Changes

Welcome [[Alain]] [[Badiou]] [[identified]] as the key feature of the XXth century the "[[passion]] of the [[Real]] /la passion du reel/"1: in contrast to the Desert XIXth century of the [[utopian]] or "[[scientific]]" projects and ideals, plans [[about]] the [[future]], the XXth century aimed at delivering the [[thing]] itself, at directly realizing the longer-for New [[Order]]. The ultimate and defining [[experience]] of the XXth century was the direct experience of [[the Real]] as opposed to the everyday [[social]] [[reality]] — the Real*Slavoj Zizekin its extreme [[violence]] as the price to be paid for peeling off the deceiving layers of reality.10/7/01 Already in the trenches of the [[World]] War I, Carl [[Schmitt]] was celebrating the face to face combat as the authentic [[intersubjective]] [[encounter]]: authenticity resides in the act of violent [[transgression]], from the [[Lacanian]] Real — Reflections on WTC the Thing [[Antigone]] confronts when he violates the order of the City — third versionto the Bataillean [[excess]].

Alain Badiou identified as So, if the key feature passion of the XXth century Real ends up with the pure semblance of the [[political]] theater, then, in an exact [[inversion]], the "[[postmodern]]"passion of the semblance of the Last Men ends up in a kind of Real /la passion du reel/. [[Recall]] the phenomenon of "cutters"1(mostly [[women]] who experience an irresistible urge to cut themselves with razors or otherwise hurt themselves), strictly correlative to the virtualization of our environs: in contrast it stands for a desperate strategy to [[return]] to the XIXth century real of the utopian or "scientific" projects and ideals[[body]]. As such, plans about cutting is to be contrasted with the futurestandard tattoo inscriptions on the body, which [[guarantee]] the XXth century aimed at delivering [[subject]]'s inclusion in the ([[virtual]]) [[symbolic]] order — with the thing itselfcutters, at directly realizing the longer-for New Order. The ultimate and defining experience of problem is the XXth century was opposite one, namely the direct experience assertion of the Real as opposed reality itself. Far from [[being]] suicidal, far from signalling a [[desire]] for self-annihilation, cutting is a radical attempt to the everyday social (re)gain a stronghold in reality — , or (another aspect of the Real same phenomenon) to firmly ground our ego in its extreme violence as the price to be paid for peeling off our [[bodily]] reality, against the deceiving layers unbearable [[anxiety]] of realityperceiving oneself as non-existing. Already in The standard report of cutters is that, after [[seeing]] the trenches red warm blood flowing out of the World War Iself-inflicted wound, Carl Schmitt was celebrating the face to face combat as the authentic intersubjective encounterfeel alive again, firmly rooted in reality. So, although, of course, cutting is a pathological phenomenon, it is nonetheless a pathological attempt at regaining some kind of normalcy, at avoiding a total [[psychotic]] breakdown. On today's [[market]], we find a [[whole]] series of products deprived of their malignant property: coffee without caffeine, cream without fat, beer without alcohol… Virtual Reality simply generalizes this procedure of offering a product deprived of its substance: authenticity resides in it provides reality itself deprived of its substance, of the act resisting hard kernel of violent transgression, from the Lacanian Real — in the same way decaffeinated coffee smells and tastes like the Thing Antigone confronts when he violates real coffee without being the real one, Virtual Reality is experienced as reality without being one. However, at the order end of this process of virtualization, the City — to the Bataillean excessinevitable Benthamian conclusion awaits us: reality is its own best semblance.

As Badiou demonstrated apropos And was the bombing of the Stalinist show trials, this violent effort WTC with [[regard]] to distill the pure Real from Hollywood catastrophe movies not like the elusive reality necessarily ends up in its opposite, in snuff pornography versus ordinary sado-maso porno movies? This is the obsession with pure appearance: element of truth in Karl-Heinz Stockhausen's provocative [[statement]] that the Stalinist universe, planes hitting the passion of WTC towers was the Real (ruthless enforcement ultimate work of the Socialist development) thus culminates in ritualistic stagings of a theatrical spectacle in the truth of which no art: one believes. The key to this reversal resides in can effectively perceive the ultimate impossibility to draw a clear distinction between deceptive reality and some firm positive kernel collapse of the Real: every positive bit of reality is a priori suspicious, since (WTC towers as we know from Lacan) the Real Thing is ultimately another name for climactic conclusion of the Void. The pursuit XXth century art's "passion of the Real thus equals total annihilation, a (self)destructive fury within which real" — the only way "terrorists" themselves did it not do it primarily to trace the distinction between the semblance and the Real isprovoke real material damage, precisely, to STAGE it in a fake spectaclebut FOR THE SPECTACULAR EFFECT OF IT. The fundamental illusion is here that, once authentic XXth century passion to penetrate the violent work of purification is doneReal Thing (ultimately, the New Man will emerge ex nihilo, freed from the filth of destructive Void) through the past corruption. Within this horizon, "really-existing men" are reduced to the stock cobweb of raw material semblances which can be ruthlessly exploited for constitute our reality thus culminates in the construction thrill of the new — Real as the Stalinist revolutionary definition of man is a circular one: ultimate "man is what is to be crushedeffect, stamped on, mercilessly worked over, in order " sought after from digitalized special effects through [[reality TV]] and amateur pornography up to produce a new mansnuff movies." We have here Snuff movies which deliver the tension between the series of "ordinary" elements (real thing"ordinary" men as are perhaps the "material" ultimate truth of history) and the exceptional "empty" element (the socialist "New Man," which virtual reality. There is at first nothing but an empty place to be filled up with positive content through the revolutionary turmoil). In a revolution, there is no a priori positive determination intimate connection between virtualization of this New Man: a revolution is not legitimized by reality and the positive notion emergence of what Man's essence, "alienated" in present conditions an infinite and to be realized through the revolutionary processinfinitized bodily [[pain]], is — much stronger that the only legitimization of a revolution is negative, a will to break with the Past. One should formulate here things in a very precise wayusual one: the reason why the Stalinist fury of purification is so destructive resides in the very fact that it is sustained by the belief that, after the destructive work of purification will be accomplished, SOMETHING WILL REMAIN, the sublime do [[biogenetics]] and Virtual Reality combined not open up new "indivisible remainder,enhanced" the paragon possibilities of the New. It is in order to conceal the fact that there is nothing beyond that, in a strictly perverse way, the revolutionary has to cling to violence as the only index of his authenticityTORTURE, new and it is as this level that the critics unheard-of Stalinism as a rule misperceive the cause horizons of the Communist's attachment extending our ability to the Party. Say, when, in 1939-1941 pro-Soviet Communists twice had endure pain (through widening our sensory capacity to change their Party line overnight (after the Soviet-German pactsustain pain, it was imperialism, not, Fascism, which was elevated to the role through inventing new forms of the main enemy; from June 22 1941, when Germany attacked Soviet Union, inflicting it was again the popular front against the Fascist beast)? Perhaps, the brutality of the imposed changes of position was what attracted them. Along the same lines, the purges themselves exerted ultimate Sadean [[image]] on an uncanny fascination, especially on intellectuals: their "irrationalundead" cruelty served as a kind [[victim]] of ontological proof, bearing witness to the fact that we are dealing with [[torture]] who can sustain endless pain without having at his/her disposal the Realescape into [[death]], not just with empty plans — the Party is ruthlessly brutal, so it means business…also waits to become reality.

