Slavoj Zizek. Multiculturalism or the cultural logic of multinational capitalism? Slavoj Zizek.

Multiculturalism or the cultural logic of multinational capitalism? in: New Left Review. !""#$ Septem%er&'cto%er ())*. +hose who still remem%er the goo, ol, ,a-s of Socialist Realism$ are well aware of the ke- role pla-e, %- the notion of the .t-pical/: trul- progressive literature shoul, ,epict .t-pical heroes in t-pical situations./ 0riters who presente, a %leak picture of Soviet realit- were not simpl- accuse, of l-ing1 the accusation was rather that the- provi,e, a ,istorte, reflection of social realit- %- ,epicting the remain,ers of the ,eca,ent past$ instea, of focusing on the phenomena which were .t-pical/ in the sense of e2pressing the un,erl-ing historical ten,enc- of the progress towar,s 3ommunism. Ri,iculous as this notion ma- soun,$ its grain of truth resi,es in the fact that each universal i,eological notion is alwa-s hegemonize, %- some particular content which colours its ver- universalit- an, accounts for its efficiencWhy Is the Single Mother Typical? n the rejection of the social welfare s-stem %- the New Right in the us$ for e2ample$ the universal notion of the welfare s-stem as inefficient is sustaine, %- the pseu,o& concrete representation of the notorious 4frican&4merican single mother$ as if$ in the last resort$ social welfare is a programme for %lack single mothers 5 the particular case of the .single %lack mother/ is silentl- conceive, as .t-pical/ of social welfare an, of what is wrong with it. n the case of the anti&a%ortion campaign$ the .t-pical/ case is the e2act opposite: a se2uall- promiscuous professional woman who values her career over her .natural/ assignment of motherhoo,6although this characterization is in %latant contra,iction to the fact that the great majorit- of a%ortions occur in lower&class families with a lot of chil,ren. +his specific twist$ a particular content which is promulgate, as .t-pical/ of the universal notion$ is the element of fantas-$ of the phantasmatic %ackgroun,!support of the universal i,eological notion. +o put it in 7antian terms$ it pla-s the role of .transcen,ental schematism/$ translating the emptuniversal concept into a notion which ,irectl- relates an, applies to our .actual e2perience/. 4s such$ this phantasmatic specification is %- no means an insignificant illustration or e2emplification: it is at this level that i,eological %attles are won or lost6 the moment we perceive as .t-pical/ the case of a%ortion in a large lower&class familuna%le to cope with another chil,$ the perspective changes ra,icall-(. +his e2ample makes clear in what sense .the universal results from a constitutive split in which the negation of a particular i,entit- transforms this i,entit- in the s-m%ol of i,entit- an, fullness as such/:" the 8niversal ac9uires concrete e2istence when some particular content starts to function as its stan,&in. 4 couple of -ears ago$ the :nglish -ellow press focuse, on single mothers as the source of all evils in mo,ern societ-$ from %u,get crises to juvenile ,elin9uenc-. n this i,eological space$ the universalit- of .mo,ern social :vil/ was operative onl- through the split of the figure of .single mother/ into itself in its particularit- an, itself as the stan,&in for .mo,ern social :vil/. +he fact that this link %etween the 8niversal an, the particular content which functions as its stan,&in is contingent means precisel- that it is the outcome of a political struggle for
1

4nother name for this short&circuit %etween the 8niversal an, the ;articular is$ of course$ .suture/: the operation of hegemon- .sutures/ the empt- 8niversal to a particular content. 2 :rnesto Laclau$ :mancipation<s=$ >erso$ Lon,on ())?$ pp. (@5(#.

i,eological hegemon-. Aowever$ the ,ialectic of this struggle is more comple2 than in its stan,ar, Mar2ist version6of particular interests assuming the form of universalit-: .universal human rights are effectivel- the rights of white male propert- owners.../ +o work$ the ruling i,eolog- has to incorporate a series of features in which the e2ploite, majorit- will %e a%le to recognize its authentic longings. n other wor,s$ each hegemonic universalit- has to incorporate at least two particular contents$ the authentic popular content as well as its ,istortion %- the relations of ,omination an, e2ploitation. 'f course$ fascist i,eolog- .manipulates/ authentic popular longing for true communitan, social soli,arit- against fierce competition an, e2ploitation1 of course$ it .,istorts/ the e2pression of this longing in or,er to legitimize the continuation of the relations of social ,omination an, e2ploitation. Aowever$ in or,er to %e a%le to achieve this ,istortion of authentic longing$ it has first to incorporate it... :tienne Bali%ar was fulljustifie, in reversing Mar2/s classic formula: the ruling i,eas are precisel- not ,irectlthe i,eas of those who ruleC. Aow ,i, 3hristianit- %ecome the ruling i,eolog-? Bincorporating a series of crucial motifs an, aspirations of the oppresse,6truth is on the si,e of the suffering an, humiliate,$ power corrupts$ an, so on6an, rearticulating them in such a wa- that the- %ecame compati%le with the e2isting relations of ,omination. Desire and its Articulation 'ne is tempte, to refer here to the Dreu,ian ,istinction %etween the latent ,ream& thought an, the unconscious ,esire e2presse, in a ,ream. +he two are not the same: the unconscious ,esire articulates itself$ inscri%es itself$ through the ver.perla%oration/$ translation$ of the latent ,ream&thought into the e2plicit te2t of a ,ream. n a homologous wa-$ there is nothing .fascist/ <or .reactionar-/ an, so forth= in the .latent ,ream&thought/ of fascist i,eolog- <the longing for authentic communit- an, social soli,arit-=1 what accounts for the properl- fascist character of fascist i,eolog- is the wa- this .latent ,ream&thought/ is transforme, an, ela%orate, %- the i,eological .,ream&work/ into the e2plicit i,eological te2t which continues to legitimize social relations of e2ploitation an, ,omination. 4n, is it not the same with to,a-/s right&wing populism? 4re li%eral critics not too 9uick in ,ismissing the ver- values populism refers to as inherentl- .fun,amentalist/ or .proto&fascist/? Non&i,eolog-6what Dre,ric Eameson calls the utopian moment present even in the most atrocious i,eolog-6is thus a%solutel- in,ispensa%le: ideology is in a way nothing but the form of appearance, the formal distortion/displacement, of non-ideology . +o take the worst imagina%le case$ was Nazi anti&Semitism not groun,e, in the utopian longing for an authentic communit- life$ in the full- justifie, rejection of the irrationalitof capitalist e2ploitation? 'ur point$ again$ is that it is theoreticall- an, politicall- wrong to ,enounce this longing as a .totalitarian fantas-/$ that is$ to search in it for the .roots/ of fascism6the stan,ar, mistake of the li%eral&in,ivi,ualist criti9ue of fascism: what makes it .i,eological/ is its articulation$ the wa- this longing is ma,e to function as the legitimization of a ver- specific notion of what capitalist e2ploitation is <the result of Eewish influence$ of the pre,ominance of financial over .pro,uctive/ capital6onl- the latter ten,s towar,s a harmonious .partnership/ with workers= an, of how we are to overcome it <%- getting ri, of the Eews=.
3

