Although Timothy Garton Ash is my political opponent, I’ve always admired his wealth of precise observations and found him a reliable source on the vicissi-tudes of post-Communist Eastern Europe. In his new book,<i> The Free World: America, Europe and the Suprising Future of the West</i>, Ash applies his signature bitterly witty approach to the growing tensions between key Western European states and the United States. His aperçus about the relations among the United Kingdom, France and Germany recall the gentle irony of a novel of manners, giving a new twist to the old topic of “European trinity.”</p>{{BSZ}}
<p>Hegel was among the first to interpret Although [[Timothy Garton Ash]] is my [[political]] opponent, I’ve always admired his wealth of precise observations and found him a reliable source on the geo-graphic triad vicissitudes of Germanypost-France-England as expressing three existential attitudes[[Communist]] [[Eastern Europe]]. In his new book, <i>The Free [[World]]: German reflective thoroughnessAmerica, French revolutionary hastiness [[Europe]] and English moderate pragmatism. In terms the Suprising [[Future]] of political stancesthe West</i>, this triad can be read as German conservatism[[Ash]] applies his signature bitterly witty approach to the growing tensions between key [[Western Europe]]an [[state]]s and the [[United States]]. His aperçus [[about]] the relations among the [[United Kingdom]], French radicalism [[France]] and English liberalism. In terms [[Germany]] [[recall]] the gentle irony of a predominating social spherenovel of manners, it is German culture versus French politics versus English economy. Ash observes that today this trinity has undergone giving a strange displacement: The French are preoccupied with culture (How new twist to save their legacy from vulgar Americanization); the English focus on political dilemmas (Should they join the old topic of “[[European Monetary Union?); the Germans worry about the sad inertia of their economytrinity]].</p>”
<p>A desired goal might be a further shift[[Hegel]] was among the first to [[interpret]] the geographic [[triad]] of [[Germany]]-[[France]]-[[England]] as expressing [[three]] existential attitudes: The [[German]] reflective thoroughness, [[French]] [[revolution]]ary hastiness and [[English focused on culture (their cultural tolerance and lack ]] moderate [[pragmatism]]. In [[terms]] of pretence could serve political stances, this triad can be read as an antidote to [[German]] [[conservatism]], [[French arrogant elitism ]] [[radicalism]] and [[English]] [[liberalism]]. In terms of a predominating [[social]] sphere, it is [[German excessive seriousness)]] [[culture]] versus [[French]] [[politics]] versus [[English]] [[economy]]. [[Ash]] observes that today this trinity has undergone a strange [[displacement]]: The French focused on economy are preoccupied with [[culture]] (which, against all expectations, theirs has been doing rather wellHow to save their legacy from vulgar [[Americanization]]). And—surprise!—Germans ; the English focus on politics political dilemmas (where Should they join the European Monetary Union?); the Germans worry about the sad inertia of their recent political life has served as a model of reasonable debate that avoids blind passions)[[economy]].</p>
<p>So far, so good. However, in the second half A desired [[goal]] might be a further shift: The English focused on [[culture]] (their [[cultural]] [[tolerance]] and [[lack]] of <i>The Free World</i>, when Ash diagnoses the threats pretence could serve as an antidote to freedom in the post-Cold War, he becomes dogmatic French arrogant elitism and simplistic, his proposed solutions hopelessly naïve and declaratoryGerman excessive seriousness). True The French focused on [[economy]] (which, here and thereagainst all expectations, one finds insights surprising for a man of Ash’s political position (like his unambiguous attack on the trade agreements that are pushing the poorer countries toward ruintheirs has been doing rather well). Yet his positive proposals lack any foundation in a detailed analysis of the global situation. First, he identifies four “new Red Armies” And — surprise! — Germans on politics (sic!) where their [[recent]] political [[life]] has served as forces a [[model]] of Evil (or historical processes) reasonable debate that pose or will pose a threat to democracy in the future: 1) the Near East situation (the unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the rise of Muslim fundamentalism); 2) the Far East situation (what will China develop into with regard to democracy?); 3) the gap between the rich North and poor South; and 4avoids blind passions) the oncoming environmental catastrophe. </p>