So, if the passion The ultimate American [[paranoiac]] [[fantasy]] is that of the Real ends up with the pure semblance of the political theateran [[individual]] [[living]] in a small idyllic Californian city, thena consumerist paradise, in an exact inversion, the "postmodern" passion of who suddenly starts to suspect that the semblance of the Last Men ends up world he lives in is a kind of Real. Recall the phenomenon of "cutters" (mostly women who experience an irresistible urge to cut themselves with razors or otherwise hurt themselves)fake, strictly correlative a spectacle staged to the virtualization of our environs: it stands for convince him that he lives in a desperate strategy to return to the real world, while all [[people]] around him are effectively actors and extras in a gigantic show. The most [[recent]] example of the body. As such, cutting this is to be contrasted with the standard tattoo inscriptions on the body, which guarantee the subjectPeter Weir's inclusion in the The Truman Show (virtual1998) symbolic order — , with Jim Carrey playing the cutters, small town clerk who gradually discovers the problem truth that he is the opposite one, namely the assertion hero of reality itself. Far from being suicidal, far from signalling a desire for self24-annihilationhours permanent TV show: his hometown is constructed on a gigantic studio set, cutting with cameras following him permanently. Among its predecessors, it is a radical attempt to worth mentioning [[Philip Dick]]'s [[Time]] Out of Joint (re1959)gain , in which a stronghold hero living a modest daily [[life]] in reality, or (another aspect a small idyllic Californian city of the same phenomenon) to firmly ground our ego in our bodily realitylate 50s, against gradually discovers that the unbearable anxiety whole town is a fake staged to keep him satisfied… The underlying experience of Time Out of Joint and of perceiving oneself as non-existing. The standard report of cutters Truman Show is thatthe late [[capitalist]] consumerist Californian paradise is, after seeing the red warm blood flowing out of the selfin its very hyper-inflicted woundreality, the feel alive again, firmly rooted in reality. Soa way IRREAL, althoughsubstanceless, deprived of the material inertia. And the same "derealization" of the [[horror]] went on after the WTC bombings: while the [[number]] of course, cutting 6000 victims is a pathological phenomenonrepeated all the time, it is nonetheless a pathological attempt at regaining some kind surprising how little of normalcy, at avoiding a total psychotic breakdown. On today's market, the actual carnage we find a whole series of products deprived of their malignant property: coffee without caffeinesee — no dismembered bodies, cream without fatno blood, beer without alcohol… Virtual Reality simply generalizes this procedure no desperate faces of offering the dying people… in clear contrast to the reporting from the [[Third]] World catastrophies where the whole point was to produce a product deprived scoop of its substancesome gruesome detail: it provides reality itself deprived Somalis dying of its substancehunger, raped Bosnian women, of men with throats cut. These shots were always accompanied with the resisting hard kernel advance-warning that "some of the Real [[images]] you will see are extremely graphic and may hurt [[children]]" — a warning which we NEVER heard in the same way decaffeinated coffee smells and tastes like the real coffee without being reports on the real one, Virtual Reality is experienced as reality without being oneWTC collapse. HoweverIs this not yet another proof of how, at the end of even in this process of virtualization[[tragic]] moments, the inevitable Benthamian conclusion awaits us: distance which separates Us from Them, from their reality , is its own best semblance.maintained: the real horror happens THERE, not HERE? /"2

And was So it is not only that Hollywood [[stages]] a semblance of real life deprived of the bombing weight and inertia of materiality — in the WTC with regard to late capitalist consumerist [[society]], "real social life" itself somehow acquires the Hollywood catastrophe movies not like the snuff pornography versus ordinary sado-maso porno movies? This is the element features of truth a staged fake, with our neighbors behaving in Karl-Heinz Stockhausen's provocative statement that the planes hitting the WTC towers was "real" life as [[stage]] actors and extras… Again, the ultimate work truth of art: one can effectively perceive the collapse of capitalist utilitarian de-spiritualized universe is the WTC towers as the climactic conclusion de-materialization of the XXth century art's "passion real life" itself, its reversal into a [[spectral]] show. Among [[others]], Christopher Isherwood gave expression to this unreality of the real" — American daily life, exemplified in the motel room: "terrorists" themselves did it not do it primarily American motels are unreal! /…/ they are deliberately designed to provoke real material damage, but FOR THE SPECTACULAR EFFECT OF ITbe unreal. /…/ The authentic XXth century passion Europeans [[hate]] us because we've retired to penetrate live [[inside]] our advertisements, like hermits going into caves to contemplate." Peter Sloterdijk's notion of the Real Thing (ultimately"sphere" is here literally realized, as the destructive Void) through gigantic metal sphere that envelopes and isolates the cobweb entire city. Years ago, a series of semblances which constitute our reality thus culminates [[science]]-[[fiction]] [[films]] like Zardoz or Logan's Run forecasted today's postmodern predicament by extending this fantasy to the [[community]] itself: the isolated group living an aseptic life in a secluded area longs for the thrill experience of the Real as the ultimate "effect," sought after from digitalized special effects through reality TV and amateur pornography up to snuff movies. Snuff movies which deliver the "real thing" are perhaps the ultimate truth world of virtual realitymaterial decay. There is an intimate connection between virtualization Is the endlessly repeated shot of reality the plane approaching and hitting the second WTC tower not the emergence real-life version of an infinite and infinitized bodily painthe famous [[scene]] from [[Hitchcock]]'s Birds, superbly [[analyzed]] by [[Raymond Bellour]], in which Melanie approaches the Bodega Bay pier after crossing the bay on the small boat? When, much stronger that while approaching the usual one: do biogenetics and Virtual Reality combined not open up new "enhanced" possibilities of TORTUREwharf, new and unheard-of horizons of extending our ability she waves to endure pain her (through widening our sensory capacity to sustain pain, through inventing new forms of inflicting itfuture)? Perhapslover, the ultimate Sadean image on a single bird (first perceived as an "undead" victim of undistinguished dark [[blot]]) unexpectedly enters the torture who can sustain endless pain without having at his/[[frame]] from above [[right]] and hits her disposal head.3 Was the plane which hit the WTC tower not literally the escape into deathultimate Hitchcockian blot, also waits to become reality.the anamorphic [[stain]] which denaturalized the idyllic well-known New York landscape?

The ultimate American paranoiac fantasy is that of an individual living in a small idyllic Californian city, a consumerist paradise, who suddenly starts Wachowski brothers' hit [[Matrix]] (1999) brought this [[logic]] to suspect that its climax: the world he lives in material reality we all experience and see around us is a fakevirtual one, generated and coordinated by a spectacle staged gigantic mega-computer to convince him that he lives in a real world, while which we are all people around him are effectively actors and extras in a gigantic show. The most recent example of this is Peter Weir's The Truman Show attached; when the hero (1998played by Keanu Reeves)awakens into the "real reality, with Jim Carrey playing the small town clerk who gradually discovers the truth that " he is the hero of a 24-hours permanent TV show: his hometown is constructed on sees a gigantic studio set, desolate landscape littered with cameras following him permanently. Among its predecessors, it is worth mentioning Philip Dick's Time Out burned ruins — what remained of Joint (1959), in which Chicago after a hero living a modest daily life in a small idyllic Californian city of [[global]] war. The [[resistance]] [[leader]] Morpheus utters the late 50s, gradually discovers that the whole town is a fake staged ironic greeting: "Welcome to keep him satisfied… The underlying experience of Time Out of Joint and of The Truman Show is that the late capitalist consumerist Californian paradise is, in its very hyper-reality, in a way IRREAL, substanceless, deprived desert of the material inertiareal. And the same "derealization" Was it not something of the horror went similar order that took place in New York on after [[September 11]]? Its citizens were introduced to the WTC bombings: while the number "desert of 6000 victims is repeated all the time, it is surprising how little of the actual carnage we see real" — no dismembered bodiesto us, no bloodcorrupted by Hollywood, no desperate faces of the dying people… in clear contrast to landscape and the reporting from the Third World catastrophies where the whole point was to produce a scoop shots we saw of some gruesome detail: Somalis dying of hunger, raped Bosnian women, men with throats cut. These shots were always accompanied with the advance-warning that "some collapsing towers could not but remind us of the images you will see are extremely graphic and may hurt children" — a warning which we NEVER heard most breathtaking scenes in the reports on the WTC collapsecatastrophe big productions. Is this not yet another proof of how, even in this tragic moments, the distance which separates Us from Them, from their reality, is maintained: the real horror happens THERE, not HERE? /"2