See :tienne Bali%ar$ La crainte ,es masses$ ;aris ())*.

+he struggle for i,eological an, political hegemon- is thus alwa-s the struggle for the appropriation of the terms which are .spontaneousl-/ e2perience, as .apolitical/$ as transcen,ing political %oun,aries. No won,er that the name of the strongest ,issi,ent movement in the :astern :uropean 3ommunist countries was Soli,arit-: a signifier of the impossi%le fullness of societ-$ if there ever was one. t was as if$ in ;olan, in the ()FGs$ what Laclau calls the logic of e9uivalence was %rought to an e2treme: .3ommunists in power/ serve, as the em%o,iment of non&societ-$ of ,eca- an, corruption$ magicall- uniting ever-one against themselves$ inclu,ing the ,isappointe, .honest 3ommunists/ themselves. 3onservative nationalists accuse, the 3ommunists of %etra-ing ;olish interests to the Soviet master1 %usiness&oriente, in,ivi,uals saw in them an o%stacle to un%ri,le, capitalist activit-1 for the 3atholic 3hurch$ 3ommunists were amoral atheists1 for the farmers$ the- represente, the force of violent mo,ernization which threw rural life off the rails1 for artists an, intellectuals$ 3ommunism was s-non-mous with oppressive an, stupi, censorship1 workers saw themselves not onl- e2ploite, %- the ;art- %ureaucrac-$ %ut even further humiliate, %the claims that this was ,one on their %ehalf1 finall-$ ol, ,isillusione, leftists perceive, the regime as the %etra-al of .true Socialism/. +he impossi%le political alliance %etween all these ,ivergent an, potentiall- antagonistic positions was possi%le onl- un,er the %anner of a signifier which stan,s$ as it were$ on the ver- %or,er which separates the political from the pre&political$ an, .Soli,arit-/ was the perfect can,i,ate: it is politicalloperative as ,esignating the .simple/ an, .fun,amental/ unit- of human %eings which shoul, link them %e-on, all political ,ifferences@. Conservative Basic Instincts 0hat ,oes all this tell us a%out La%our /s recent electoral victor- in the 87? t is not onl- that$ in a mo,el hegemonic operation$ the- reappropriate, .apolitical/ notions like .,ecenc-/1 what the- successfull- focuse, on was the inherent o%scenit- of the +ori,eolog-. +he +ories/ e2plicit i,eological statements were alwa-s supporte, %- their sha,ow- ,ou%le$ %- an o%scene$ pu%licl- unacknowle,ge,$ %etween&the&lines message. 0hen$ for e2ample$ the- launche, their infamous .%ack to %asics/ campaign$ its o%scene supplement was clearl- in,icate, %- Norman +e%%itt$ .never sh- a%out e2posing the ,irt- secrets of the 3onservative unconscious/#. .Man- tra,itional La%our voters realize, that the- share, our values6that man is not just a social %ut also a territorial animal1 it must %e part of our agen,a to satisf- those %asic instincts of tri%alism an, territorialit-?./ H?I +his$ then$ is what .%ack to %asics/ was reall- a%out: the reassertion of .%asic/ egoistic$ tri%al$ %ar%arian .instincts/ which lurk %eneath the sem%lance of civilize, %ourgeois
4

