Leil-Zahra Mortada

making noise, and more noise

Coprolalia on Syria, European pseudo-Leftists, and Žižek

I was a bit disappointed when I read Žižek´s article on Syria. It is true that the people in Syria have no excuse for not making a revolution, but compassion is a virtue. Maybe if “comrade” Žižek could´ve taken the time to scribble them a manual of “Revolution 101” they could´ve been brought to their senses. Possibly a syllabus of recommended readings? Žižek has a lot to teach the people in Syria and Egypt. The European Left as a whole has much to share itself. I mean, Europe has been revolting for decades and the victories of the European Left are a source of global envy. Žižek himself has lead the barricades and put a stake to the heart of neoliberalism in his own country.

Zizek 1Only if the people in Syria could read Žižek!  Only then they´d see how mistaken they have been. They´d see that revolution is not about survival. It is not about teaching your kids that their life does matter despite the international silence that hollowly echo the atrocities they have been witnessing for over three years; let alone the terror of the decades before. Revolution is not about reminding yourself and those around you that it is ok to continue living though your friends are either killed or are being tortured in detention camps as we speak. Revolution is not about carving the walls of your city with “Down with the Regime” knowing that you are not risking your life only, but also the lives of your family members. Revolution is not about making a song that resonates in the voices of hundreds of thousands across the country, then have the regime forces slit your throat open and distribute a celebratory video of your dead body. Revolution is not about women taking to the streets after hearing the constant stories of gang rapes of both men and women by Assad´s thugs. Revolution is not about thinking how to get food to the sieged towns and villages. Revolution is not a small activist group working to deliver/smuggle vaccines to counter the outbreak of polio in northern Syria. Revolution is not about all the creative direct actions in Damascus. Revolution is not about the Local Coordination Committees (LCCs) organizing and working under bombardments, detentions, shortage of basic needs, the Assad regime, Islamic fundamentalism, and constant pressure to prove that they are “revolutionary enough”. Revolution is not about not-writing leftist communiques because your people are refugees jumping on the first ship to sink, and you don´t have the time nor the energy to prove to Europe that you are “revolutionary enough”. Revolution is not about dreaming and plotting about the future while all you see around is hunger, pain and death. Revolution is not about still believing that another Syria is possible despite Assad, the Islamic fundamentalists, the international meddling, and the international hypocrisy; plus the constant reproach of the European/International Left. Revolution is not what Syria is doing. This is what Žižek wants us to know.

I wonder if Žižek took the effort to google for an hour or two before he wrote his opinion. If he bothered to check the hashtag #Syria on Twitter while he is waiting for his turn to speak on some academic conference. I wonder if he tried to get the contacts of Syrian activists and rebels for some firsthand accounts on what is happening while he is on his way from his hotel to his BBC interview. Or maybe acted like a revolutionary would and headed there on a solidarity field trip, or maybe volunteered for a week or two at a refugee camp in Turkey and recorded all the “social theories” he´d witness there! Maybe then he could´ve read Kafr Nabl´s banners that would put him to the shame he desreves. Maybe then he could´ve relayed to the European Left the communiques of some LCCs; or maybe the photos of the courageous media collective “Lens of a Young Homsi“, or those of “Lens of a Young Woman on a Summer Vacation“. He could´ve heard of the Spray Guy, or the smuggling of tape-recorders into governmental buildings in Damascus then blasting revolutionary chants from within. People would´ve told him about Damascus waking up to find the fountains in its squares spilling red water in protest against massacres committed by the regime. If Žižek took the time to use google he could´ve heard about the “Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression” and its detainees; he could´ve read about the “Violations Documentation Center in Syria” and the inspiring work of Razan Zaitonah. There are so many names and groups and organizations to come across, it is easy to see how much revolutionary work is being done if he could´ve just went through the names of the detainees and what they were doing before getting arrested. I wonder if he ever heard the name Bassel Shehadeh! I wonder if he spoke to some activists or refugees which can be found all over European streets, before he decided that Christians (in such ignorant generalization) are siding with the regime. Yet, Žižek decided without the minimal respect for the lives of those killed, to flamboyantly diss a whole uprising! He had the “Leftist” audacity to sit on his European academic pedestal and wipe these people off the revolutionary map. It is quite impressive how many Europeans feel entitled to dictate on other people what they should or should not do. I don´t remember Tunisian leftists telling the Occupy movement what to do. I don´t remember texts from Bahrain telling Acampada Barcelona that what they are doing is not changing a thing. It is only Europeans and North Americans that feel that it is perfectly normal for them to judge and intervene in the smallest details of other political movements, to tell the world how to talk and where to walk, without doing the indispensable research ahead.