So it is not only that Hollywood stages When we hear how the bombings were a semblance of real life deprived of totally unexpected shock, how the unimaginable [[Impossible]] happened, one should recall the [[other]] defining catastrophe from the weight and inertia beginning of materiality — in the late capitalist consumerist societyXXth century, "real social life" itself somehow acquires the features that of Titanic: it was also a staged fakeshock, with our neighbors behaving but the [[space]] for it was already prepared in "real" life as stage actors and extras… Again[[ideological]] fantasizing, since Titanic was the ultimate truth [[symbol]] of the capitalist utilitarian de-spiritualized universe is the de-materialization might of the "real life" itself, its reversal into a spectral showXIXth century industrial [[civilization]]. Among others, Christopher Isherwood gave expression to this unreality of Does the American daily life, exemplified in same not hold also for these bombings? Not only were the motel room: "American motels are unreal! /…/ they are deliberately designed to be unreal. /…/ The Europeans hate [[media]] bombarding us because we've retired to live inside our advertisements, like hermits going into caves to contemplate." Peter Sloterdijk's notion of all the time with the "sphere" is here literally realized, as talk about the gigantic metal sphere that envelopes and isolates terrorist [[threat]]; this threat was also obviously libidinally invested — just recall the entire city. Years ago, a series of science-fiction films like Zardoz or Logan's Run forecasted today's postmodern predicament by extending this fantasy movies from Escape From New York to Independence Day. Therein resides the community itself: the isolated group living an aseptic life in a secluded area longs for the experience rationale of the real world often-mentioned [[association]] of material decay. Is the endlessly repeated shot of attacks with the plane approaching and hitting Hollywood disaster movies: the second WTC tower not unthinkable which happened was the real-life version [[object]] of the famous scene from Hitchcock's Birdsfantasy, superbly analyzed by Raymond Bellourso that, in which Melanie approaches the Bodega Bay pier after crossing the bay on the small boat? Whena way, while approaching the wharfAmerica got what it fantasized about, she waves to her (future) lover, a single bird (first perceived as an undistinguished dark blot) unexpectedly enters and this was the frame from above right and hits her headgreatest surprise.3 Was the plane which hit the WTC tower not literally the ultimate Hitchcockian blot, the anamorphic stain which denaturalized the idyllic well-known New York landscape?

The Wachowski brothers' hit Matrix (1999) brought this logic One should therefore turn around the standard [[reading]] according to its climaxwhich, the WTC explosions were the intrusion of the Real which shattered our [[illusory]] Sphere: quite on the material contrary, it is prior to the WTC collapse than we lived in our reality we all experience and see around us , perceiving the Third World horrors as something which is a virtual onenot effectively part of our [[social reality]], generated and coordinated by as something which [[exists]] (for us) as a gigantic mega-computer to which we are all attached; when spectral apparition on the hero (played by Keanu ReevesTV) awakens into [[screen]] — and what happened on September 11 is that this screen [[fantasmatic]] apparition entered our reality. It is not that reality entered our image: the "real image entered and shattered our reality(i.e.," he sees a desolate landscape littered with burned ruins — [[the symbolic]] coordinates which determine what remained of Chicago after a global warwe experience as reality). The resistance leader Morpheus utters fact that, after September 11, the ironic greeting: opening of many "Welcome to the desert of the real.blockbuster" Was it not something of movies with scenes which bear a resemblance to the similar order that took place in New York WTC collapse (large buildings on September 11? Its citizens fire or under attack, terrorist actions…) was postponed (or the films were introduced even shelved), is thus to be read as the "desert [[repression]]" of the real" — to us, corrupted by Hollywoodfantasmatic background [[responsible]] for the impact of the WTC collapse. Of course, the landscape and point is not to play a pseudo-postmodern [[game]] of reducing the shots we saw WTC collapse to just another media spectacle, reading it as a catastrophy version of the collapsing towers could not but remind us of snuff porno movies; the most breathtaking scenes in question we should have asked ourselves when we stared at the catastrophe big productions.TV screens on September 11 is simply: WHERE DID WE ALREADY SEE THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN?

When It is precisely now, when we hear how are dealing with the bombings were raw Real of a totally unexpected shockcatastrophe, how the unimaginable Impossible happened, one that we should recall bear in [[mind]] the other defining catastrophe from ideological and fantasmatic coordinates which determine its [[perception]]. If there is any [[symbolism]] in the beginning collapse of the XXth centuryWTC towers, that it is not so much the old-fashioned notion of the "center of Titanic: it was also a shockfinancial [[capitalism]], " but , rather, the space notion that the two WTC towers stood for it was already prepared in ideological fantasizing, since Titanic was the symbol center of the might VIRTUAL capitalism, of financial speculations [[disconnected]] from the XIXth century industrial civilizationsphere of material production. Does The shattering impact of the same not hold also bombings can only be accounted for these bombings? Not only were against the media bombarding us all background of the time with borderline which today separates the talk about the terrorist threat; this threat was also obviously libidinally invested — just recall the series of movies digitalized First World from Escape From New York to Independence Day. Therein resides the rationale Third World "[[desert of the often-mentioned association of Real]]." It is the attacks with the Hollywood disaster movies: the unthinkable [[awareness]] that we live in an insulated artificial universe which happened was generates the object of fantasy, so notion that, in a way, America got what it fantasized about, and this was some ominous [[agent]] is threatening us all the greatest surprisetime with total [[destruction]].

One should therefore turn around Is, consequently, Osama Bin Laden, the suspected mastermind behind the standard reading according to whichbombings, not the WTC explosions were real-life [[counterpart]] of Ernst Stavro Blofeld, the intrusion [[master]]-criminal in most of the Real which shattered our illusory Sphere: quite on [[James]] Bond films, involved in the contrary, it [[acts]] of global destruction. What one should recall here is prior to that the WTC collapse than only place in Hollywood films where we lived see the production process in our reality, perceiving all its intensity is when James Bond penetrates the master-criminal's [[secret]] [[domain]] and locates there the Third World horrors as something which is not effectively part site of our social reality, as something which exists (for us) as a spectral apparition on the intense labor (TV) screen — distilling and what happened on September 11 is that this screen fantasmatic apparition entered our reality. It is not that reality entered our image: packaging the image entered and shattered our reality (i.e.drugs, the symbolic coordinates which determine what we experience as realityconstructing a rocket that will destroy New York…). The fact thatWhen the master-criminal, after September 11capturing Bond, usually takes him on a tour of his illegal factory, is this not the closest Hollywood comes to the opening of many "socialist-realist proud presentation of the blockbuster" movies with scenes which bear production in a resemblance to factory? And the WTC collapse (large buildings on fire or under attackfunction of Bond's [[intervention]], terrorist actions…) was postponed (or the films were even shelved)of course, is thus to be read as the "repression" explode in firecraks this site of production, allowing us to return to the fantasmatic background responsible for the impact daily semblance of our [[existence]] in a world with the WTC collapse"disappearing [[working]] [[class]]. Of course" Is it not that, in the point is not to play a pseudo-postmodern game of reducing the exploding WTC collapse to just another media spectacletowers, reading it as a catastrophy version of this violence directed at the snuff porno movies; the question we should have asked ourselves when we stared threatening [[Outside]] turned back at the TV screens on September 11 is simply: WHERE DID WE ALREADY SEE THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAINus?