Now$ when this magic moment of universal soli,arit- is over$ the signifier which$ in some postocialist countries$ is emerging as the signifier of the .a%sent fullness/ of societ-$ is honest-: it forms the focus of the spontaneous i,eolog- of .or,inar- people/ caught in the economic an, social tur%ulence in which the hopes of a new fullness of Societ- that shoul, follow the collapse of Socialism were cruell- %etra-e,$ so that$ in their e-es$ .ol, forces/ <e2&3ommunists= an, e2&,issi,ents who entere, the ranks of power joine, han,s in e2ploiting them even more than %efore un,er the %anner of ,emocrac- an, free,om. +he %attle for hegemon-$ of course$ is now focuse, on the particular content which will give a spin to this signifier: what ,oes .honest-/ mean? 4n,$ again$ it woul, %e wrong to claim that the conflict is ultimatela%out the ,ifferent meanings of the term .honest-/: what gets lost in this .semantic clarification/ is that each position claims that their honest- is the onl- .true/ honest-: the struggle is not simpl- a struggle among ,ifferent particular contents$ it is a struggle which splits from within the universal itself. 5 Eac9ueline Rose$ States of Dantas-$ '2for, ())?$ p. (@).
6

3ite, in i%i,.

societ-. 0e all remem%er the <,eserve,l-= famous scene from ;aul >erhoeven/s film Basic nstinct <())"= in which$ in the course of a police investigation$ Sharon Stone for a %rief moment sprea,s her legs an, reveals to the fascinate, policemen what is <or is it?= a glimpse of her pu%ic hair. 4 statement like +e%%itt/s is un,ou%te,l- an i,eological e9uivalent of this gesture$ allowing a %rief glance into the o%scene intimac- of the +hatcherite i,eological e,ifice. <La,- +hatcher herself was too .,ignifie,/ to perform ,irectl- this i,eological Sharon&Stone&gesture too often$ so the poor +e%%itt ha, to act as her stan,&in.= 4gainst this %ackgroun,$ the La%our emphasis on .,ecenc-/ was not a case of simple moralism6rather$ its message was that the- are not pla-ing the same o%scene game$ that their statements ,o not contain$ .%etween the lines/$ the same o%scene message. n to,a-/s general i,eological constellation$ this gesture is more important than it maseem. 0hen the 3linton a,ministration resolve, the ,ea,lock of ga-s in the us 4rmwith the compromise of .Jon/t ask$ ,on/t tellK/6%- which sol,iers are not ,irectl- aske, if the- are ga-$ so the- are also not compelle, to lie an, ,en- it$ an, although the- are not formall- allowe, in the 4rm-$ the- are tolerate, as long as the- keep their se2ual orientation private an, ,o not activel- en,eavour to engage others in it6this opportunist measure was ,eserve,l- criticize, for en,orsing homopho%ic attitu,es. 4lthough the ,irect prohi%ition of homose2ualit- is not to %e enforce,$ its ver- e2istence as a virtual threat compelling ga-s to remain in the closet affects their actual social status. n other wor,s$ what this solution amounte, to was an e2plicit elevation of h-pocris- into a social principle$ like the attitu,e towar,s prostitution in tra,itional 3atholic countries6if we preten, that ga-s in the 4rm- ,o not e2ist$ it is as if theeffectivel- ,o not e2ist <for the %ig 'ther=. La-s are to %e tolerate,$ on con,ition that the- accept the %asic censorship concerning their i,entit-... 0hile full- justifie, at its own level$ the notion of censorship at work in this criticism$ with its Doucaul,ian %ackgroun, of ;ower which$ in the ver- act of censorship an, other forms of e2clusion$ generates the e2cess it en,eavours to contain an, ,ominate$ nonetheless seems to fall short at a crucial point: what it misses is the wa- in which censorship not onl- affects the status of the marginal or su%versive force that the power ,iscourse en,eavours to ,ominate$ %ut$ at an even more ra,ical level$ splits from within the power ,iscourse itself. 'ne shoul, ask here a naive$ %ut nonetheless crucial 9uestion: wh- ,oes the 4rm- so strongl- resist pu%licl- accepting ga-s into its ranks? +here is onl- one possi%le consistent answer: not %ecause homose2ualitposes a threat to the allege, .phallic an, patriarchal/ li%i,inal econom- of the 4rmcommunit-$ %ut$ on the contrar-$ %ecause the Army community itself relies on a thwarted/disavowed homosexuality as the key component of the soldiers malebonding. Drom m- own e2perience$ remem%er how the ol, infamous Mugoslav ;eople/s 4rmwas homopho%ic in the e2treme6when someone was ,iscovere, to have homose2ual inclinations$ he was instantl- turne, into a pariah$ %efore %eing formall- ,ismisse, from the 4rm-6-et$ at the same time$ ever-,a- arm- life was e2cessivel- permeate, with an atmosphere of homose2ual innuen,o. Sa-$ while sol,iers were stan,ing in line for their meal$ a common vulgar joke was to stick a finger into the arse of the person ahea, of -ou an, then to with,raw it 9uickl-$ so that when the surprise, victim turne, aroun,$ he ,i, not know who among the sol,iers sharing a stupi, o%scene smile ha,