So far, so [[good]]. However, in the second half of <i>The Free World<p/i>Here, when [[Ash simply enumerates four domains that cause worry. Consequently]] diagnoses the [[threats]] to [[freedom]] in the post-[[Cold War]], he becomes [[dogma]]tic and simplistic, his proposed solutions read less hopelessly naïve and declaratory. [[True]], here and there, one finds insights surprising for a man of Ash’s political [[position]] (like his unambiguous attack on the trade agreements that are pushing the poorer countries toward ruin). Yet his positive proposals lack any foundation in a plan for action grounded in serious detailed [[analysis ]] of the [[global constellation and more like ]] [[situation]]. First, he [[identifies]] four “new Red Armies” (sic!) as forces of [[Evil]] (or historical [[processes]]) that pose or will pose a list of desiderata [[threat]] to [[democracy]] in the future: 1) the Near East situation (the developed countries should abide by unresolved [[Israel]]i-[[Palestine|Palestinian]] [[conflict]] and the rules rise of fair market competition they impose on [[Muslim fundamentalism]]); 2) the underdeveloped ones; they should make a more serious effort Far East situation (what will [[China]] develop into with [[regard]] to thwart ecological disaster[[democracy]]?); only a combined U.S.-E.U. alliance can solve the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, etc.3). Indeed, how can one respond to this platitude: “If we want to be able to look ourselves in the face every morning, anyone who earns more than gap between the average wage in a rich country should aim to give 1 percent of his or her annual income to charities with a good track record in North and poor South; and 4) the developing world. We can afford itoncoming [[environment]]al catastrophe.”</p>
<p>The European publishers of <i>The Free World</i> chose a far more intriguing subtitle for the bookHere, hinting [[Ash]] simply enumerates four domains that Ash would explain: “Why A Crisis Of The West Reveals The Opportunity Of Our Time[[cause]] worry.” But Consequently, his proposed solutions read less like a plan for [[action]] grounded in serious analysis of the book fails to live up to global constellation and more like a [[list]] of desiderata (the expectations aroused developed countries should abide by this subtitle, namely, that the post-Cold War world, though it generates new problems, also could provide rules of fair [[market]] competition they impose on the underdeveloped ones; they should make a unique chance more serious effort to confront themthwart ecological disaster; only a combined U.S. My own perception of these problems is hopelessly tinted by “outmoded” Marx-ism: The four trouble spots Ash identifies are clearly grounded in E.U. alliance can solve the dynamics of today’s global capitalismIsraeli-Palestinian crisis, etc.). This link is self-evident Indeed, how can one respond to this platitude: “If we [[want]] to be able to look ourselves in the case of environmental collapse and the North-South poverty gap. As for Islamic fundamentalismface every morning, does it not arise through anyone who earns more than the refusal average wage in a rich country should aim to give 1 percent of Muslim civilization his or her annual income to integrate charities with a good track record in the social dynamics of capitalism? And doesn’t China’s strange economic dynamic stem from the fact that developing world. We can afford it is a Communist state that fully endorses capitalist economy? </p>.”
The European publishers of <pi>The question should therefore be put at Free World</i> [[chose]] a far more general levelintriguing subtitle for the book, hinting that [[Ash]] would explain: Where do we stand regarding global capitalism? Are “Why A Crisis Of The West Reveals The Opportunity Of Our [[Time]].” But the book fails to live up to the expectations aroused by this subtitle, namely, that the post-[[Cold War]] world, though it generates new problems, also could provide a unique [[chance]] to confront [[them]]. My own [[perception]] of these troubling problems is hopelessly tinted by “outmoded” [[Marxism]]: The four trouble spots symptoms [[Ash]] identifies are clearly grounded in the dynamics of a structural flaw inscribed today’s [[global capitalism]]. This link is [[self]]-evident in the very core [[case]] of [[environment]]al collapse and the capitalist machineNorth-South [[poverty]] gap. As for [[Islamic fundamentalism]], or are they accidents does it not arise through the [[refusal]] of [[Muslim]] [[civilizatio]] to integrate the social dynamics of [[capitalism]]? And doesn’t [[China]]’s strange [[economic]] [[dynamic]] stem from the fact that it is a [[Communist]] state that could be kept under control, if not resolvedfully endorses [[capitalist]] [[economy]]?</p>
<p>This does not mean one The question should reject Ash’s diagnosis and proposals with the crude Marxist retorttherefore be put at a more general level: “He fails to take into account Where do we stand regarding [[global capitalism]]? Are these troubling spots [[symptom]]s of a [[structural]] flaw inscribed in the dialectical totality very core of the situation.” But Ash would do well to go back and read Jonathan Alter’s column in Newsweek written directly following 9/11. After stating that “we can’t legalize physical torture; it’s contrary to American valuescapitalist [[machine]],” Alter none-theless concludes or are they accidents that “we’ll have to think about transferring some suspects to our less squeamish alliescould be kept under [[control]], even if that’s hypocritical. Nobody said this was going to be pretty.” This is how First World democracies increasingly function: by outsourcing their dirty work (be it torture or material production) to other countries. Ash is unable to see how the features he condemns (ruthless disregard for the en-vironment, the hypocritical double standards of free trade practices, etc.) are products of the very social dynamic that sustains the First World’s role as exporters of democracy and guardians of universal human rights.</p>not resolved?