It is precisely now, when we are dealing with the raw Real of a catastrophe, that we should bear The safe Sphere in mind the ideological and fantasmatic coordinates which determine its perception. If there Americans live is any symbolism in experienced as under threat from the collapse Outside of the WTC towersterrorist attackers who are ruthlessly self-sacrificing AND cowards, it is not so much the old-fashioned notion cunningly intelligent AND [[primitive]] barbarians. The letters of the deceased attackers are quoted as "center of financial capitalismchilling documents" — why? Are they not exactly what one would expect from dedicated fighters on a suicidal mission? If one takes away references to Koran," butin what do they differ from, rathersay, the notion that CIA special manuals? Were the two WTC towers stood CIA manuals for the center of Nicaraguan contras with detailed descriptions on how to perturb the VIRTUAL capitalismdaily life, of financial speculations disconnected from up to how to clog the sphere of material production. The shattering impact water toilets, not of the bombings can only be accounted for only against same order — if anything, MORE cowardly? When, on September 25, 2001, the background of Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar appealed to Americans to use their own judgement in responding to the borderline which today separates devastating attacks on the digitalized First World from Trade Center and the Third World Pentagon rather than blindly following their [[government]]'s policy to attack his country ("desert of the RealYou accept everything your government says, whether it is [[true]] or [[false]]. /…/ Don't you have your own [[thinking]]? /…/ So it will be better for you to use your [[sense]] and [[understanding]]." It is ), were these statements, taken in a literal-abstract, decontextualized, sense, not quite appropriate? Today, more than ever, one should bear in mind that the awareness that we live in an insulated artificial universe which generates large majority of Arabs are not fanaticized dark crowds, but scared, uncertain, aware of their fragile status — witness the notion that some ominous agent is threatening us all anxiety the time with total destructionbombings caused in Egypt.

Is, consequently, Osama Bin LadenWhenever we encounter such a purely [[evil]] Outside, we should gather the suspected mastermind behind courage to endorse the bombings[[Hegelian]] lesson: in this pure Outside, not we should recognize the real-life counterpart distilled version of Ernst Stavro Blofeldour own essence. For the last five centuries, the master-criminal in most (relative) prosperity and peace of the James Bond films, involved in "[[civilized]]" West was bought by the acts export of global ruthless violence and destruction. What one should recall here is that into the only place in Hollywood films where we see "barbarian" Outside: the production process in all its intensity is when James Bond penetrates long story from the master-criminal's secret domain and locates there the site conquest of intense labor (distilling and packaging America to the drugs, constructing a rocket that will destroy New York…)slaughter in Congo. When the master-criminalCruel and indifferent as it may sound, after capturing Bondwe should also, usually takes him on a tour of his illegal factorynow more than ever, is this not the closest Hollywood comes to bear in mind that the socialist-realist proud presentation actual effect of the production these bombings is much more symbolic than real: in a factory? And Africa, EVERY SINGLE DAY more people die of AIDS than all the function victims of Bond's interventionthe WTC collapse, and their death could have been easily cut back with relatively small financial means. The US just got the taste of coursewhat goes on around the world on a daily basis, is from Sarajevo to explode in firecraks this site of productionGrozny, allowing us from Ruanda and Congo to return Sierra Leone. If one adds to the daily semblance of our existence [[situation]] in New York rapist gangs and a world with dozen or so snipers blindly targeting people who walk along the "disappearing working classstreets, one gets an [[idea]] about what Sarajevo was a decade ago." Is it not that, in the exploding WTC towers, this violence directed at the threatening Outside turned back at us?

The safe Sphere in which Americans live is experienced as under threat from When, days after September 11 2001, our [[gaze]] was transfixed by the images of the plane hitting one of the Outside WTC towers, all of terrorist attackers who us were [[forced]] to experience what the "[[compulsion]] to [[repeat]]" ans [[jouissance]] beyond the [[pleasure]] [[principle]] are ruthlessly self-sacrificing AND cowards: we wanted to see it again and again, the same shots were repeated ad nauseam, cunningly intelligent AND primitive barbariansand the uncanny [[satisfaction]] we got from it was jouissance at its purest. The letters It is when we watched on TV screen the two WTC towers collapsing, that it became possible to experience the [[falsity]] of the deceased attackers "reality TV shows": even if these shows are quoted as "chilling documentsfor real," people still act in them — why? Are they not exactly what one would expect from dedicated fighters on simply play themselves. The standard disclaimer in a suicidal mission? If one takes away references to Koran, novel ("characters in what do they differ fromthis [[text]] are a fiction, say, the CIA special manuals? Were the CIA manuals for the Nicaraguan contras every resemblance with detailed descriptions on how to perturb the daily real life, up to how to clog characters is purely [[contingent]]") holds also for the water toilets, not participants of the same order — reality soaps: what we see there are fictional characters, even if anything, MORE cowardly? When, on September 25, 2001they play themselves for the real. Of course, the Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar appealed to Americans to use their own judgement in responding "return to the devastating attacks on Real" can be given different twists: one already hears some conservatives [[claim]] that what made us so vulnerable is our very [[openness]] — with the World Trade Center and inevitable conclusion lurking in the Pentagon rather than blindly following their government's policy background that, if we are to attack his country (protect our "You accept everything your government saysway of life, whether it is true or false. /…/ Don't you " we will have your own thinking? /…/ So it will be better for you to use your sense and understandingsacrifice some of our freedoms which were "misused" by the enemies of [[freedom]].This logic should be rejected tout court: is it not a fact that our First World ")open" countries are the most controlled countries in the entire history of humanity? In the United Kingdom, were these statementsall [[public]] spaces, taken in a literal-abstractfrom buses to shopping malls, decontextualized, senseare constantly videotaped, not quite appropriate? Today, more than ever, one should bear in mind that to mention the large majority almost total [[control]] of Arabs are not fanaticized dark crowds, but scared, uncertain, aware all forms of their fragile status — witness the anxiety the bombings caused in Egyptdigital [[communication]].

Whenever we encounter such a purely evil Outside, we should gather the courage to endorse Along the Hegelian lesson: in this pure Outside, we should recognize the distilled version of our own essence. For the last five centuriessame lines, Rightist commentators like George Will also immediately proclaimed the (relative) prosperity and peace end of the American "civilizedholiday from history" West was bought by — the export impact of ruthless violence and destruction into reality shattering the "barbarian" Outside: isolated tower of the long story from [[liberal]] tolerant attitude and the conquest of America to the slaughter in Congo[[Cultural]] Studies focus on textuality. Cruel and indifferent as it may soundNow, we should alsoare forced to strike back, now more than ever, bear to deal with real enemies in mind that the actual effect of these bombings is much more symbolic than real: in Africaworld… However, EVERY SINGLE DAY more people die of AIDS than all WHOM to strike? Whatever the victims of response, it will never hit the WTC collapseRIGHT target, and their death could have been easily cut back with relatively small financial meansbringing us [[full]] satisfaction. The US just got ridicule of America attacking Afghanistan cannot but strike the eye: if the taste greatest [[power]] in the world will destroy one of what goes the poorest countries in which peasant barely survive on around barren hills, will this not be the ultimate [[case]] of the world on impotent [[acting out]]? Afghanistan is otherwise an [[ideal]] target: a daily basiscountry ALREADY reduced to rubble, from Sarajevo to Groznywith no infrastructure, from Ruanda and Congo repeatedly destroyed by war for the last two decades… one cannot avoid the surmise that the [[choice]] of Afghanistan will be also determined by [[economic]] considerations: is it not the best procedure to Sierra Leone. If act out one's anger at a country for which no one adds cares and where there is nothing to destroy? Unfortunately, the possible choice of Afghanistan recalls the anecdote about the madman who searches for the lost key beneath a street light; when asked why there when he lost the situation key in New York rapist gangs and a dozen or so snipers blindly targeting people who walk along dark corner backwards, he answers: "But it is easier to [[search]] under strong light!" Is not the ultimate irony that the streets, one gets an idea about what Sarajevo was a decade ago.whole of Kabul already looks like downtown Manhattan?