,one it. 4 pre,ominant form of greeting a fellow sol,ier in m- unit$ instea, of simplsa-ing .AelloK/$ was to sa- .Smoke m- prickK/ < .;usi kuracK/ in Ser%o&3roat=1 this formula was so stan,ar,ize, that it ha, completel- lost an- o%scene connotation an, was pronounce, in a totall- neutral wa-$ as a pure act of politeness. 3ensorship$ ;ower an, Resistance +his fragile coe2istence of e2treme an, violent homopho%ia with thwarte,$ that is$ pu%licl- unacknowle,ge,$ .un,ergroun,/ homose2ual li%i,inal econom-$ %ears witness to the fact that the ,iscourse of the militar- communit- can onl- operate %- wa- of censoring its own li%i,inal foun,ation. 4t a slightl- ,ifferent level$ the same goes for the practice of hazing6the ceremonial %eating up an, humiliating of us Marines %- their el,er peers$ who stick me,als ,irectl- onto their skin$ an, so on. 0hen the pu%lic ,isclosure of these practices <some%o,- secretl- shot them on vi,eo= cause, such an outrage$ what ,istur%e, the pu%lic was not the practice of hazing itself <ever-%o,- was aware that things like this were going on=$ %ut the fact of it %eing ren,ere, pu%lic. 'utsi,e the confines of militar- life$ ,o we not encounter a strictl- homologous self& censoring mechanism in conservative populism with its se2ist an, racist %ias? n the election campaigns of Eesse Aelms$ the racist an, se2ist message is not pu%liclacknowle,ge,6at the pu%lic level$ it is sometimes even violentl- ,isavowe,6%ut is instea, articulate, in a series of ,ou%le&enten,res an, co,e, allusions. +his kin, of self&censorship is necessar- if$ in the present i,eological con,itions$ Aelms/s ,iscourse is to remain effective. f it were to articulate ,irectl-$ in a pu%lic wa-$ its racist %ias$ this woul, ren,er it unaccepta%le in the hegemonic political ,iscourse1 if it were effectivelto a%an,on the self&censore, co,e, racist message$ it woul, en,anger the support of its targete, electoral %o,-. 3onservative populist political ,iscourse thus offers an e2emplar- case of a power ,iscourse whose efficienc- ,epen,s on the mechanism of self&censorship: it relies on a mechanism which is effective onl- insofar as it remains censore,. 4gainst the image$ all&present in cultural criticism$ of a ra,ical su%versive ,iscourse or practice .censore,/ %- the ;ower$ one is even tempte, to claim that to,a-$ more than ever$ the mechanism of censorship intervenes pre,ominantl- to enhance the efficienc- of the power ,iscourse itself. +he temptation to %e avoi,e, here is the ol, leftist notion of .%etter for us to ,eal with the enem- who openl- a,mits his <racist$ homopho%ic. . .= %ias$ than with the h-pocritical attitu,e of pu%licl- ,enouncing what one secretl- an, effectivel- en,orses/. +his notion fatefull- un,erestimates the i,eological an, political significance of maintaining appearances: appearance is never .merel- an appearance/$ it profoun,laffects the actual socio&s-m%olic position of those concerne,. f racist attitu,es were to %e ren,ere, accepta%le in mainstream i,eological an, political ,iscourse$ this woul, ra,icall- shift the %alance of the entire i,eological hegemon-. +his$ pro%a%l-$ is what 4lain Ba,iou ha, in min, when he mockingl- ,esignate, his work as a search for the .goo, terror/: to,a-$ in the face of the emergence of new racism an, se2ism$ the strateg- shoul, %e to make such enunciations unuttera%le$ so that an-one rel-ing on them automaticall- ,is9ualifies himself6as$ in our universe$ those who approvinglrefer to fascism. 0hile one ma- %e aware of the wa- in which authentic -earnings for$ sa-$ communit-$ are turne, %- fascism$ one shoul, emphaticall- not ,iscuss .how man- people reall- ,ie, in 4uschwitz/$ .the goo, si,es of slaver-/$ .the necessit- of cutting %ack on worker/s collective rights/$ an, so on1 the position shoul, %e here 9uite

una%ashe,l- .,ogmatic/ an, .terrorist/$ that these are not o%jects of .open$ rational$ ,emocratic ,iscussion/. +his inherent split an, self&censorship of the power mechanism is to %e oppose, to the Doucaul,ian motif of the interconnection of ;ower an, resistance. 'ur point is not onlthat resistance is immanent to ;ower$ that power an, counter&power generate each other1 it is not onl- that ;ower itself generates the e2cess of resistance which it can no longer ,ominate1 it is also not onl- that6in the case of se2ualit-6the ,isciplinar.repression/ of a li%i,inal investment eroticizes this gesture of repression itself$ as in the case of the o%sessional neurotic who gets li%i,inal satisfaction out of the vercompulsive rituals ,estine, to keep at %a- the traumatic jouissance. +his last point must %e further ra,icalize,: the ;ower e,ifice itself is split from within$ that is$ to repro,uce itself an, contain its 'ther$ it has to rel- on an inherent e2cess which groun,s it. +o put it in the Aegelian terms of speculative i,entit-$ ;ower is alwa-s& alrea,- its own transgression$ if it is to function$ it has to rel- on a kin, of o%scene supplement6the gesture of self&censorship is co&su%stantial with the e2ercise of power. t is thus not enough to sa- that the .repression/ of some li%i,inal content retroactivel- eroticizes the ver- gesture of .repression/6this .eroticization o po!er is not a secon,ar- effect of its e2ertion on its o%ject %ut its ver- ,isavowe, foun,ation$ its .constitutive crime/$ its foun,ing gesture which has to remain invisi%le if power is to function normall-. 0hat we get in the kin, of militar- ,rill ,epicte, in the first part of 7u%rick/s >ietnam film Dull Metal Eacket <()F*=$ for e2ample$ is not a secon,areroticization of the ,isciplinar- proce,ure which creates militar- su%jects$ %ut the constitutive o%scene supplement of this proce,ure which ren,ers it operative. +he Logic of 3apital So$ %ack to the recent La%our victor-$ one can see how it not onl- involve, a hegemonic reappropriation of a series of motifs which were usuall- inscri%e, into the 3onservative fiel,6famil- values$ law an, or,er$ in,ivi,ual responsi%ilit-1 the La%our i,eological offensive also separate, these motifs from the o%scene phantasmatic su%te2t which sustaine, them in the 3onservative fiel,6in which .toughness on crime/ an, .in,ivi,ual responsi%ilit-/ su%tl- referre, to %rutal egotism$ to the ,is,ain for victims$ an, other .%asic instincts/. +he pro%lem$ however$ is that the New La%our strateginvolve, its own .message %etween the lines/: we full- accept the logic of 3apital$ we will not mess a%out with it. +o,a-$ financial crisis is a permanent state of things the reference to which legitimizes the ,eman,s to cut social spen,ing$ health care$ support of culture an, scientific research$ in short$ the ,ismantling of the welfare state. s$ however$ this permanent crisis reall- an o%jective feature of our socio&economic life? s it not rather one of the effects of the shift of %alance in the .class struggle/ towar,s 3apital$ resulting from the growing role of new technologies as well as from the ,irect internationalization of 3apital an, the co&,epen,ent ,iminishe, role of the Nation&State which was further a%le to impose certain minimal re9uirements an, limitations to e2ploitation? n other wor,s$ the crisis is an .o%jective fact/ if an, onl- if one accepts in a,vance as an un9uestiona%le premise the inherent logic of 3apital6as more an, more left&wing or li%eral parties have ,one. 0e are thus witnessing the uncann- spectacle of social& ,emocratic parties which came to power with the %etween&the&lines message to 3apital