<p>It is true This does not mean one can only be shocked by the excessive indifference toward suffering, even when this suffering is widely reported should reject [[Ash]]’s [[diagnosis]] and condemned in proposals with the media. Sudan offers a current example, but recall crude [[Marxist]] retort: “He fails to take into account the three-year-long siege [[dialectic]]al [[totality]] of Sarajevo, when the population was starving and exposed situation.” But [[Ash]] would do well to permanent shelling go back and sniper fireread [[Jonathan Alter]]’s column in Newsweek written directly following [[9/11]]. The enigma here is why After [[stating]] that “we can’t legalize [[physical]] [[torture]]; it’s contrary to American values, although the media was continually covering the crisis” Alter nonetheless concludes that “we’ll have to [[think]] about transferring some suspects to our less squeamish allies, even if that’s hypocritical. Nobody said this was neither the Ugoing to be pretty.N” This is how [[First World]] [[democracies]] increasingly function: by [[outsourcing]] their dirty [[work]] (be it [[torture]] or [[material]] [[production]]) to [[other]] countries. forces [[Ash]] is unable to see how the features he condemns (ruthless disregard for the [[environment]], <acronym title="North Atlantic Treaty Organization">NATO</acronym> nor the United States willing to impose a corridor in Sarajevo through which people and provisions could circulate freely? The only answer to this enigma was proposed by Rory Braumanhypocritical [[double]] standards of [[free trade]] practices, who, on behalf etc.) are products of the Red Cross, coordinated the help to Sarajevo: The very presentation of social dynamic that sustains the crisis of Sarajevo [[First World]]’s [[role]] as “humanitarian,” the recasting exporters of a political-military conflict into humanitarian terms, was sustained by a political choice, that of taking the side [[democracy]] and guardians of Serbia[[universal]] [[human rights]].</p>
<p>IndeedIt is true one can only be shocked by the excessive [[indifference]] toward [[suffering]], such even when this suffering is widely reported and condemned in the [[media]]. [[Sudan]] offers a depoliticizing current example, but recall the three-year-long siege of “Human Rights” too often serves as [[Sarajevo]], when the ideology of military interventionism in support of specific economic-political purposespopulation was starving and exposed to permanent shelling and sniper fire. For example The enigma here is why, although the [[media]] was continually covering the crisis, was neither the [[U.SN. overthrow of Saddam Hussein]] forces, legitimized [[NATO]] nor the [[United States]] willing to impose a corridor in the terms of ending the suffering of the Iraqi Sarajevo through which [[people, ]] and provisions could circulate freely? The only answer to this enigma was clearly not only motivated proposed by economic self-interest (oil)Rory Brauman, but by the idea that only certain political and economic conditions—Western liberal democracywho, guarantee on behalf of private propertythe [[Red Cross]], coordinated the inclusion into the global market economy, etc.—could bring freedom [[help]] to [[Sarajevo]]: The very presentation of the Iraqi people. In Iraqcrisis of Sarajevo as “[[humanitarian]], ” the recasting of a political-military conflict into humanitarian anti-politics of only preventing suffering implicitly prohibited terms, was sustained by a positive collective project for social and political transformationchoice, that of taking the side of [[Serbia]]. </p>
<p>WhatIndeed, then, happens to such a depoliticizing of “[[Human Rights when they are reduced to ]]” too often serves as the rights [[ideology]] of those excluded from the military interventionism in support of specific economic-political process—ipurposes.e For example, when they become uselessthe [[U.S.]] overthrow of [[Saddam Hussein]], since they are legitimized in the rights terms of those whoending the suffering of the [[Iraq]]i people, preciselywas clearly not only motivated by economic [[self-interest]] ([[oil]]), have no rights? Jacques Rancierebut by the [[idea]] that only certain political and economic conditions—[[West]]ern [[liberal democracy]], [[guarantee]] of [[private property]], the French philosopherinclusion into the [[global market]] [[economy]], recently gave this answer:</p>etc. — could bring [[freedom]] to the Iraqi people. In [[Iraq]], the [[humanitarian]] anti-politics of only preventing suffering implicitly prohibited a positive collective [[project]] for social and political transformation.
