Changes

The fate of a [[Slovene]] [[Communist]] [[revolution]]ary serves as a perfect [[metaphor]] for the twists of [[Stalinism]]. In 1943, when <i>Free [[ItalyWorld]] capitulated, he led a rebellion of [[Yugoslav]] prisoners in a [[concentration camp]] on the Adriatic island of Rab: 2000 starving prisoners disarmed 2200 [[Italian]] soldiers. After the [[war]], he was arrested and put in a prison on Goli otok ('Naked Island'), a notorious [[Communist]] [[concentration camp]] near Rab. While he was there, he and other prisoners were detailed to build a monument to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the 1943 rebellion on Rab. As Why a prisoner Crisis of the Communists, he was building a monument to himself and West Reveals the rebellion he'd led. If poetic injustice means anything, this is it. The fate Opportunity of this revolutionary was surely the fate of the people as a whole under Our [[StalinistTime]] </i> by [[dictatorshipTimothy Garton Ash]]: the millions who overthrew the ''ancien régime'', and were then forced to build monuments to their own revolutionary past.

The fate of a [[Timothy Garton AshSlovene]] would appreciate this tragicomic accident: it comes close to the spirit of [[ethicallyCommunist]] engaged [[ironyrevolution]] that permeates his best work. Although he is my political opponent, I always consider him worth reading for his wealth of precise observations, and ary serves as a reliable source on the vicissitudes of the disintegration of perfect [[Eastern Europemetaphor]]an for the twists of [[CommunismStalinism]]. In <i>Free World</i> 1943, when [[Italy]] capitulated, he has taken the same perspicuous and bitterly witty approach to the conundrums led a rebellion of the recent tensions between the key [[Western EuropeYugoslav]]an prisoners in a [[stateconcentration camp]]s and on the Adriatic island of Rab: 2000 starving prisoners disarmed 2200 [[USItalian]]soldiers. His aperçus about the relations between After the [[UKwar]], he was arrested and put in a prison on Goli otok ('Naked Island'), a [[Francenotorious]] [[Communist]] and [[Germanyconcentration camp]] often recall the gentle near Rab. While he was there, he and [[ironyother]] prisoners were detailed to build a monument to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the 1943 rebellion on Rab. As a novel prisoner of mannersthe Communists, giving he was building a new twist monument to himself and the rebellion he'd led. If poetic injustice means anything, this is it. The fate of this revolutionary was surely the old topic fate of the [[people]] as a [[whole]] under [[Stalinist]] [[dictatorship]]: the millions who overthrew the ''ancien régime'', and were then [[European trinityforced]] to build monuments to their own revolutionary [[past]]'.

In a famous scene from [[BuñuelTimothy Garton Ash]]'s <i>Phantom would appreciate this tragicomic accident: it comes close to the spirit of Liberty</i>[[ethically]] engaged [[irony]] that permeates his best [[work]]. Although he is my political opponent, the roles I always consider him worth [[reading]] for his wealth of eating and excreting are inverted: people sit at toilets around a table, chatting pleasantlyprecise observations, and when they want to eat, sneak away to a small room. So, as a reliable source on the vicissitudes of the disintegration of [[supplementEastern Europe]] to an [[Lévi-StraussCommunism]], one is tempted to propose that shit can also serve as a . In <i>matière-à-penserFree World</i>: he has taken the same perspicuous and bitterly witty approach to the three basic types conundrums of the [[toiletrecent]] form an excremental correlative-counterpoint to tensions between the key [[Lévi-StraussWestern Europe]]ian triangle of cooking (the raw, the cooked and the rotten). In a traditional an [[Germanstate]] s and the [[toiletUS]], the hole into which shit disappears after we flush is right at the front, so that shit is first laid out for us to sniff and inspect for traces of illness. In the typical His aperçus [[Frenchabout]] the relations between the [[toiletUK]], on the contrary, the hole is at the back, i.e. shit is supposed to disappear as quickly as possible. Finally, the [[AmericanFrance]] (and [[Anglo-SaxonGermany]]) often [[toiletrecall]] presents a synthesis, a mediation between these opposites: the toilet basin is full of water, so that the shit floats in it, visible, but not to be inspected. No wonder that in the famous discussion of gentle [[Europeirony]]an toilets at the beginning of her half-forgotten <i>Fear a novel of Flying</i>manners, Erica Jong mockingly claims that 'German toilets are really the key giving a new twist to the horrors old topic of the Third Reich. People who can build toilets like this are capable of anything.' It is clear that none of these versions can be accounted for in purely [[utilitarian ]]terms: each involves a certain [[ideological]] perception of how the [[subject]] should relate to [[excrementEuropean trinity]]'.