.we will ,o the necessar- jo% for -ou in an even more efficient an, painless wa- than the conservatives/. +he pro%lem$ of course$ is that$ in to,a-/s glo%al socio&political circumstances$ it is practicall- impossi%le effectivel- to call into 9uestion the logic of 3apital: even a mo,est social&,emocratic attempt to re,istri%ute wealth %e-on, the limit accepta%le to the 3apital .effectivel-/ lea,s to economic crisis$ inflation$ a fall in revenues an, so on. Nevertheless$ one shoul, alwa-s %ear in min, how the connection %etween .cause/ <rising social e2pen,iture= an, .effect/ <economic crisis= is not a ,irect o%jective causal one: it is alwa-s&alrea,- em%e,,e, in a situation of social antagonism an, struggle. +he fact that$ if one ,oes not o%e- the limits set %- 3apital$ a crisis .reallfollows/$ in no wa- .proves/ that the necessit- of these limits is an o%jective necessit- of economic life. t shoul, rather %e conceive, as a proof of the privilege, position 3apital hol,s in the economic an, political struggle$ as in the situation where a stronger partner threatens that if -ou ,o N$ -ou will %e punishe, %- M$ an, then$ upon -our ,oing N$ M effectivel- ensues. 4n iron- of histor- is that$ in the :astern :uropean e2&3ommunist countries$ the .reforme,/ 3ommunists were the first to learn this lesson. 0h- ,i, man- of them return to power via free elections? +his ver- return offers the ultimate proof that these states have effectivel- entere, capitalism. +hat is to sa-$ what ,o e2&3ommunists stan, for to,a-? Jue to their privilege, links with the newl- emerging capitalists6mostlmem%ers of the ol, nomenklatura .privatizing/ the companies the- once ran6the- are first an, foremost the part- of %ig capital1 furthermore$ to erase the traces of their %rief$ %ut nonetheless rather traumatic e2perience with politicall- active civil societ-$ as a rule the- ferociousl- a,vocate a with,rawal from i,eolog-$ a retreat from active engagement in civil societ- to passive$ apolitical consumerism6the ver- two features which characterize contemporar- capitalism. Jissi,ents are thus astonishe, to ,iscover that the- pla-e, the role of .vanishing me,iators/ on the path from socialism to capitalism in which the same class as %efore rules un,er a new guise. t is therefore wrong to claim that the return of the e2&3ommunists to power signals how people are ,isappointe, at capitalism an, long for the ol, socialist securit-6rather$ in a kin, of Aegelian .negation of negation/$ it is onl- with the return to power of e2&3ommunists that socialism was effectivel- negate,1 that is$ what the political anal-sts <mis=perceive as the .,isappointment at capitalism/ is effectivel- the ,isappointment at an ethico& political enthusiasm for which there is no place in .normal/ capitalism*. 4t a somewhat ,ifferent level$ the same logic un,erlies the social impact of c-%erspace: this impact ,oes not ,erive ,irectl- from technolog- %ut relies on the network of social relations$ that is$ the pre,ominant wa- ,igitalization affects our self& e2perience is me,iate, %- the frame of the late capitalist glo%alize, market econom-. Bill Lates has commonl- cele%rate, c-%erspace as opening up the prospect of what he calls .friction&free capitalism/6this e2pression ren,ers perfectl- the social fantaswhich un,erlies the i,eolog- of c-%erspace capitalism$ of a wholl- transparent$ ethereal me,ium of e2change in which the last trace of material inertia vanishes. +he crucial point here is that the .friction/ we ,ispose of in the fantas- of .friction&free capitalism/$
7

Retroactivel-$ one thus %ecomes aware of how ,eepl- the phenomenon of so&calle, .,issi,ence/ was em%e,,e, in the socialist i,eological framework$ of the e2tent to which .,issi,ence/$ in its ver- utopian .moralism/ <preaching social soli,arit-$ ethical responsi%ilit-$ an, so forth= provi,e, the ,isavowe, ethical core of socialism: perhaps$ one ,a-$ historians will note that6in the same sense in which Aegel claime, that the true spiritual result of the ;eloponnesian war$ its spiritual :n,$ is +huci,-,es/s %ook a%out it6,issi,ence/ was the true spiritual result of Reall- :2isting Socialism.