When, days after To succumb to the urge to act now and retaliate means precisely to avoid confronting the true dimensions of what occurred on September 11 2001, our gaze was transfixed by — it means an act whose true aim is to lull us into the images secure conviction that nothing has REALLY changed. The true long-term threat are further acts of mass [[terror]] in comparison to which the plane hitting one [[memory]] of the WTC towerscollapse will pale — acts less spectacular, but much more horrifying. What about bacteriological warfare, all what about the use of us were forced to experience lethal gas, what about the "compulsion prospect of the DNA [[terrorism]] (developing poisons which will [[affect]] only people who share a determinate genome)? In contrast to repeat" ans jouissance beyond [[Marx]] who relied on the pleasure principle are: we wanted to see it again and againnotion of [[fetish]] as a solid object whose [[stable]] [[presence]] obfuscates its social mediation, one should assert that [[fetishism]] reaches its acme precisely when the same shots were repeated ad nauseamfetish itself is "dematerialized, and " turned into a fluid "immaterial" virtual entity; [[money]] fetishism will culminate with the uncanny satisfaction we got from it was jouissance at passage to its purest. It is electronic [[form]], when we watched on TV screen the two WTC towers collapsing, last traces of its materiality will [[disappear]] — it is only at this stage that it became possible to experience will assume the falsity form of the "reality TV shows"an indestructible spectral presence: even if these shows are "for realI owe you 1000 $, and no matter how many material [[notes]] I burn," people I still act in them — they simply play themselves. The standard disclaimer in a novel ("characters in this text are a fictionowe you 1000 $, every resemblance with the real life characters debt is purely contingent") holds inscribed somewhere in the virtual digital space… Does the same not hold also for warfare? Far from pointing towards the XXIth century warfare, the participants WTC twin towers explosion and collapse in September 2001 were rather the last spectacular cry of the reality soapsXXth century warfare. What awaits us is something much more uncanny: what we see there are fictional characters, even if they play themselves for the real. Of course, the specter of an "immaterial"return to war where the Real" attack is invisible — viruses, poisons which can be given different twists: one already hears some conservatives claim that what made us so vulnerable is our very openness — with anywhere and nowhere. At the inevitable conclusion lurking in level of [[visible]] material reality, nothing happens, no big explosions, and yet the background thatknown universe starts to collapse, if we life disintegrates… We are entering a new era of paranoiac warfare in which the biggest task will be to protect our "way [[identify]] the enemy and his weapons. Instead of lifea quick acting out," we one should confront these difficult questions: what will have to sacrifice some of our freedoms which were "misusedwar" by mean in the enemies of freedom. This logic should XXIst century? Who will be rejected tout court: is it not a fact that our First World "openthem," countries if they are , clearly, neither states nor criminal gangs? One cannot resist the most controlled countries in temptation to recall here the entire history [[Freudian]] opposition of humanity? In the United Kingdompublic Law and its [[obscene]] [[superego]] [[double]]: are, all public spacesalong the same line, from buses to shopping mallsthe "international terrorist organizations" not the obscene double of the big multinational corporations — the ultimate rhizomatic [[machine]], are constantly videotapedall-present, although with no clear territorial base? Are they not the form in which nationalist and/or [[religious]] "[[fundamentalism]]" accommodated itself to mention global capitalism? Do they not embody the almost total control of all forms of digital communication.ultimate contrafiction, with their [[particular]]/exclusive content and their global [[dynamic]] functioning?

Along the same lines, Rightist commentators like George Will also immediately proclaimed There is a [[partial]] truth in the end notion of the American "holiday from historyclash of civilizations" attested here — witness the impact surprise of reality shattering the isolated tower average American: "How is it possible that these people display and [[practice]] such a disregard for their own lives?" Is the obverse of this surprise not the liberal tolerant attitude and the Cultural Studies focus on textuality. Now, rather sad fact that we are forced to strike back, to deal with real enemies in the real world… HoweverFirst World countries, WHOM find it more and more difficult even to imagine a public or [[universal]] Cause for which one would be ready to strikesacrifice one's life? Whatever When, after the responsebombings, it will never hit even the Taliban foreign minister said that he can "feel the pain" of the RIGHT targetAmerican children, bringing us did he not thereby confirm the hegemonic ideological role of this Bill [[Clinton]]'s trademark phrase? It effectively appears as if the [[split]] between First World and Third World runs more and more along the lines of the opposition between leading a long [[satisfying]] life full satisfactionof material and cultural wealth, and dedicating one's life to some transcendent Cause. The ridicule Two [[philosophical]] references immediately impose themselves apropos this ideological [[antagonism]] between the Western consummerist way of America attacking Afghanistan cannot but strike life and the eyeMuslim radicalism: if [[Hegel]] and [[Nietzsche]]. Is this antagonism not the greatest power one between what Nietzsche called "[[passive]]" and "[[active]]" [[nihilism]]? We in the world will destroy one of West are the poorest countries Nietzschean Last Men, immersed in which peasant barely survive on barren hillsstupid daily pleasures, will this not be while the ultimate case of the impotent acting out? Afghanistan is otherwise an ideal target: a country ALREADY reduced Muslim radicals are ready to rubblerisk everything, with no infrastructure, repeatedly destroyed by war for engaged in the last two decades… one [[struggle]] up to their self-destruction. (One cannot avoid but note the significant role of the stock [[exchange]] in the surmise that bombings: the choice ultimate proof of Afghanistan will be also determined by economic considerations: is it not their [[traumatic]] impact was that the best procedure to act out one's anger at a country New York Stock Exchange was closed for which no one cares four days, and where there is nothing its opening the following Monday was presented as the key [[sign]] of things returning to destroy? Unfortunatelynormal.) Furthermore, if one perceives this opposition through the possible choice lenses of Afghanistan recalls the anecdote about Hegelian struggle between Master and Servant, one cannot avoid noting the [[paradox]]: although we in the madman West are perceived as exploiting masters, it is us who searches for occupy the lost key beneath a street light; when asked why there when he lost position of the key in a dark corner backwardsServant who, since he answers: "But it clings to life and its pleasures, is easier unable to search under strong light!" Is not risk his life (recall Colin Powell's notion of a high-tech war with no [[human]] casualties), while the ultimate irony that the whole of Kabul already looks like downtown Manhattan?poor Muslim radicals are Masters ready to risk their life…