In the same way Žižek laid misinformed and misrepresented “facts” about Syria, he did about Egypt. To consider that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt were ever “surprised impassive observers” shows great ignorance. When were they “surprised impassive observers”?! When they met with Omar Suleiman even before Mubarak stepped down?? Or when they were playing on various fronts sending their youth to Tahrir Square while they were striking deals with SCAF? Or when they were actively supporting and defending the same military regime that is killing them now? To consider that the “agents of Tahrir Square” are passively supporting the crimes of the military is another blatant sign of lack of touch with revolutionary reality. Or maybe it is all built on what is coming out in the European mainstream media? Activist groups and revolutionaries in Egypt, despite having suffered the brutality of Morsi´s regime, have been actively and loudly denouncing Sisi´s massacres. They too are worn out from the immense revolutionary weight yet still carrying out the not-so-glamorous tasks of dealing with the detainees, military trials, the injured, the housing problems, the families of the martyrs, sectarian violence, the attack on liberties, the writing of the constitution, the attack on women´s bodies and rights…and the list can go on longer than Žižek´s scheduled appearances on magazine covers. They are working day and night to stop the further division of their society, to fight against the stigmatization of even their enemies (Muslim Brotherhood) so that they can build a country where a woman can´t be arrested and tortured for wearing a veil and protesting for someone she believes was the democratically elected president. Even if this ex-president has blood on his hands and favored neoliberal economical policies. The same way Europe is obsessed with secularism, it is obsessed with “democracy”. But did anyone stop and ask  the European iluminatis what democracy are they talking about? The votes bought with sugar and flour “donations”? Or the political affiliation paid for with medicines for those who can´t afford a loaf of bread? Or the democracy that is built on fueling sectarian violence and telling people that voting for one party would make you a better Muslim? The democracy that made the votes for Mursi modern-day indulgences! Žižek then moves to reduce popular dissidence and rebellion against Mubarak to a “predominantly the revolt of the educated middle class, with the poor workers and farmers reduced to the role of (sympathetic) observers”. Does anyone truly believe that the middle class (to which I belong) is capable of holding up nonstop on the barricades for days and nights? Does anyone really believe that if it wasn´t for the youngsters from Egypt´s slums and their bravery on the frontlines, the middle class could´ve ousted Mubarak? Does anyone really believe that without the Bedouins in Sinai, the workers in various factories, the strikes and the workers descending on the square, any of this would´ve been possible?! Do people truly still believe that this all happened thanks to Twitter and Facebook? Of course activists from the middle class played an important role in this, but it was in no way more important than those from the crushed classes of the society. Go over the names of the martyrs, the names of the injured and the names of the detainees, and scan their economical backgrounds, then come talk about the poor being “sympathetic observers”.

zizek 2Žižek´s article is the perfect example of every European leftist (prick) sitting in some bar drinking beer and talking about entire populations fighting in ways he only saw in books and movies. The story of our lives, immigrants in Europe. His/their portrayal of the options we have as A) supporting Assad or B) supporting the Islamists is the typical and historical mistake of a big section of the European Left. With all his/their “social theory” expertise they didn´t come across options C, D, E, F and the numerous combinations. It is like talking about the USA and saying that the only two options we have, as radical leftists, are between the Republicans and the Democrats, completely dropping the extensive network of activist groups who are doing inspiring work. Since when did we measure European activism according to the major political forces on the scene? Yes, superficially these are two options we have, but not if we did our revolutionary homework and looked for people who are too busy getting up every morning to face both A and B instead of sitting on their computers and write letters of self-validation to the European Left. But of course, it is the duty of Syrian leftists to clarify these issues for the European Left. I mean, “comrade” Žižek and other “comrades” are busy setting up the EU on fire, attacking US military bases, World Bank headquarters are under siege, and immigrants are welcomed into the fortress by revolutionary committees. They are too busy to google Syria.

It is important for social movements, and revolutionaries, to communicate, debate and discuss what is happening in the world and in their respective movements. This is what true solidarity is all about. But communication shouldn´t be a simplex circuit, it shouldn´t be one directional, else it will be another form of political colonialism and cultural superiority! Communication should be interactive and opinions should be informed. It should be based on equality, on built and informed trust, and on respect. Unfortunately this is not what is happening, all the effort is being put into a condescending patriarchal lecturing and continuos ignorant yet firm discrediting. So what is happening in the majority of the European (& academic) Left these days? Nothing really special, except that Lady Gaga is one step closer to becoming the world’s new superpower while its competitors are eagerly weakening each other.


  1. thank you for writing this, it is a wonderful antidote to Zizek’s sickening ranting on these topics

  2. Thank you for this ! Spot on !

  3. hey,
    the european left is in very bad condition and you can take zizek as evidence.
    How can you talk of victory(ies) if capitalism is still not abolished?
    I wonder why there are still parts of the revolutionary forces in syria who refuse the use of violence in a situation of civil war?…
    From Berlin it is hard to judge the situation in syria. Mutual Alienation/ the absentia of personal relations to revo. forces in syria and the falsification of the spectacle make it difficult to clear the view.
    What are the theoretical fundamentals or deposits of this struggle? Do you think this a proletarian revolution?
    maybe you can answer one or two questions?