,oes not onl- refer to the realit- of material o%stacles which sustain an- e2change process$ %ut$ a%ove all$ to the Real of traumatic social antagonisms$ power relations$ an, so forth which %ran, the space of social e2change with a pathological twist. n his Lrun,risse manuscripts$ Mar2 pointe, out how the ver- material ,isposition of a nineteenth&centur- in,ustrial pro,uction site ,irectl- materializes the capitalist relationship of ,omination6the worker as a mere appen,i2 su%or,inate, to the machiner- owne, %- the capitalist1 mutatis mutan,is$ the same goes for c-%erspace. n the social con,itions of late capitalism$ the ver- materialit- of c-%erspace automaticallgenerates the illusor- a%stract space of .friction&free/ e2change in which the particularit- of the participants/ social position is o%literate,. +he pre,ominant .spontaneous i,eolog- of c-%erspace/ is so&calle, .c-%er& revolutionism/ which relies on the notion of c-%erspace6or the 0orl, 0i,e 0e%6as a self&evolving .natural/ organismF. 3rucial here is the %lurring of the ,istinction %etween .culture/ an, .nature/: the o%verse of the .naturalization of culture/ <market$ societ- as living organism= is the .culturalization of nature/ <life itself is conceive, as a set of self& repro,ucing ,ata6.genes are memes/=). +his new notion of Life is thus neutral with respect to the ,istinction of natural an, cultural or .artificial/ processes. +he :arth <as Laia= an, the glo%al market$ the- %oth appear as gigantic self&regulate, living s-stems whose %asic structure is ,efine, in terms of the process of co,ing an, ,eco,ing$ of transmitting information. +he i,ea of the 0orl, 0i,e 0e% as a living organism is often evoke, in conte2ts which ma- seem li%erating6sa-$ against state censorship of the nternet. Aowever$ this ver- ,emonization of the state is thoroughl- am%iguous$ since it is pre,ominantl- appropriate, %- right&wing populist ,iscourse an,!or market li%eralism: its main targets are the state interventions which tr- to maintain a kin, of minimal social %alance an, securit-. +he title of Michael Rothschil,/s %ook6Bionomics: +he nevita%ilit- of 3apitalism6is in,icative here(G. So$ while c-%erspace i,eologists can ,ream a%out the ne2t evolutionar- step in which we will no longer %e mechanicallinteracting .3artesian/ in,ivi,uals$ in which each .person/ will cut his or her su%stantial link to his in,ivi,ual %o,- an, conceive of itself as part of the new holistic Min, which lives an, acts through him or her$ what is o%fuscate, in such a ,irect .naturalization/ of the 0orl, 0i,e 0e% or market is the set of power relations6of political ,ecisions$ of institutional con,itions6which .organisms/ like the nternet <or the market or capitalism...= nee, in or,er to thrive. ,eological 8n,ergroun, 0hat one shoul, ,o is thus reassert the ol, Mar2ist criti9ue of .reification/: to,a-$ emphasizing the ,epoliticize, .o%jective/ economic logic against the allege,l- .out,ate,/ forms of i,eological passions is the pre,ominant i,eological form$ since i,eolog- is alwa-s self&referential$ that is$ it alwa-s ,efines itself through a ,istance towar,s an 'ther ,ismisse, an, ,enounce, as .i,eological((. Eac9ues RanciOre gave a poignant e2pression to the /%a, surprise/ which awaits to,a-/s postmo,ern i,eologues of the .en, of politics/: it is as if we are witnessing the ultimate confirmation of Dreu,/s thesis$ from ivili!ation and its "iscontents$ on how$ after ever- assertion of :ros$ +hanatos
8 9

See +iziana +erranova$ .Jigital Jarwin/$ New Dormations$ no. ")$ Summer ())?. See Richar, Jawkins$ +he Selfish Lene$ '2for, ()F). 10 Michael L. Rothschil,$ Bionomics: +he nevita%ilit- of 3apitalism$ 4rmonk$ n- ())". 11 See Slavoj PiQek$ . ntro,uction/$ in Mapping ,eolog-$ >erso$ Lon,on ())#.