<blockquote>They become humanitarian rightsWhat, then, happens to [[Human Rights]] when they are reduced to the rights of those who cannot enact them, excluded from the victims of the absolute denial of rightpolitical [[process]] — i. For all thise, when they become useless, since they are not void, Political names and political places never become merely void. The void is filled by somebody or something else. … If the rights of those who suffer inhuman repression are unable to enact Human Rights that are their last recourse, then somebody else has to inherit their precisely, have no rights in order to enact them in their place. This is what is called ? [[Jacques Ranciere]], the “right to humanitarian interference”—a right that some nations assume to the supposed benefit of the victimized populations[[French]] [[philosopher]], and very often against the advice of humanitarian organizations themselves. The “right to humanitarian interference” might be described as a sort of “return to senderrecently gave this answer:” the disused right that had been sent to the rightless are sent back to the senders.</blockquote>
<pblockquote>ThusThey become humanitarian rights, in the reigning discourse rights of humanitarian interventionthose who cannot enact them, the developed West victims of the absolute [[denial]] of [[right]]. For all this, they are not [[void]], Political names and political places never become merely void. The void is effectively getting back from the victimized Third World its own message filled by somebody or something else. … If those who suffer inhuman [[repression]] are unable to enact [[Human]] Rights that are their last recourse, then somebody else has to inherit their rights in [[order]] to enact them in its true formtheir [[place]]. This is also where we should look for candidates what is called the “right to humanitarian interference”—a right that some nations assume to fill the position supposed benefit of “universal individualthe victimized populations,” a particular group whose fate stands for and very often against the injustice advice of today’s world: Palestinians, Guantánamo prisoners, etchumanitarian organizations themselves. Palestine today presents us with the “opportunity” of Ash’s subtitle because all The “right to humanitarian interference” might be described as a sort of “[[return]] to sender:” the standard “pragmatic” solutions disused right that had been sent to the “Middle East crisis” have repeatedly failed, which suggests that a utopian invention of a radical new space may be rightless are sent back to the only “realistic” choicesenders. </pblockquote>
<p>But there is a better example of today’s “universal individual”: the slum dwellers of the new megalopolises. The explosive growth of slums Thus, in the last decades, from Mexico City and other Latin American capitals through Africa to India, China and Indonesia, is perhaps the crucial geopolitical event reigning [[discourse]] of our time. Take the case of Lagos, Nigeria. According to Mike Davis[[humanitarian]] [[intervention]], “No one even knows the size of its population—officially it developed [[West]] is 6 million, but most experts estimate it at 10 million.” Very soon (or perhaps, given effectively getting back from the imprecision of victimized [[Third World censuses, already) the urban population of the earth will outnumber the rural population]] its own [[message]] in its true [[form]]. And slum inhabitants will compose This is also where we should look for candidates to fill the majority position of this urban population. So we are in no way dealing with “[[universal individual]],” a marginal phenomenon, but rather [[particular]] group whose fate stands for the fast growth injustice of a population outside state controltoday’s world: [[Palestine|Palestinians]], living in conditions half outside the law[[Guantánamo]] prisoners, in terrible need of the minimal forms of self-organizationetc. Slum dwellers—marginalized laborers, superfluous civil servants and ex-peasants—are still incorporated into [[Palestine]] today presents us with the global economy in numerous ways, many “opportunity” of them working as informal wage workers or self-employed entrepreneurs, with no adequate health or social security coverage. Slums have mushroomed [[Ash]]’s subtitle because all of the Third World’s inclusion into the global economy. Cheap food imports from standard “pragmatic” solutions to the First World “[[Middle East]] crisis” have destroyed local agriculture forcing millions to flee repeatedly failed, which suggests that a [[utopian]] invention of a radical new [[space]] may be the countrysideonly “realistic” [[choice]]. Their existence is the true “symptom” of slogans like “Development,” “Modernization,” and “World Market.”</p>