In a famous [[Hegelscene]] was among the first to see in the geographical from [[Buñuel]]'s <i>[[triadPhantom]] of Liberty</i>, the roles of eating and excreting are inverted: people sit at toilets around a table, chatting pleasantly, and when they [[Germanywant]]to eat, sneak away to a small room. So, as a [[Francesupplement]] and to [[EnglandLévi-Strauss]] an expression of three different existential attitudes, one is tempted to propose that shit can also serve as a <i>matière-à-penser</i>: reflective thoroughness (the [[Germanthree]]), revolutionary hastiness (basic types of [[Frenchtoilet]]), [[utilitarianform]] an excremental correlative-counterpoint to the [[pragmatismLévi-Strauss]] (ian [[Englishtriangle]]of cooking (the raw, the cooked and the rotten). In a traditional [[politicalGerman]] terms, this [[triadtoilet]] can be read as , the [[Germanhole]] into which shit [[conservatismdisappears]], after we flush is [[Frenchright]] at the front, so that shit is first laid out for us to sniff and inspect for traces of [[revolutionaryillness]] . In the typical [[radicalismFrench]] and [[Englishtoilet]] , on the contrary, the hole is at the back, i.e. shit is supposed to [[liberalismdisappear]]as quickly as possible. In terms of Finally, the predominance of one sphere of social life, it is [[GermanAmerican]] ([[metaphysicsAnglo-Saxon]] and ) [[poetrytoilet]] versus presents a [[Frenchsynthesis]] , a mediation between these opposites: the toilet basin is [[politicsfull]] and of water, so that the shit floats in it, [[English]] [[economicsvisible]], but not to be inspected. The point about No wonder that in the famous [[toiletdiscussion]]s is that they enable us not only to discern this of [[triadEurope]] in an toilets at the most intimate domain, but also to identify its underlying beginning of her half-forgotten <i>[[mechanismFear]] in of Flying</i>, Erica Jong mockingly claims that 'German toilets are really the key to the horrors of the three different attitudes towards [[excrementThird]]al [[excessReich]]: an ambiguous contemplative fascination; a wish to get rid . People who can build toilets like this are capable of it as fast as possible; a pragmatic decision to treat it as ordinary and dispose of it in an appropriate wayanything. ' It is easy clear that none of these versions can be accounted for an academic at a round table to claim that we live in purely [[utilitarian ]][[terms]]: each involves a certain [[post-ideological]] universe, but [[perception]] of how the moment he visits the lavatory after the heated discussion, he is again knee-deep in [[ideologysubject]] should relate to [[excrement]].

[[Garton AshHegel]]'s observations suggest that was among the first to see in the three terms geographical [[triad]] of the trinity have recently undergone a strange [[displacementGermany]], [[France]] and [[England]]an expression of three different existential attitudes: the reflective thoroughness ([[German]]), revolutionary hastiness ([[French are preoccupied with culture (how to save theirs from vulgar Americanisation]]), the [[utilitarian]] [[pragmatism]] ([[English are focusing on ]]). In [[political dilemmas (should they join a politically united Europe?)]] terms, this [[triad]] can be read as [[German]] [[conservatism]], [[French]] [[revolutionary]] [[radicalism]] and [[English]] [[liberalism]]. In terms of the Germans? predominance of one sphere of [[social]] [[life]], it is [[German]] [[metaphysics]] and [[poetry]] versus [[French]] [[politics]] and [[English]] [[economics]]. The Germans worry point about [[toilet]]s is that they enable us not only to discern this [[triad]] in the inertia most intimate [[domain]], but also to [[identify]] its underlying [[mechanism]] in the three different attitudes towards [[excrement]]al [[excess]]: an ambiguous contemplative [[fascination]]; a [[wish]] to get rid of their economy, it as fast as possible; a pragmatic decision to treat it as if, ordinary and dispose of it in postponing economic reforms indefinitely, they were persisting an appropriate way. It is easy for an academic at a round table to [[claim]] that we live in an attitude which turns around their own saying: <i>morgena [[post-ideological]] [[universe]], morgenbut the [[moment]] he visits the lavatory after the heated discussion, nur nicht heute, sagen alle faulen Leute</i> ('tomorrow, tomorrow, just not today, all lazy people say')he is again knee-deep in [[ideology]].