reasserts itself with a vengeance. 4t the ver- moment when$ accor,ing to the official i,eolog-$ we are finall- leaving %ehin, the .immature/ political passions <the regime of the .political/6class struggle an, other .out&,ate,/ ,ivisive antagonisms= for the .mature/ post&i,eological pragmatic universe of rational a,ministration an, negotiate, consensus$ for the universe$ free of utopian impulses$ in which the ,ispassionate a,ministration of social affairs goes han, in han, with aestheticize, he,onism <the pluralism of .wa-s of life/=6at this ver- moment$ the foreclose, political is cele%rating a triumphant come%ack in its most archaic form: of pure$ un,istille, racist hatre, of the 'ther which ren,ers the rational tolerant attitu,e utterl- impotent (". n this precise sense$ contemporar- .postmo,ern/ racism is the s-mptom of multiculturalist late capitalism$ %ringing to light the inherent contra,iction of the li%eral&,emocratic i,eological project. Li%eral .tolerance/ con,ones the folklorist 'ther ,eprive, of its su%stance6like the multitu,e of .ethnic cuisines/ in a contemporar- megalopolis1 however$ an- .real/ 'ther is instantl- ,enounce, for its .fun,amentalism/$ since the kernel of 'therness resi,es in the regulation of its jouissance: the .real 'ther/ is %,efinition .patriarchal/$ .violent/$ never the 'ther of ethereal wis,om an, charming customs. 'ne is tempte, to reactualize here the ol, Marcusean notion of .repressive tolerance/$ reconceiving it as the tolerance of the 'ther in its aseptic$ %enign form$ which forecloses the ,imension of the Real of the 'ther/s jouissance(C. +he same reference to jouissance ena%les us to cast a new light on the horrors of the Bosnian war$ as the- are reflecte, in :mir 7usturica/s film$ 8n,ergroun, <())#=. +he political meaning of this film ,oes not resi,e primaril- in its overt ten,entiousness$ in the wa- it takes si,es in the post&Mugoslav conflict6heroic Ser%s versus the treacherous$ pro&Nazi Slovenes an, 3roats6%ut$ rather$ in its ver- .,epoliticize,/ aestheticist attitu,e. +hat is to sa-$ when$ in his conversations with the journalists of 3ahiers ,u cinOma$ 7usturica insiste, that 8n,ergroun, is not a political film at all %ut a kin, of liminal trance&like su%jective e2perience$ a .,eferre, suici,e/$ he there%unknowingl- put on the ta%le his true political car,s an, in,icate, that 8n,ergroun, stages the .apolitical/ phantasmatic %ackgroun, of the post&Mugoslav ethnic cleansing an, war cruelties. Aow? +he pre,ominant clichO a%out the Balkans is that the Balkan people are caught in the phantasmatic whirlpool of historical m-th67usturica himself en,orses this view: . n this region$ war is a natural phenomenon. t is like a natural catastrophe$ like an earth9uake which e2plo,es from time to time. n m- film$ trie, to clarif- the state of things in this chaotic part of the worl,. t seems that no%o,- is a%le to locate the roots of this terri%le conflict (@./ 0hat we fin, here$ of course$ is an e2emplar- case of .Balkanism/$ functioning in a similar wa- to :,war, Sai,/s concept of .'rientalism/: the Balkans as the timeless space onto which the 0est projects its phantasmatic content. +ogether with Milche Manchevski/s Before the Rain <which almost won the 'scar for the %est foreign film in ())#=$ 8n,ergroun, is thus the ultimate i,eological pro,uct of 0estern li%eral multiculturalism: what these two films offer to the 0estern li%eral gaze is precisel- what this gaze wants to see in the Balkan war6the spectacle of a timeless$ incomprehensi%le$ m-thical c-cle of passions$ in contrast to ,eca,ent an, anaemic 0estern life(#.
12 13

See Eac9ues RanciRre$ 'n the Shores of ;olitics$ >erso$ Lon,on ())#$ p. "". Dor a more ,etaile, account of the role of jouissance in the process of i,eological i,entification$ see Slavoj PiQek$ +he ;lague of Dantasies$ >erso$ Lon,on ())*$ ch. ". 14 .;ropos ,e :mir 7usturica$ 3ahiers ,e cinOma$ no. @)"$ Eune ())#$ p. ?).

+he weak point of the universal multiculturalist gaze ,oes not resi,e in its ina%ilit- to .throw out the ,irt- water without losing the %a%-/: it is ,eepl- wrong to assert that$ when one throws out nationalist ,irt- water6.e2cessive/ fanaticism6one shoul, %e careful not to lose the %a%- of .health-/ national i,entit-$ so that one shoul, trace the line of separation %etween the proper ,egree of .health-/ nationalism which guarantees the necessar- minimum of national i,entit-$ an, .e2cessive/ nationalism. Such a common sense ,istinction reproduces the very nationalist reasoning which aims to get rid of #impure excess. 'ne is therefore tempte, to propose a homolog- with ps-choanal-tic treatment$ whose aim is also not to get ri, of the ,irt- water <s-mptoms$ pathological tics= to keep the %a%- <the kernel of the health- :go= safe$ %ut$ rather$ to throw out the %a%- <to suspen, the patient/s :go= to confront the patient with his .,irtwater/$ with the s-mptoms an, fantasies which structure his jouissance. n the matter of national i,entit-$ one shoul, also en,eavour to throw out the %a%- <the spiritual puritof national i,entit-= to ren,er visi%le the phantasmatic support which structures the jouissance in the national +hing. 4n, the merit of 8n,ergroun, is that$ unknowingl-$ it ren,ers visi%le this ,irt- water.