<p>While one should resist But there is a better example of today’s “[[universal individual]]”: the [[slum]] dwellers of the new megalopolises. The explosive growth of slums in the temptation last decades, from [[Mexico]] City and other [[Latin America]]n capitals through [[Africa]] to elevate [[India]], [[China]] and idealize [[Indonesia]], is perhaps the crucial geopolitical [[event]] of our time. Take the slum dwellers into a new revolutionary classcase of Lagos, [[Nigeria]]. According to Mike Davis, “No one even [[knows]] the size of its population—officially it is extremely surprising how many 6 million, but most experts estimate it at 10 million.” Very soon (or perhaps, given the imprecision of their features fit [[Third World]] censuses, already) the old Marxist definition urban population of the proletarian revolutionary classearth will outnumber the rural population. Even more than And [[slum]] inhabitants will compose the classic proletariat, they majority of this urban population. So we are “free” in no way dealing with a marginal phenomenon, but rather the double meaning fast growth of the word—“freed” from all substantial ties and dwelling in a free space population [[outside ]] [[state ]] control, [[living]] in [[conditions]] half outside the [[law]], in terrible [[need]] of the minimal forms of self-organization. Slum dwellers—marginalized laborers, superfluous civil servants and police regulations. They ex-peasants — are large collectivesstill incorporated into the [[global economy]] in numerous ways, forcibly thrown into a situation where they must invent some mode many of beingthem [[working]] as informal [[wage]] [[workers]] or self-togetheremployed entrepreneurs, while simultaneously deprived with no adequate health or [[social security]] coverage. Slums have mushroomed because of any inherited ethnic the [[Third World]]’s inclusion into the [[global economy]]. Cheap food imports from the [[First World]] have destroyed local agriculture forcing millions to flee the countryside. Their [[existence]] is the true “[[symptom]]” of slogans like “[[Development]],” “[[Modernization]],” and religious traditions“[[World Market]].”</p>
<p>Slum dwellers are While one should resist the counter-class temptation to elevate and idealize the other newly emerging slum dwellers into a new [[revolution]]ary [[class]], it is extremely surprising how many of their features fit the so-called “symbolic class” (managers, journalists, academics, artists, etcold [[Marxist]] definition of the [[proletarian]] [[revolution]]ary [[class]].) that is also uprooted and that perceives itself as directly universal. (A New York academic has Even more in common with me, a Slovene academic, than with the blacks classic [[proletariat]], they are “free” in Harlem half a mile from his campus.) Is this the new axis double [[meaning]] of class struggle? Or is the “symbolic class” inherently split[[word]] — “freed” from all substantial ties and dwelling in a free space outside [[state]] and [[police]] regulations. They are large collectives, enabling us to make an emancipatory wager on forcibly thrown into a coalition between the slum dwellers situation where they must invent some mode of [[being]]-together, while simultaneously deprived of any inherited [[ethnic]] and the “progressives” of the symbolic class?</p>[[religious]] [[tradition]]s.
<p>This brings us back [[Slum]] dwellers are the counter-class to the title—and underlying project—of Ash’s book: Our main hope for other newly emerging class, the so-called “[[symbolic class]]” (managers, journalists, [[academics]], [[art]]ists, etc.) that is also uprooted and that perceives itself as directly [[universal]]. (A [[New York]] academic has more in common with me, a truly “free world” lies [[Slovene]] [[academic]], than with the [[black]]s in Harlem half a mile from his campus.) Is this the desolate universe new axis of [[class struggle]]? Or is the slums. We should be watching “[[symbolic class]]” inherently [[split]], enabling us to make an emancipatory wager on a coalition between the slum collectives for signs of new forms of social awareness: They will be dwellers and the seeds “progressives” of the future.</p>[[symbolic]] class?
This brings us back to the title — and underlying project — of [[Ash]]’s book: Our main hope for a truly “[[free world]]” lies in the desolate [[universe]] of the [[slums]]. We should be watching the slum collectives for [[signs]] of new forms of social [[awareness]]: They will be the seeds of the future. ==See Also==* [[slums]]* [[symbolic class]]* [[capitalism]]* [[globalization]]* [[humanitarian]]* [[human rights]]* [[torture]]* [[economy]]* [[Eastern Europe]]* [[England]]* [[France]]* [[Germany]]* [[fundamentalism]]* [[environment]]* [[democracy]]* [[democracy]]* [[univerality]]* [[marxist theory]] ==Source==* [[The Free World ... of Slums]]. ''In These [[Times]]''. September 23, 2004. <http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/1090/>. Also listed on ''[[Lacan]].com''. <http://www.lacan.com/zizekslums.htm>. [[Category:Marxist theory]][[Category:Politics]][[Category:Articles by Slavoj Žižek]][[Category:Works]][[Category:Articles]]