And what if there was [[Garton Ash]]'s observations [[suggest]] that the three terms of the trinity have recently undergone a further shift of terms? We might then see strange [[displacement]]: the United Kingdom focused on French are preoccupied with [[culture ]] (cultural tolerance and lack of pretension could serve as an antidote how to French elitism and excessive German seriousnesssave theirs from vulgar Americanisation); France focused , the English are focusing on political dilemmas (should they join a politically united Europe?), and the Germans? The Germans worry about the inertia of their [[economy (]], as if, in postponing [[economic]] reforms indefinitely, they were persisting in an attitude whichturns around their own saying: <i>morgen, against all expectationsmorgen, nur nicht heute, has done rather well in recent decades); and - surprise - Germany focused on politics sagen alle faulen Leute</i> (is the political life of the Bundesrepublik 'tomorrow, tomorrow, just not a triumph of reasoned debate over blind passion?today, all lazy people say').

So far so good. In the second half And what if there was a further shift of terms? We might then see the book, however, Garton Ash passes to a general diagnosis United Kingdom focused on culture ([[cultural]] [[tolerance]] and [[lack]] of the threats pretension could serve as an antidote to freedom since the end of the Cold War, French elitism and the tone becomes dogmatic and simplistic, and the proposed solutions hopelessly naive. The final pages are full of journalistic commonplaces - 'Western-style consumerism is unsustainable excessive German seriousness); France focused on a global scale' - which contrast starkly with the witty remarks about 'Janus Britain' earlier in the book. True, there are forthright statements, unusual for a man of Garton Ash's political views economy (an unambiguous attackwhich, for example, on the unfair trade practices of the developed countries)against all expectations, but he fails to ground his proposals has done rather well in a detailed analysis of the global situation. First, he identifies four 'new Red Armies' (<i>sic</i>recent decades), the forces of evil ; and - or historical processes surprise - that pose Germany focused on politics (or will pose) a threat to democracy and freedom in is the coming decades: political life of the situation in the Middle East (the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the rise Bundesrepublik not a triumph of Islamism), the situation in the Far East (how will China develop with regard to democracyreasoned debate over blind [[passion]]?), the gap between North and South, and the global ecological deadlock.

These four areas So far so [[good]]. In the second half of the book, however, Garton Ash passes to a general diagnosis of the [[threats]] to [[freedom]] since the end of anxiety are enumerated rather than analysed the [[Cold War]], and the tone becomes dogmatic andsimplistic, as and the proposed solutions hopelessly naive. The final pages are full of journalistic commonplaces - 'Western-style consumerism is unsustainable on a result[[global]] scale' - which contrast starkly with the witty remarks about 'Janus [[Britain]]' earlier in the book. [[True]], there are forthright statements, unusual for a man of Garton Ash's proposed solutions political views (oran unambiguous attack, for example, ratheron the unfair trade practices of the developed countries), since but he is appropriately modest, fails to ground his guidelines for solutions) read like proposals in a list detailed [[analysis]] of desiderata: the developed countries should abide by global [[situation]]. First, he [[identifies]] four 'new Red Armies' (<i>sic</i>), the rules forces of fair competition they want [[evil]] - or historical [[processes]] - that pose (or will pose) a [[threat]] to impose on [[democracy]] and freedom in the coming decades: the underdeveloped ones; they should make a more concentrated effort to thwart ecological catastrophe; situation in the [[Middle East crisis should be resolved through ]] (the joint effort Israeli-Palestinian [[conflict]] and the rise of Islamism), the situation in the US and Europe, and so on. And what is one Far East (how will China develop with [[regard]] to say of his tendency to moralistic platitudedemocracy? 'If we want to be able to look ourselves in ), the face every morninggap between North and South, anyone who earns more than and the average wage in a rich country should aim to give 1 per cent of his or her annual income to charities with a good track record in the developing world. We can afford itglobal ecological deadlock.'

