Changes

=====Introduction==[[Žižek]]'s account of [[law]] is built upon the reiteration of the idea that ''[[law]] is [[split]]'' or that ''there is a [[parallax view|parallax]] [[gap]] between the '''[[public]] [[letter]]''' and its '''[[obscene]] [[superego]] [[supplement]]'''''.<ref>{{Z}} ''[[The Parallax View]]''. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2006. p. 10.</ref>===

 For [[Žižek]], ''* [[law]] is '''necessary''' and potentially '''liberatory'''''. : Appearing in mutiple arrangements - the [[symbolic]] [[law]] of [[language]] and [[law|norms]], the [[public]] [[law]] of [[state]]s and [[state|regimes]], the [[transgressive]] "[[obscene|nightly]]" [[law]] of [[superego]], as well as the [[religion|religious]] [[law]] of [[Judaism]] and the [[Pauline]] [[law]] of [[faith]] - [[law]] persists as a constituent element of [[human ]] [[practical ]] [[experience]].

[[Violence]] ''persists'' in the [[form ]] of [[law]] as an ''[[injunction]]''.

As [[Zizek]] explains, "The last foundation of the [[Law]]'s [[authority ]] lies in its [[process ]] of [[enunciation]]."<ref>{{Z}} "How Did [[Marx ]] Invent the [[Symptom]]?" in ''[[Mapping Ideology]]''. Ed. [[Slavoj Zizek]]. Verso: [[London]], 1944. p. 318</ref>

This [[traumatic]], nonintegrated [[character ]] of [[law]] is a positive condition of [[law]].<ref>{{Z}} "How Did Marx Invent [[the Symptom]]?" in ''[[Mapping Ideology]]''. Ed. Slavoj Zizek. Verso: London, 1944. p. 319</ref>

This [[trauma]]tic, [[senseless]] [[injunction]] is also the [[psychoanalytic ]] [[notion ]] of the [[superego]].

[[Superego]] issues unconditional commands, telling us what to do, refusing to take no for an answer, refusing even to consider our specific circumstances, [[needs ]] or desires.

The [[superego]] command is thus more than a simple [[prohibition]]. It is a [[prohibition]] compliance with which produces [[enjoyment]]. When we obey the [[superego]], when we give up our own [[desire]] and comply or follow [[orders]], a part of us, or, more precisely the [[Other]] within us, [[enjoy]]s.

The [[superego]] [[injunction|injunction to enjoy]] accompanies a [[duty ]] to be happy. Important for Zizek is the way that in today's more permissive societies, the superego injunction to enjoy accompanies a duty to be happy. He writes, <blockquote>"The superego is thus the properly obscene [[reversal ]] of the permissive 'You may!' into the prescriptive 'You must!', the point at which permitted enjoyment turns into ordained enjoyment."<ref>{{TFA}} {{FA}} p. 133</ref> We must have great sex lives, fulfilling jobs, interesting hobbies, fantastic vacations. If we do not, we have somehow failed. We are [[guilty]]-inadequate. By attending to the superego supplement of law, Zizek thus enables us to grasp how it is the [[case ]] that what might appear at law's retreat, as law's securing of a larger realm of personal [[choice ]] and privacy, comes up against a crippling [[impasse ]] of unfreedom-the command to enjoy that effectively prevents us from enjoying, entwining us in [[guilt ]] and uncertainty.

[[Violence]] persists as [[superego]], that is, as the punishing, powerful, obscene, [[dead ]] [[father]] killed by the [[primal ]] [[horde]].