...and they were one and the same, historically.

“Advertising and ideology affects everyone except me!”

So true, Tomi!

"You are not immune to propaganda"

Frederic chopin - nocturne no. 1

In this case the "it" in "this is it" refers to the objet petit a, which in this case would be the lost Jouissance that we had. This "it" is the surplus that is in the product, which is not the product itself. In the case of Coke, the "it" today refers to the literal form of Jouissance which would be happiness. "Buy Coke to buy literal happiness". Does this makes sense? :)

The important part of the awnser would be that there is nothing special in Coke. That is the trick of the Objet petit a, that there does not need to be anything special about the product itself, but only the feeling that is attached to it. And for Coke, this feeling is of course "happiness". It is pure happiness in a battle. It is a heavier drug than cocaine today. It is very clever marketing, that in this nihilistic age there is a product that literally sells happiness. If you want to know how this can be done with products I recommend you read "Public Relations" or "Propaganda" by Edward Bernays. Hope this awnser your question! 😁

Thanks for your interesting question! I believe that here in uour examples the objet petit a is even more explicit. For the diet, you can best drink water. But when you drink coke you see the label that says it has no calories. So every time you see this, the text signifies a slimmer body. You can feel this short moment of surplus enjoyment becouse the coke promises this something extra that is not in the coke itself. For the sexual fetish it is even more pronounced since in this example the coke can even be part of the fetish. Everytime you drink the coke you know that it is a meams to an end. The fact that you in this case could get aroused from drinking the coke tells you that it is not the coke itself (there is no arousing substance in the coke), but something that the subject projects on the coke, his objet petit a. I hope this answers your question somewhat! 😄

Thanks for your comment. And of cource he babbles, thats what philosophers do. But I hope that you can see that, even if it is not coke per se, that the metaphor still provides a certain insight in human interactions between products, desire and the ideology that bridges the two? 😁

@@eversbrothersproductions1476 I do, but isn't this generally known? Where is the "added value"? I find philosophy enjoyable precisely for the added value. For providing atypical angles of looking at things, for applying uncommon knowledge to common phenomena (and vice versa). That's why philosophy can be pleasurable for its own sake, irrespective of whether we agree with the conclusions of a particular author. A theist can enjoy Christopher Hitchens just like an atheist can be enriched by Dennis Prager.