These four areas of [[anxiety]] are enumerated rather than analysed and, as a result, Garton Ash's conclusion does not live up to the promiseproposed solutions (or, stated in the book's subtitlerather, to show how the post-Cold War worldsince he is appropriately modest, although it generates new problems, also opens up his guidelines for solutions) read like a unique chance to confront them. My own view [[list]] of these shortcomings is hopelessly 'outmoded', because tinged with Marxismdesiderata: the four problems Garton Ash lists are clearly grounded in developed countries should abide by the general dynamics rules of today's global capitalism. This link is self-evident in fair competition they want to impose on the case of underdeveloped ones; they should make a more concentrated effort to thwart ecological problems and catastrophe; the poverty gap between North and South. Is Middle East crisis should be resolved through the rise joint effort of Islamism not conditioned by the refusal US and Europe, and so on. And what is one to say of Muslim civilisation his tendency to accept [[moralistic]] platitude? 'If we want to be able to look ourselves in the social dynamics of capitalism? Is face every morning, anyone who earns more than the strange turn average [[wage]] in China not to do with the fact that it is a Communist state which has fully endorsed a capitalist economy? The question rich country should therefore be put at a more general level than Garton Ash would like: how do we stand with regard aim to global capitalism? Are give 1 per cent of his 'new Red Armies' symptoms of or her annual income to charities with a structural flaw at good track record in the heart of the capitalist machine, or are they accidents that developing world. We can be kept under control, if not averted?afford it.'

Not that we should respond to Garton Ash with the crude Marxist retort that 'he doesn't take into account s conclusion does not live up to the dialectical totality of promise, stated in the situation.book' The singularity of human suffering may reach s subtitle, to show how the post-Cold War world, although it generates new problems, also opens up a level at which the easy reference unique [[chance]] to totality turns into cynicismconfront [[them]]. The only argument for My own view of these shortcomings is hopelessly 'outmoded', because tinged with [[Marxism]]: the war against Iraq was repeatedly put by Christopher Hitchens: four problems Garton Ash lists are clearly grounded in the majority general dynamics of Iraqis were victims today's global [[capitalism]]. This link is [[self]]-evident in the [[case]] of Saddam ecological problems and the poverty gap between North and were glad to get rid of himSouth. To this majority, Is the caution expressed rise of Islamism not conditioned by Western liberals could only appear deeply hypocritical. A typical middle-class Western leftist has no right to despise a Cuban who has decided the [[refusal]] of Muslim civilisation to leave Cuba not only because of political disenchantment, but also because of poverty and hunger. I remember from accept the early 1990s dozens social dynamics of Western leftists who proudly proclaimed that Yugoslavia still existed, and reproached me for betraying capitalism? Is the opportunity strange turn in China not to prolong do with the fact that existence - to it is a Communist state which I answered that I was not yet ready has fully endorsed a [[capitalist]] economy? The question should therefore be put at a more general level than Garton Ash would like: how do we stand with regard to lead my life to avoid disappointing global capitalism? Are his 'new Red Armies' [[symptoms]] of a [[structural]] flaw at the dreams heart of Western leftists. There the capitalist [[machine]], or are few things more worthy of contemptthey accidents that can be kept under [[control]], few attitudes more ideological (if this word has any meaning today, it is here) than a tenured Western academic leftist patronising an Eastern European from a Communist country who longs for liberal democracy and some consumer goods.not averted?

