Book review: Slavoj Zizek "First as a tragedy then as a farce"

 I just listened Zizek https://www.blinkist.com/first-as-tragedy-then-as-farce-en 

In the book he says

 1.the current communist regimes were not implemented correctly.

2. We must make a revolution and start from from the ground with a new society

3. All the benefits obtained from working class were obtained by revolution

4. Taking care of the proletariat, mean destroying it. He give the example of a refugee without papers, who once he got papers is no longer a refugee.

I will dismantle all the points.

1. During and after civil war, russian communists tried to implement the most radical ideas.

In the army they abolished the ranks, and all the attacks were decided by vote. After some defeats, Soviets fall back the old military hierarchical organization.

Reading books of Ilf and Petrov, you realize that people tried to make communism work. They implemented a car sharing club, they were thinking of getting rid of money.

Ilf and Petrov criticize very open the communist bureaucrats.

Till Stalin came they tried and failed to apply the most radical communist ideas.

2. In Soviet Union they wanted to erase religion, nationality to create a new world.

This will never work, because what we have now worked in the past. For example nationalism. In the past a group of people with similar cultural background, joined together and fought for a piece of land. They succeeded and their national identity survived till today.

Zizek is like the doctors in the '50 that considered food fiber useless because us not digested, and recommended to avoid it.

Now all doctors recommend fiber for improving gut biome and gut transit.

If a thing exists it exists for a reason. Instead of bulldozing the past, let's see how we can use it for the future.

3. He has some true here. Without unions and struggle, 8h work day, payed vacation, interdiction of child labor would come too late, if ever.

But employees of google didn't stormed the head quarters to get better pay and free food. This was triggered by demand for their labour.

State, unions and revolutionaries can improve things who have little bargaining power. 

4. Why he wants a strict class separation? 

If they could many proletarians would take the place of their bourgeoise bosses. 

Many people work because they have to.

Very few janitors come to work because they like it.

Class has meaning only from statistical point if view. If someone has an income greater than proletariat average, but lower than bourgeoisy where you put them?

Theory must follow practice. Not the way around. But tell this to communists

I don't understand the concept of capitalism.

Communists didn't explain it well.

In feudal period the property was inherited, get through marriage or got with sword in hand.

The property was usually indivisible land.

In modern capitalist period, propriety became gold, which could be divided and transfered.

Capitalism is based on existence of private property and its peacefull exchange for other proprities. 

The early merchants abhorred the medieval war lord, and they tried to placate them with laws enforced by a centralized state.

If the hero of the middle ages was the knight, the hero of modern capitalist period is the lawyer .

All the peaceful civil disobedience used now in a capitalist society wouldn't make sense in a lawless middle ages, where a lord can out your head on a spike.

So where the communists see power as the basis for capitalism?

If in a country the private property doesn't exist but it exists market economy ? We considered capitalist ?

First communists tried to abolish private property with the rifle (Lenin,Stalin,Mao,Pol Pot) now they want to use ideology to make us hand it over property voluntarily.