  4. @weitling what are your questions about? There can’t be victories when capitalism is not abolished? How about sitting in a warm house in Berlin having a beer going out freely when you wish – and do so even when you are a woman? Or beeing able to say your opinion, hold a demonstration on whatever issue you like, kissing in the streets men or women whoever you wish? You really think this is something not worth fighting for? Well, I tell you why you think so: Because you have all these freedoms – and many more. It is quite arrogant having these freedoms to ask from people in Egypt or Syria that they don’t aspire these, that they don’t celebrate when they achieve some, but demand from them to be the first to abolish capitalism – otherwise not accept them as true revolutionaries. Your questions are a great example of what has been wrong with the European Left for decades: They project their dreams on movements in the “Third World”, because they are unable to fight for them in their own countries – then they are pissed off when these movements don’t live up to these dreams. That’s infantile. But I also have a question for you: why do you not know any revolutionary forces from Syria? Unfortunately, many of them were forced into exile, you can meet many of them in Berlin if you want to.

    • @Hannah Wettig, dont get me wrong. Of course there can be victories but i think that these victories fade away if the social revolution won´t transform the whole circumstances of society. the society of the spectacle has strong absorbing powers. My life in berlin is crappy and miserable. there is no need for any envy. I think that almost every time europe and its “achievements” has been the model of revolutions in the “third world”, these revolutions failed. i am not saying that it is not worth fighting for the so called freedoms you name, but that is not enough in my eyes. these bourgeois freedoms do not satisfy, that is what is to be learned of the european history of the revolutionary project . I dont care if there are true revolutionaries in syria or not (i hate this talk about identities), all i want is to destroy this form of society, which we live in and which is dominated by things, violence and boredom. I am looking for alliances in this war, thats the reason why i ask questions. i am not projecting on movements in syria or elsewhere, i am searching for sympathizers and for practice and theory i can assume.
      Are there any groups in syria you know, who reflect the ongoing struggle in syria in a theoretical way?
      i dont know revol. forces here in berlin because i am an isolated young man, but believe me i do what i can to revive the revolutionary project in fucking germany. maybe youve got the address of some expatriates or the spots they meet?

  5. Spot on – sometimes the ignorance of the western left seems bottomless. We need strong voices like your to break through!

  6. Simply brilliant!

  7. we might not agree on the conclusions but let us be accurate about the details: zizek, as a dialectician, would never posit a dual position as you so-called mentioned. on the EXACT contrary: he’s very title as “pseudo..” is for the breaking of such false dichotomies. in his article he even mentioned specifically that what you also ignored which is the very reason why for the syrian fight is a pseudo fight: the absence of the third party that stands for the ALL. zizek would have totally agreed with you about the criticism of the EU leftists. but the entire claim of his was that such dual positioning is the false ideological representation of things: between islamism and dictatorship. what is missing is the spark that started the revolution, unfortunately overwhelmed by jihadists and the cold western shoulder. in short, although you completely misunderstood zizek, he would still agree with many of what you say, just not the with the context. surely he was writing it for a western eye and taste, and so he would not do the trouble to enumerate each and every important yet minor section of the revolutionary forces. what was important for him to stress out, is exactly what you said about the false dichotomy, manufactured and marketed by the western media. that’s should be your culprit.

  8. This is absolutely brilliant. Teslam ya basha!!!

  9. Hi, would you allow an Iranian translator to translate your paper into Persian?
    Thank you.

  10. “Žižek himself has lead the barricades and put a stake to the heart of neoliberalism in his own country.”

    I would really like to get some background info that support this theses. Žižek has never played any meaningful role in resistance against neoliberalism in Slovenia. Rather…for the large part of this period he was publicly supporting a leading neoliberal party that led a coalition government 1992-2004 and then another that was part of government 2008-11. If being a columnist for the party’s electoral propaganda journal is enogh to consider one as being the supporter of the pary. I think yes.

    And this is more or less what his political engagement amount to local slovenian political space. He has been and is still completely irrelevant politically.

    I don’t remember any metaphorical or other barricades that he would took place in let alone lead. And there were in last 10-15 years student struggles against neoliberal reforms of the university (succsesful in some ways!), there were struggles against militarization and agains NATO and war, there were struggles of migrant workers, there were struggles against Schengen and for the restoration of rights of the erased people…and many many more. Žižek was completely irrelevant in all of these.

    Maybe I don’t know something…would appreaciate a comment from the author.

    /and now I can start to really read the text itself :)/


    • Ivan, I´m being sarcastic.. like very sarcastic 🙂


    • Had such a concern for seconds, but then I noticed the “comrade” written in parenthesis and got what Leil means, however, I’d be much more critical of Mr. bid mouth and his “funny” and “informed” revolutionary manners

  11. The problem is not that the compassion is virtue, but that the virtue is uncompassionate.


  1. Pseudo-izquierdistas Europeos y Žižek

Leave a Response

Please note: comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

rssBlog EntriesComments