One Not that we should ask the naive question: why should the US not be a global policeman? The post-Cold War situation called for a global power respond to fill Garton Ash with the void. The problem, however, is not crude [[Marxist]] retort that the US is a new global empire, but that it isn'he doesn't one, though it pretends to be. In fact, take into account the [[dialectical]] [[totality]] of the US continues to act as a nation-state, ruthlessly pursuing its own interestssituation. ' The watchword singularity of recent US politics is [[human]] [[suffering]] may reach a weird reversal of level at which the well-known ecologists' motto: act global, think localeasy reference to totality turns into [[cynicism]]. This contradiction is amply illustrated by The only argument for the twin pressures the US war against [[Iraq]] was exerting on Serbia last yearrepeatedly put by [[Christopher Hitchens]]: it demanded that the government in Belgrade hand over suspected war criminals majority of Iraqis were victims of [[Saddam]] and were glad to the Hague tribunal (the logic get rid of him. To this majority, the global empire demands a transcaution expressed by Western [[liberals]] could only appear deeply hypocritical. A typical middle-state global judicial institution) while at the same time urging it [[class]] Western [[leftist]] has no right to sign despise a bilateral treaty with the US obliging it Cuban who has decided to leave Cuba not to deliver to the International Criminal Court any US citizen suspected only because of political disenchantment, but also because of war crimes or other crimes against humanitypoverty and hunger. No wonder I [[remember]] from the Serb reaction was one early 1990s dozens of perplexed fury. Apropos the Hague tribunalWestern leftists who proudly proclaimed that [[Yugoslavia]] still existed, Garton Ash wrote in and reproached me for betraying the <i>Süddeutsche Zeitung</i> opportunity to prolong that 'No Führer or Duce, no Pinochet, no Idi Amin and no Pol Pot should any longer be allowed [[existence]] - to which I answered that I was not yet ready to lead my life to feel safe behind the palace gates of sovereignty from avoid disappointing the intervention [[dreams]] of people's justiceWestern leftists.' One should take note There are few things more worthy of the names missing contempt, few attitudes more ideological (if this [[word]] has any [[meaning]] today, it is here) than a tenured Western academic leftist patronising an Eastern European from this lista Communist country who longs for [[liberal]] democracy and some consumer goods.

Garton Ash One should ask the naive question: why should the US not be a global policeman? The post-Cold War situation called for a global [[power]] to fill the [[void]]. The problem, however, is well aware not that the same logic of exception applies US is a new global [[empire]], but that it isn't one, though it pretends to economic relationsbe. In Cancún last yearfact, the US insisted on keeping subsidies for its cotton producerscontinues to act as a [[nation]]-state, thus violating ruthlessly pursuing its own advice to Third World countries to abandon state subsidies and open up to the market. With torture it's much the same storyinterests. The exemplary economic strategy watchword of today's capitalism recent US politics is outsourcing a weird [[reversal]] of the well- contracting out the known ecologists'dirty' process of material production (but also publicitymotto: act global, design, accountancy) to other companies[[think]] local. In this way, it This [[contradiction]] is easy to circumvent environmental and health legislationamply illustrated by the twin pressures the US was exerting on Serbia last year: it demanded that the production takes place in Indonesia, say, where regulations are much less stringent than [[government]] in Belgrade hand over suspected war criminals to the [[Hague]] tribunal (the [[logic]] of the West, and global empire [[demands]] a trans-state global judicial institution) while at the Western company which owns same time urging it to [[sign]] a bilateral treaty with the logo can claim that US obliging it is not responsible for to deliver to the International Criminal Court any violations by US [[citizen]] suspected of war crimes or other crimes against humanity. No wonder the sub-contractorSerb reaction was one of perplexed fury. Torture is nowadays 'outsourced' to Third World allies of Apropos the USHague tribunal, which can practise it without worrying about legal liability or public protest. Garton Ashwrote in the <i>Süddeutsche Zeitung</i> that 's analysis does not allow him No Führer or Duce, no Pinochet, no Idi Amin and no Pol Pot should any longer be allowed to see how feel safe behind the things he condemns (ruthless disregard for palace gates of [[sovereignty]] from the environment, the hypocritical double standards imposed by the superpowers etc) are products [[intervention]] of the social dynamics which sustain the role people's justice.' One should take note of the exporters of democracy and guardians of universal human rightsnames [[missing]] from this list.