To succumb to the urge to act now and retaliate means precisely to avoid confronting the true dimensions of what occurred on September 11 — it means an act whose true aim is to lull us into the secure conviction that nothing has REALLY changed. The true long-term threat are further acts of mass terror in comparison to which the memory of the WTC collapse will pale — acts less spectacular, but much more horrifying. What about bacteriological warfare, what about the use of lethal gas, what about the prospect of the DNA terrorism (developing poisons which will affect only people who share a determinate genome)? In contrast to Marx who relied on the notion of fetish as a solid object whose stable presence obfuscates its social mediation, one should assert that fetishism reaches its acme precisely when the fetish itself is "dematerialized," turned into a fluid "immaterial" virtual entity; money fetishism will culminate with the passage to its electronic form, when the last traces of its materiality will disappear — it is only at this stage that it will assume the form of an indestructible spectral presence: I owe you 1000 $, and no matter how many material notes I burn, I still owe you 1000 $, the debt is inscribed somewhere in the virtual digital space… Does the same not hold also for warfare? Far from pointing towards the XXIth century warfare, the WTC twin towers explosion and collapse in September 2001 were rather the last spectacular cry of the XXth century warfare. What awaits us is something much more uncanny: the specter of an "immaterial" war where the attack is invisible — viruses, poisons which can be anywhere and nowhere. At the level of visible material reality, nothing happens, no big explosions, and yet the known universe starts to collapse, life disintegrates… We are entering a new era of paranoiac warfare in which the biggest task will be to identify the enemy and his weapons. Instead of a quick acting out, one should confront these difficult questions: what will "war" mean in the XXIst century? Who will be "them," if they are, clearly, neither states nor criminal gangs? One cannot resist the temptation to recall here the Freudian opposition of the public Law and its obscene superego double: are, along the same line, the "international terrorist organizations" not the obscene double of the big multinational corporations — the ultimate rhizomatic machine, all-present, although with no clear territorial base? Are they not the form in which nationalist and/or religious "fundamentalism" accommodated itself to global capitalism? Do they not embody the ultimate contrafiction, with their particular/exclusive content and their global dynamic functioning? There is a partial truth in the notion of the "clash of civilizations" attested here — witness the surprise of the average American: "How is it possible that these people display and practice such a disregard for their own lives?" Is the obverse of this surprise not the rather sad fact that we, in the First World countries, find it more and more difficult even to imagine a public or universal Cause for which one would be ready to sacrifice one's life? When, after the bombings, even the Taliban foreign minister said that he can "feel the pain" of the American children, did he not thereby confirm the hegemonic ideological role of this Bill Clinton's trademark phrase? It effectively appears as if the split between First World and Third World runs more and more along the lines of the opposition between leading a long satisfying life full of material and cultural wealth, and dedicating one's life to some transcendent Cause. Two philosophical references immediately impose themselves apropos this ideological antagonism between the Western consummerist way of life and the Muslim radicalism: Hegel and Nietzsche. Is this antagonism not the one between what Nietzsche called "passive" and "active" nihilism? We in the West are the Nietzschean Last Men, immersed in stupid daily pleasures, while the Muslim radicals are ready to risk everything, engaged in the struggle up to their self-destruction. (One cannot but note the significant role of the stock exchange in the bombings: the ultimate proof of their traumatic impact was that the New York Stock Exchange was closed for four days, and its opening the following Monday was presented as the key sign of things returning to normal.) Furthermore, if one perceives this opposition through the lenses of the Hegelian struggle between Master and Servant, one cannot avoid noting the paradox: although we in the West are perceived as exploiting masters, it is us who occupy the position of the Servant who, since he clings to life and its pleasures, is unable to risk his life (recall Colin Powell's notion of a high-tech war with no human casualties), while the poor Muslim radicals are Masters ready to risk their life… However, this notion of the "clash of civilizations" has to be thoroughly rejected: what we are witnessing today are rather clashes WITHIN each civilization. Furthermore, a brief look at the comparative history of [[Islam ]] and [[Christianity ]] tells us that the "[[human rights ]] record" of Islam (to use this anachronistic term) is much better than that of Christianity: in the past centuries, Islam was significantly more tolerant towards other [[religions ]] than Christianity. NOW it is also the time to [[remember ]] that it was through the Arabs that, in the Middle Ages, we in the Western [[Europe ]] regained access to our Ancient Greek legacy. While in no way excusing today's horror acts, these facts nonetheless clearly demonstrate that we are not dealing with a feature inscribed into Islam "as such," but with the outcome of modern socio-political conditions.

Every feature attributed to the Other is already present in the very heart of the US: murderous fanaticism? There are today in the US itself more than two millions of the Rightist populist "fundamentalists" who also practice the terror of their own, legitimized by (their understanding of) Christianity. Since America is in a way "harboring" them, should the US [[Army ]] have punished the US themselves after the Oklashoma bombing? And what about the way Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson reacted to the bombings, perceiving them as a sign that God lifted up its protection of the US because of the sinful lives of the Americans, putting the blame on hedonist [[materialism]], [[liberalism]], and rampant [[sexuality]], and claiming that America got what it deserved? The fact that very same condemnation of the "liberal" America as the one from the Muslim Other came from the very heart of the Amerique profonde should give as to [[think]]. America as a safe haven? When a New Yorker commented on how, after the bombings, one can no longer walk safely on the city's streets, the irony of it was that, well before the bombings, the streets of New York were well-known for the dangers of being attacked or, at least, mugged — if anything, the bombings gave rise to a new sense of [[solidarity]], with the scenes of young African-Americans helping an old [[Jewish ]] gentlemen to cross the street, scenes unimaginable a couple of days ago.

Now, in the days immediately following the bombings, it is as if we dwell in the unique time between a traumatic [[event ]] and its symbolic impact, like in those brief [[moment ]] after we are deeply cut, and before the full extent of the pain strikes us — it is open how the events will be [[symbolized]], what their symbolic efficiency will be, what acts they will be evoked to justify. If nothing else, one can clearly experience yet again the limitation of our [[democracy]]: decisions are being made which will affect the fate of all of us, and all of us just wait, aware that we are utterly powerless. Even here, in these moments of utmost tension, this link is not automatic but contingent. There are already the first bad omens, like the sudden resurrection, in the public [[discourse]], of the old Cold war term "free world": the struggle is now the one between the "free world" and the forces of darkness and terror. The question to be asked here is, of course: who then belongs to the UNFREE world? Are, say, China or Egypt part of this free world? The actual [[message ]] is, of course, that the old [[division ]] between the Western liberal-democratic countries and all the others is again enforced.

The day after the bombing, I got a message from a journal which was just about to publish a longer text of mine on [[Lenin]], telling me that they decided to postpone its publication — they considered inopportune to publish a text on Lenin immediately after the bombing. Does this not points towards the ominous ideological rearticulations which will follow, with a new Berufsverbot ([[prohibition ]] to employ radicals) much stronger and more widespread than the one in the Germany of the 70s? These days, one often hears the phrase that the struggle is now the one for democracy — true, but not quite in the way this phrase is usually meant. Already, some [[Leftist ]] friends of mine wrote me that, in these difficult moments, it is better to keep one's head down and not push forward with our agenda. Against this temptation to duck out the crisis, one should insist that NOW the [[Left ]] should provide a better [[analysis ]] — otherwise, it concedes in advance its political AND [[ethical ]] defeat in the face of the acts of quite genuine ordinary people heroism (like the passengers who, in a [[model ]] of [[rational ]] ethical act, overtook the kidnappers and provokes the early crush of the plane: if one is condemned to die soon, one should gather the strength and die in such a way as to prevent other people dying).

