Disinfo | Why Slavoj Žižek doesn’t get it

Pars Today – Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Žižek has written an article discussing the issue of water in Iran, in which he reportedly made controversial and misleading statements.

According to Pars Today, Slavoj Žižek, a philosophy professor at the European Graduate School, wrote a peculiar article titled “When Communism Is the Only Option” on the Corin Times website on December 16, 2025. Referring to the declining rainfall in Iran, particularly in Tehran, he framed it as an example of existential threats facing modern societies.

Amazingly, Žižek argued that only by declaring a state of emergency, implementing public control over resources, and pursuing global cooperation could social collapse be prevented. He humorously referred to this approach as “necessary communism”, claiming that the solution to water issues—including in Iran—requires a form of communism.

Regarding this European philosopher’s views—especially on Iran and declining rainfall—it should be noted that:

1. Žižek, without visiting Iran or directly observing the situation, relied solely on misinformation and biased portrayals in Western media to make strange claims about Tehran’s water issues and the condition of its people. For instance, he alleged that thousands of Tehran residents have fled north toward the Caspian Sea, and suggested that if this number reaches millions, a mass migration to Turkey and Europe could occur.

He has a completely absurd perception of Tehran residents’ movements, interpreting weekend trips to northern Iran and the Caspian coast as evidence that people are fleeing the city due to water shortages. When Žižek’s understanding of an issue like water in Iran—especially in Tehran—is fundamentally misinformed, it is questionable how he can, in his view, propose solutions such as the so-called “necessary communism”, including public control over vital resources and emergency management for survival. It would be more appropriate for him to visit Iran, particularly Tehran, and after observing the realities firsthand, offer solutions based on accurate insights.

2. Although Žižek has written extensively about the dimensions, causes, and consequences of water issues in Iran—based largely on his speculative and ill-informed perceptions—he makes no mention of the water situation in Western countries, including Europe and the United States, and only refers to countries like Egypt or Afghanistan. Yet, with rising global temperatures and the spread of extreme climate events, drought is no longer confined to any single country; from Europe to Africa, and from China to South America, nations are grappling with water shortages. However, their responses to this challenge vary significantly.

In this context, Western countries, in addition to facing issues like poverty and homelessness, are also confronted with declining rainfall, increasing water scarcity, and drought. For example, due to reduced precipitation in the United Kingdom, the government has urged citizens to conserve water. In the United States, a vast country, this issue has become particularly severe in western states such as California.

Climate change has caused droughts to occur in regions previously unfamiliar with them—from the reduced flow of the Mississippi River in the U.S. to the drying of major rivers in Europe, humanitarian crises in the Horn of Africa, and the cascading effects on China’s global economic networks. Today, the scope of drought extends well beyond geographical borders.

Importantly, the solutions to water scarcity and drought vary across countries, depending on each nation’s specific geographical, social, and political context.

In Conclusion: Many Western philosophers have severely criticized Žižek’s thinking, beliefs, and ideas. Numerous scholars consider his writings unreliable and meaningless. American intellectual and linguist Noam Chomsky has described Žižek’s work as empty posturing, asserting that it should not be taken seriously. British philosopher John Gray has also criticized Žižek for praising violence and producing nonsensical, hollow statements.

It appears that Žižek has followed the same absurd and contentless approach in the article under discussion. His proposal of a communist-style solution to the water issue in Iran, rather than being based on accurate and reliable data, is the result of collecting and drawing conclusions from numerous incorrect and misleading sources.