Then there Garton Ash is well aware that the question same logic of depoliticised 'human rights' and 'humanitarian intervention'exception applies to economic relations. When Sarajevo was under siege for more than three years in the early 1990sIn Cancún last year, there was no attempt by UN forces, Nato " or the US insisted on keeping subsidies for its cotton producers, thus violating its own advice to Third World countries to abandon state subsidies and open up to create a corridor - the most modest [[market]]. With [[torture]] it's much the same story. The exemplary economic strategy of options today's capitalism is [[outsourcing]] - through which people and provisions could move freely. It would have cost little and a bit of serious pressure on contracting out the Serb forces would have ended the prolonged spectacle 'dirty' [[process]] of the encircled Sarajevo[[material]] production (but also publicity, [[design]], exposed accountancy) to ridiculous levels of terrorother companies. So why was nothing done? There In this way, it is only one answer easy to thiscircumvent environmental and health legislation: the one proposed by Rony Braumanproduction takes [[place]] in Indonesia, say, a former president of Médecins sans Frontièreswhere regulations are much less stringent than in the West, who co-ordinated and the Western company which owns the relief effort logo can claim that it is not [[responsible]] for Sarajevoany violations by the sub-contractor. The presentation of the crisis of Sarajevo as Torture is nowadays 'humanitarianoutsourced', the recasting to Third World allies of the politico-military conflict in humanitarian termsUS, was in Braumanwhich can practise it without worrying about [[legal]] liability or [[public]] protest. Garton Ash's view sustained analysis does not allow him to see how the things he condemns (ruthless disregard for the [[environment]], the hypocritical [[double]] standards imposed by an eminently <i>political</i> choice - that the superpowers etc) are products of the social dynamics which sustain the [[role]] of siding with the Serbsexporters of democracy and guardians of [[universal]] [[human rights]].

More generally, how Then there is it that the question of depoliticised '[[Human Rights|human rights are so often the ]]' and 'rights[[humanitarian intervention]]' . When Sarajevo was under siege for more than three years in the early 1990s, there was no attempt by UN forces, [[NATO|Nato]] " or the US to create a corridor - the most modest of options - through which people and provisions could move freely. It would have cost little and a bit of serious pressure on the Serb forces would have ended the prolonged [[spectacle]] of the encircled Sarajevo, exposed to ridiculous levels of [[terror]]. So why was [[nothing]] done? There is only one answer to this: the one proposed by Rony Brauman, a former president of Médecins sans Frontières, who co-ordinated the relief effort for Sarajevo. The presentation of those excluded from the political community and reduced to crisis of Sarajevo as 'bare lifehumanitarian'? Jacques Rancière has proposed , the recasting of the politico-military conflict in humanitarian terms, was in Brauman's view sustained by an essay in the eminently <i>South Atlantic Quarterlypolitical</i> [[choice]] - that when such rights are of no use,siding with the Serbs.

<blockquote>you do the same as charitable persons do with their old clothes. You give them to the poor. Those rights that appear to be useless in their place are sent abroad, along with medicine and clothes, to people deprived of medicineMore generally, clothes and rights. It how is in this way . . . it that the Rights of Man become the rights of those who have no rights, the rights of bare human beings subjected to inhuman repression and inhuman conditions of existence. They become humanitarian rights, are so often the 'rights ' only of those who cannot enact them, excluded from the victims of the absolute denial of rights. For all this, they are not void. Political names political [[community]] and political places never become merely void. The void is filled by somebody or something else . . . if those who suffer inhuman repression are unable reduced to enact the human rights that are their last recourse, then somebody else '[[bare life]]'? Jacques Rancière has to inherit their rights proposed in order to enact them an essay in their place. This is what is called the 'right to humanitarian interference' - a right <i>South Atlantic Quarterly</i> that some nations assume to the supposed benefit when such rights are of victimised populationsno use, and very often against the advice of the humanitarian organisations themselves. The 'right to humanitarian interference' might be described as a sort of 'return to sender': the disused rights that had been sent to the rightless are sent back to the senders.</blockquote>