When, in the aftermath of September 11, the Americans en masse rediscovered their American pride, displaying flags and singing together in the public, one should emphasize more than ever that there is nothing "innocent" in this rediscovery of the American innocence, in getting rid of the sense of historical [[guilt ]] or irony which prevented many of them to fully assume being American. What this gesture amounted to was to "objectively" assume the burden of all that being "American" stood for in the past — an exemplary case of ideological [[interpellation]], of fully assuming one's symbolic mandate, which enters the stage after the perplexity caused by some historical [[trauma]]. In the traumatic aftermath of September 11, when the old security seemed momentarily shattered, what more "[[natural]]" gesture than to take refuge in the innocence of the firm ideological [[identification]]? 4 However, it is precisely such moments of [[transparent ]] innocence, of "return to basics," when the gesture of identification seems "natural," that are, from the standpoint of the critique of [[ideology]], the most obscure one's, even, in a certain way, obscurity itself. Let us recall another such innocently-transparent moment, the endlessly reproduced video-shot from Beijing's Avenue of Eternal Piece at the height of the "troubles" in 1989, of a tiny young man with a can who, alone, stands in front of an advancing gigantic tank, and courageously tries to prevent its advance, so that, when the tank tries to bypass him by turning right or left, them man also moves aside, again standing in its way:

And, again, this very moment of transparent clarity (things are rendered at their utmost naked: a single man against the raw force of the [[State]]) is, for our Western gaze, sustained by a cobweb of ideological implications, embodying a series of oppositions: individual versus state, peaceful resistance versus state violence, man versus machine, the inner force of a tiny individual versus the [[impotence ]] of the powerful machine… These implications, against the background of which the shot exerts its full direct impact, these "mediations" which sustain the shot's immediate impact, are NOT present for a Chinese [[observer]], since the above-mentioned series of oppositions is inherent to the European ideological legacy. And the same ideological background also overdetermines, say, our perception of the horrifying images of tiny individuals jumping from the burning WTC tower into certain death.

So what about the phrase which reverberates everywhere, "Nothing will be the same after September 11"? Significantly, this phrase is never further elaborated — it just an [[empty gesture ]] of saying something "deep" without really [[knowing ]] what we [[want ]] to say. So our first reaction to it should be: Really? Is it, rather, not that the only thing that effectively changed was that America was forced to realize the kind of world it was part of? On the other hand, such changes in perception are never without consequences, since the way we perceive our situation determines the way we act in it. Recall the [[processes ]] of collapse of a political [[regime]], say, the collapse of the Communist regimes in the Eastern Europe in 1990: at a certain moment, people all of a sudden became aware that the game is over, that the Communists are lost. The break was purely symbolic, nothing changed "in reality" — and, nonetheless, from this moment on, the final collapse of the regime was just a question of days… What if something of the same order DID occur on September 11?

We don't yet know what consequences in [[economy]], ideology, [[politics]], war, this event will have, but one thing is sure: the US, which, till now, perceived itself as an island exempted from this kind of violence, witnessing this kind of things only from the safe distance of the TV screen, is now directly involved. So the alternative is: will Americans decide to fortify further their "sphere," or to risk stepping out of it? Either America will persist in, strengthen even, the deeply immoral attitude of "Why should this happen to us? Things like this don't happen HERE!", leading to more [[aggressivity ]] towards the threatening Outside, in short: to a paranoiac acting out. Or America will finally risk stepping through the fantasmatic screen separating it from the Outside World, accepting its arrival into the Real world, making the long-overdued move from "A thing like this should not happen HERE!" to "A thing like this should not happen ANYWHERE!". Therein resides the true lesson of the bombings: the only way to ensure that it will not happen HERE again is to prevent it going on ANYWHERE ELSE. In short, America should learn to humbly accept its own vulnerability as part of this world, enacting the [[punishment ]] of those responsible as a sad [[duty]], not as an exhilarating retaliation.

The WTC bombings again confront us with the [[necessity ]] to resist the temptation of a double [[blackmail]]. If one simply, only and unconditionally condemns it, one cannot but appear to endorse the blatantly ideological position of the American innocence under attack by the Third World Evil; if one draws attention to the deeper socio-political causes of the Arab extremism, one cannot but appear to blame the victim which ultimately got what it deserved… The only consequent solution is here to reject this very opposition and to adopt both positions simultaneously, which can only be done if one resorts to the [[dialectical ]] [[category ]] of [[totality]]: there is no choice between these two positions, each one is one-sided and false. Far from offering a case apropos of which one can adopt a clear ethical stance, we encounter here the [[limit ]] of [[moral ]] reasoning: from the moral standpoint, the victims are innocent, the act was an abominable crime; however, this very innocence is not innocent — to adopt such an "innocent" position in today's global capitalist universe is in itself a false abstraction. The same goes for the more ideological clash of [[interpretations]]: one can claim that the attack on the WTC was an attack on what is worth fighting for in democratic freedoms — the decadent Western way of life condemned by Muslim and other fundamentalists is the universe of women's rights and multiculturalist [[tolerance]]; however, one can also claim that it was an attack on the very center and symbol of global financial capitalism. This, of course, in no way entails the compromise notion of shared guilt (terrorists are to blame, but, partially, also Americans are also to blame…) — the point is, rather, that the two sides are not really opposed, that they belong to the same field. The fact that global capitalism is a totality means that it is the dialectical [[unity ]] of itself and of its other, of the forces which resist it on "fundamentalist" ideological grounds.

Consequently, of the two main stories which emerged after September 11, both are worse, as [[Stalin ]] would have put it. The American patriotic [[narrative ]] — the innocence under siege, the surge of patriotic pride — is, of course, vain; however, is the Leftist narrative (with its Schadenfreude: the US got what they deserved, what they were for decades doing to others) really any better? The predominant reaction of European, but also American, Leftists was nothing less than scandalous: all imaginable stupidities were said and written, up to the "[[feminist]]" point that the WTC towers were two [[phallic ]] [[symbols]], waiting to be destroyed ("[[castrated]]"). Was there not something petty and miserable in the [[mathematics ]] reminding one of the [[holocaust ]] revisionism (what are the 6000 [[dead ]] against millions in Ruanda, Kongo, etc.)? And what about the fact that CIA (co)created Taliban and Bin Laden, financing and helping them to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan? Why was this fact quoted as an argument AGAINST attacking them? Would it not be much more [[logical ]] to claim that it is precisely their duty to get us rid of the monster they created? The moment one thinks in the [[terms ]] of "yes, the WTC collapse was a [[tragedy]], but one should not fully solidarize with the victims, since this would mean supporting US imperialism," the ethical catastrophy is already here: the only appropriate stance is the unconditional solidarity will ALL victims. The ethical stance proper is here replaced with the moralizing mathematics of guilt and horror which misses the key point: the terrifying death of each individual is absolute and incomparable. In short, let us make a simple [[mental ]] experiment: if you detect in yourself any restraint to fully empathize with the victims of the WTC collapse, if you feel the urge to qualify your [[empathy ]] with "yes, but what about the millions who suffer in Africa…", you are not demonstrating your Third World sympathize, but merely the mauvaise foi which bears witness to your implicit patronizing racist attitude towards the Third World victims. (More precisely, the problem with such comparative statements is that they are necessary and inadmissible: one HAS to make them, one HAS to make the point that much worse horrors are taken place around the world on a daily basis — but one has to do it without getting involved in the obscene mathematics of guilt.)