The reference <blockquote>you do the same as charitable persons do with their old clothes. You give them to Lacan's formula of communication (in which the sender gets back from the recipient his own message in its inverted - ipoor.e. true - form) is here Those rights that appear to the point: be useless in the reigning discourse their place are sent abroad, along with [[medicine]] and clothes, to people deprived of humanitarian interventionismmedicine, the developed West clothes and rights. It is effectively getting back from the victimised Third World its own message in its true formthis way . . And this is also where we should look for candidates for the position of the 'universal individual' - a figure or group whose fate stands for . that the injustice [[Rights of today's world: the detained in Guantanamo, or the Palestinians. Palestine is today Man]] become the site rights of a potential 'opportunity'those who have no rights, in the sense rights of Garton Ash's subtitle, precisely because the standard 'pragmatic' solutions bare human beings subjected to the Middle East crisis have repeatedly failed, so that a utopian invention inhuman [[repression]] and inhuman [[conditions]] of a new space is the only 'realistic' choiceexistence. FurthermoreThey become humanitarian rights, the Palestinians make good candidates on account rights of their paradoxical position of being those who cannot enact them, the victims of the ultimate victimsabsolute [[denial]] of rights. For all this, they are not void. Political names and political places never become merely void. The void is filled by somebody or something else . . . if those who suffer inhuman repression are unable to enact the Jewshuman rights that are their last recourse, which of course puts then somebody else has to inherit their rights in [[order]] to enact them in an extremely difficult spot: when they resist, their resistance can be denounced as a prolongation of anti-semitism, as a secret solidarity with place. This is what is called the Final Solution. Indeed, if - as Lacanian Zionists like 'right to claim humanitarian interference' - Jews are the <i>objet petit a</i> among right that some nationsassume to the supposed benefit of victimised populations, if they represent and very often against the troubling excess advice of Western history, how can one resist them with impunity? Is it possible the humanitarian organisations themselves. The 'right to humanitarian interference' might be the <i>objet described as a</i> sort of <i>objet a'[[return]] to sender': the disused rights that had been sent to the rightless are sent back to the senders.</iblockquote> itself? It is precisely this ethical blackmail that we should reject.

However, there is another area of 'opportunityThe reference to [[Lacan]]' that goes unremarked. The explosive growth s [[formula]] of slums [[communication]] (in which the last decades, sender gets back from Mexico City and other Latin American capitals through Africa the recipient his own [[message]] in its inverted - i.e. true - form) is here to India, Chinathe point: in the reigning [[discourse]] of humanitarian interventionism, the Philippines and Indonesia, developed West is perhaps effectively getting back from the crucial geopolitical event of our timesvictimised Third World its own message in its true form. The case And this is also where we should look for candidates for the [[position]] of Lagos, according to Mike Davis, the 'universal [[individual]]'- a [[figure]] or group whose fate stands for the biggest node in the shanty-town corridor injustice of 70 million people that stretches from Abidjan to Ibadantoday's world: the detained in [[Guantanamo]], or the Palestinians. [[Palestine]] is exemplary: no one even knows today the size site of its population. Davis quotes a UN report: potential 'Officially it is six million, but most experts estimate it at ten million.opportunity' Since, some time very soon, in the urban population [[sense]] of Garton Ash's subtitle, precisely because the earth will outnumber standard 'pragmatic' solutions to the rural population (this may already Middle East crisis have happened)repeatedly failed, and since slum inhabitants will constitute the greater part so that a [[utopian]] invention of a new [[space]] is the urban populationonly 'realistic' choice. Furthermore, we are in no way dealing with a minority phenomenon. We are witnessing the rapid growth Palestinians make good candidates on account of their paradoxical position of a population outside [[being]] the control victims of any statethe ultimate victims, mostly outside the law[[Jews]], which of course puts them in terrible need of minimal forms of self-organisation. Although these populations are composed of marginalised labourers, former civil servants and ex-peasants, they are not simply a redundant surplusan extremely difficult spot: when they are incorporated into the global economy in numerous ways; many of them are informal wage-earners or self-employed entrepreneursresist, with no adequate health or social security provision. (The main reason for their rise is the inclusion [[resistance]] can be denounced as a prolongation of the Third World countries in the global economy[[anti-semitism]], as a [[secret]] [[solidarity]] with cheap food imports from the First World countries ruining local agricultureFinal Solution.) One should resist the easy temptation Indeed, if - as [[Lacanian]] Zionists like to elevate and idealise slumclaim -dwellers into Jews are the <i>[[objet]] [[petit a new revolutionary class. It is nonetheless surprising how far they conform to the old Marxist definition of the proletarian revolutionary subject: ]]</i> among nations, if they are 'free' in [[represent]] the double meaning troubling excess of the wordWestern [[history]], even more than how can one resist them with impunity? Is it possible to be the classical proletariat ('free' from all substantial ties; dwelling in <i>[[objet a free space, outside the regulation ]]</i> of the state); they are <i>objet a large collective, forcibly thrown into a situation where they have to invent some mode of being-together, and simultaneously deprived of support for their traditional ways of life</i> itself? It is precisely this [[ethical]] [[blackmail]] that we should reject.

However, there is [[another]] area of 'opportunity' that goes unremarked. The explosive growth of [[slums]] in the last decades, from [[Mexico]] City and other [[Latin]] American capitals through Africa to [[India]], China, the Philippines and Indonesia, is perhaps the crucial geopolitical [[event]] of our [[times]]. The case of Lagos, according to Mike Davis, 'the biggest [[node]] in the shanty-town corridor of 70 million people that stretches from Abidjan to Ibadan', is exemplary: no one even [[knows]] the size of its population. Davis [[quotes]] a UN report: 'Officially it is six million, but most experts estimate it at ten million.' Since, some time very soon, the urban population of the earth will outnumber the rural population (this may already have happened), and since slum inhabitants will constitute the greater part of the urban population, we are in no way dealing with a minority phenomenon. We are witnessing the rapid growth of a population [[outside]] the control of any state, mostly outside the law, in terrible [[need]] of minimal forms of self-organisation. Although these populations are composed of marginalised labourers, former civil servants and ex-peasants, they are not simply a redundant [[surplus]]: they are incorporated into the [[global economy]] in numerous ways; many of them are informal wage-earners or self-employed entrepreneurs, with no adequate health or [[social security]] provision. (The main [[reason]] for their rise is the inclusion of the Third World countries in the global economy, with cheap food imports from the First World countries ruining local agriculture.) One should resist the easy temptation to elevate and idealise slum-dwellers into a new revolutionary class. It is nonetheless surprising how far they conform to the old Marxist definition of the proletarian [[revolutionary subject]]: they are 'free' in the double meaning of the word, even more than the classical [[proletariat]] ('free' from all substantial ties; dwelling in a free space, outside the regulation of the state); they are a large collective, forcibly thrown into a situation where they have to invent some mode of being-together, and simultaneously deprived of support for their traditional ways of life. The slum-dwellers are the counter-class to the other newly emerging class, the so-called '[[symbolic ]] class' (managers, journalists and PR people, academics, artists etc) which is also uprooted and perceives itself as universal (a New York academic has more in common with a Slovene academic than with blacks in Harlem half a mile from his campus). Is this the new axis of class [[struggle]], or is the 'symbolic class' inherently [[split]], so that one can make a wager on the coalition between the slum-dwellers and the 'progressive' part of [[the symbolic ]] class? The new forms of social [[awareness ]] that emerge from slum collectives will be the germs of the [[future ]] and the best hope for a properly 'free world', whether or not it's the one that Garton Ash refers to in his title.

* [[Knee-Deep]] ''[[London ]] Review of Books''. September 9, 2005. <>. Also listed on ''[[Lacan.com]]''. <http://www.lacan.com/zizek-deep.htm>.