It must be said that, within the scope of these two extremes (the violent retaliatory act versus the new [[reflection ]] about the global situation and America's role in it), the reaction of the Western powers till now was surprisingly considerate (no wonder it caused the violent anti-American [[outburst ]] of Ariel Sharon!). Perhaps the greatest irony of the situation is that the main "collateral damage" of the Western reaction is the focus on the plight of the Afghani refugees, and, more generally, on the catastrophic food and health situation in Afghanistan, so that, sometimes, military [[action ]] against Taliban is almost presented as a means to guarantee the safe delivery of the humanitarian aid — as Tony Blair said, perhaps, we will have to bomb Taliban in order to secure the food transportation and distribution. Although, of course, such large-scale publicized humanitarian actions are in themselves ideologically charged, involving the debilitating degradation of the Afghani people to [[helpless ]] victims, and reducing the Taliban to a parasite terrorizing them, it is significant to acknowledge that the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan presents a much larger catastrophy than the WTC bombings.

Another way in which the Left miserably failed is that, in the weeks after the bombing, it reverted to the old mantra "Give peace a [[chance]]! War does not stop violence!" — a true case of [[hysterical ]] precipitation, reacting to something which will not even happen in the expected form. Instead of the [[concrete ]] analysis of the new [[complex ]] situation after the bombings, of the chances it gives to the Left to propose its own [[interpretation ]] of the events, we got the blind ritualistic chant "No war!", which fails to address even the elementary fact, de facto acknowledged by the US government itself (through its postponing of the retaliatory action), that this is not a war like others, that the bombing of Afghanistan is not a solution. A sad situation, in which George [[Bush ]] showed more power of reflection than most of the Left!

No wonder that anti-Americanism was most discernible in "big" European nations, especially [[France ]] and Germany: it is part of their resistance to [[globalization]]. One often hears the complaint that the recent trend of globalization threatens the [[sovereignty ]] of the [[Nation]]-States; here, however, one should qualify this statement: WHICH states are most exposed to this threat? It is not the small states, but the second-rang (ex-)world powers, countries like United Kingdom, Germany and France: what they [[fear ]] is that, once fully immersed in the newly emerging global [[Empire]], they will be reduced at the same level as, say, [[Austria]], Belgium or even Luxembourg. The [[refusal ]] of "Americanization" in France, shared by many Leftists and Rightist nationalists, is thus ultimately the refusal to accept the fact that France itself is losing its hegemonic role in Europe. The results of this refusal are often comical — at a recent philosophical colloquium, a [[French ]] Leftist [[philosopher ]] complained how, apart from him, there are now practically no French [[philosophers ]] in France: [[Derrida ]] is sold to American deconstructionism, the academia is overwhelmed by [[Anglo-Saxon ]] cognitivism… A simple mental experiment is indicative here: let us imagine someone from Serbia claiming that he is the only remaining truly Serb philosopher — he would have been immediately denounced and ridiculed as a nationalist. The levelling of weight between larger and smaller Nation-States should thus be counted among the beneficial effects of globalization: beneath the contemptuous deriding of the new Eastern European [[post-Communist ]] states, it is easy to discern the contours of the wounded [[Narcissism ]] of the European "great nations." Here, a [[good ]] dose of Lenin's sensitivity for the small nations (recall his [[insistence ]] that, in the [[relationship ]] between large and small nations, one should always allow for a greater degree of the "small" [[nationalism]]) would be helpful. Interestingly, the same matrix was reproduced within ex-[[Yugoslavia]]: not only for the Serbs, but even for the majority of the Western powers, Serbia was self-evidently perceived as the only ethnic group with enough substance to form its own state. Throughout the 90s, even the radical democratic critics of [[Milosevic ]] who rejected Serb nationalism, acted on the presupposition that, among the ex-Yugoslav republics, it is only Serbia which has democratic potential: after overthrowing Milosevic, Serbia alone can turn into a thriving democratic state, while other ex-Yugoslav nations are too "provincial" to sustain their own democratic State… is this not the echo of [[Friedrich Engels]]' well-known scathing remarks about how the small [[Balkan ]] nations are politically reactionary since their very existence is a reaction, a survival of the past?

America's "holiday from history" was a fake: America's peace was bought by the catastrophes going on elsewhere. These days, the predominant point of view is that of an innocent gaze confronting unspeakable Evil which stroke from the Outside — and, again, apropos this gaze, one should gather the strength and apply to it also Hegel's well-known dictum that the Evil resides (also) in the innocent gaze itself which perceives Evil all around itself. There is thus an element of truth even in the most constricted Moral Majority [[vision ]] of the depraved America dedicated to mindless pleasures, in the [[conservative ]] horror at this netherworld of sexploitation and pathological violence: what they don't get is merely the Hegelian speculative [[identity ]] between this netherworld and their own position of fake purity — the fact that so many fundamentalist preachers turned out to be secret [[sexual ]] perverts is more than a contingent empirical fact. When the infamous Jimmy Swaggart claimed that the fact that he visited prostitutes only gave additional strength to his preaching (he knew from intimate struggle what he was preaching against), although undoubtedly hypocritical at the immediate [[subjective ]] level, is nonetheless objectively true.

Can one imagine a greater irony than the fact that the first codename for the US operation against terrorists was "Infinite Justice" (later changed in response to the reproach of the American Islam clerics that only God can exert infinite justice)? Taken seriously, this name is profoundly ambiguous: either it means that the Americans have the right to ruthlessly destroy not only all terrorists but also all who gave then material, moral, ideological etc. support (and this process will be by definition endless in the precise sense of the Hegelian "bad infinity" — the work will never be really accomplished, there will always remain some other terrorist threat…); or it means that the justice exerted must be truly infinite in the strict Hegelian sense, i.e., that, in relating to others, it has to relate to itself — in short, that it has to ask the question of how we ourselves who exert justice are involved in what we are fighting against. When, on September 22 2001, Derrida received the Theodor [[Adorno ]] award, he referred in his [[speech ]] to the WTC bombings: "My unconditional compassion, addressed at the victims of the September 11, does not prevent me to say it loudly: with regard to this crime, I do not believe that anyone is politically guiltless." This [[self-relating]], this inclusion of oneself into the picture, is the only true "infinite justice."

In the electoral campaign, President Bush named as the most important person in his life [[Jesus ]] [[Christ]]. Now he has a unique chance to prove that he meant it seriously: for him, as for all Americans today, "[[Love ]] thy [[neighbor]]!" means "Love the Muslims!" OR IT MEANS NOTHING AT ALL.

1. See [[Alain Badiou]], Le siecle, forthcoming from [[Editions du Seuil]], [[Paris]].

2. Another case of ideological [[censorship]]: when fireworkers' widows were interviewed on CNN, most of them gave the expected performance: tears, prayers… all except one of them who, without a tear, said that she does not pray for her [[deceived ]] husband, because she [[knows ]] that prayer will not get him back. When asked if she [[dreams ]] of revenge, she calmly said that that would be the true [[betrayal ]] of her husband: if he were to survive, he would insist that the worst thing to do is to succumb to the urge to retaliate… useless to add that this fragment was shown only once and then disappeared from the repetitions of the same block.

3. See Chapter III in Raymond Bellour, The Analysis of [[Film]], Bloomington: Indiana [[University ]] Press 2000.

4. I rely here on my critical elaboration of [[Althusser]]'s notion of interpellation in chapter 3 of Metastases of [[Enjoyment]], [[London]]: Verso Books 1995.

* 10/7/01 — Reflections on WTC — an earlier version of the book, Welcome to [[the Desert of the Real]]. 

* [[Welcome to the Desert of the Real]]]. ‘’The Symptom’’. Volume 2. Spring 2002. < http://www.lacan.com/desertsymf.htm>From: [[Lacan.com ]] Available: http://lacan.com/reflections.htm.