+he +ime Machine $nderground %rings to the light of ,a- the o%scene .un,ergroun,/ of pu%lic$ official ,iscourse6represente, in the film %- the +itoist 3ommunist regime. 'ne shoul, %ear in min, that the .un,ergroun,/ to which the film/s title refers is not onl- the ,omain of .,eferre, suici,e/$ of the eternal org- of ,rinking$ singing an, copulating$ which takes places in the suspension of time an, outsi,e pu%lic space: it also stan,s for the .un,ergroun,/ workshop in which the enslave, workers$ isolate, from the rest of the worl,$ an, thus misle, into thinking that 0orl, 0ar ii is still going on$ work ,a- an, night an, pro,uce arms sol, %- Marko$ the hero of the film$ their .owner/ an, the %ig Manipulator$ the onl- one who me,iates %etween the .un,ergroun,/ an, the pu%lic worl,. 7usturica refers here to the ol, :uropean fair-&tale motif of ,iligent ,warfs <usuall- controlle, %- an evil magician= who$ ,uring the night$ while people are asleep$ emerge from their hi,ing&place an, accomplish their work <set the house in or,er$ cook the meals=$ so that when$ in the morning$ people awaken$ the- fin, their work magicall,one. 7usturica/s .un,ergroun,/ is the last em%o,iment of this motif which is foun, from Richar, 0agner/s Rhinegol, <the Ni%elungs who work in their un,ergroun, caves$ ,riven %- their cruel master$ the ,warf 4l%erich= to Dritz Lang/s Metropolis in which the enslave, in,ustrial workers live an, work ,eep %eneath the earth/s surface to pro,uce wealth for the ruling capitalists. +his schema of the .un,ergroun,/ slaves$ ,ominate, %- a manipulative evil Master$ takes place against the %ackgroun, of the opposition %etween the two figures of the Master: on the one han,$ the .visi%le/ pu%lic s-m%olic authorit-$ on the other han,$ the .invisi%le/ spectral apparition. 0hen the su%ject is en,owe, with s-m%olic authorit-$ he acts as an appen,i2 to his s-m%olic title$ that is$ it is the .%ig 'ther/$ the s-m%olic institution$ who acts through him: suffice it to recall a ju,ge who ma- %e a misera%le an, corrupte, person$ %ut the moment he puts on his ro%e an, other insignia$ his
15

4s to this 0estern perception of the Balkans as a fantas-&screen$ see Renata Salecl$ +he Spoils of Dree,om$ Lon,on ())#.

wor,s are those of Law itself. 'n the other han,$ the .invisi%le/ Master6whose e2emplar- case is the anti&Semitic figure of the .Eew/ who$ invisi%le to the pu%lic e-e$ pulls the strings of social life 5 is a kin, of uncann- ,ou%le of pu%lic authorit-: he has to act in sha,ow$ invisi%le to the pu%lic e-e$ irra,iating a phantom&like$ spectral omnipotence(?. Marko from 7usturica/s 8n,ergroun, is to %e locate, in this lineage of the evil magician who controls an invisi%le empire of enslave, workers: he is a kin, of uncann- ,ou%le of +ito as the pu%lic s-m%olic Master. +he pro%lem with 8n,ergroun, is that it falls into the c-nical trap of presenting this o%scene .un,ergroun,/ from a %enevolent ,istance. 8n,ergroun,$ of course$ is multi&la-ere, an, self&reflective$ it pla-s with a multitu,e of clichOs <the Ser%ian m-th of a true man who$ even when %om%s fall aroun, him$ calml- continues his meal$ an, so on= which are .not to %e taken literall-/6however$ it is precisel- through such self&,istance that .postmo,ern/ c-nical i,eolog- functions. n a well&known an, much&reprinte, piece$ .%ourteen &heses on %ascism <())#=$ 8m%erto :co enumerate, the series of features which ,efine the kernel of the fascist attitu,e: ,ogmatic tenacit-$ the a%sence of humour$ insensi%ilit- to rational argument... he coul,n/t have %een more wrong. +o,a-/s neo& fascism is more an, more .postmo,ern/$ civilize,$ pla-ful$ involving ironic self&,istance$ -et for all that no less fascist. So$ in a wa-$ 7usturica is right in his interview with 3ahiers ,u cinOma: he ,oes somehow .clarif- the state of things in this chaotic part of the worl,/ %- wa- of %ringing to light its .un,ergroun,/ phantasmatic support. Ae there%- unknowingl- provi,es the li%i,inal econom- of the ethnic slaughter in Bosnia: the pseu,o&Bataillean trance of e2cessive e2pen,iture$ the continuous ma, rh-thm of ,rinking&eating&singing& fornicating. 4n,$ therein consists the .,ream/ of the ethnic cleansers$ therein resi,es the answer to the 9uestion .Aow were the- a%le to ,o it?/ f the stan,ar, ,efinition of war is that of .a continuation of politics %- other means/$ then the fact that Ra,ovan 7ara,QiS.+he +'3 mentione, in the we% site is not in the page num%er or,er. So we have followe, the Book +'3.$ the lea,er of the Bosnian Ser%s$ is a poet$ is more than a gratuitous coinci,ence: ethnic cleansing in Bosnia was the .continuation of <a kin, of= poetr- %- other means./

Concrete "ersus A#stract $niversality Aow$ then$ is this multiculturalist i,eological poetr- em%e,,e, in to,a-/s glo%al capitalism? +he pro%lem which lurks %eneath it is that of universalism. :tienne Bali%ar ,iscerne, three levels of universalit- in to,a-/s societies: the .real/ universalit- of the process of glo%alization an, the supplementar- process of .internal e2clusions/ <the e2tent to which$ now$ the fate of each of us hinges on the intricate we% of glo%al market relations=1 the universalit- of the fiction which regulates i,eological hegemon- <3hurch or State as the universal .imagine, communities/ which allow the su%ject to ac9uire a ,istance towar,s his immersion in his imme,iate social group6class$ profession$ se2$ religion6an, posit himself as a free su%ject=1 the universalit- of an ,eal$ as e2emplifie, %- the revolutionar- ,eman, for Ogali%ertO <e9ualit-&free,om= which

16

See Slavoj PiQek$ ./ Aear Mou with M- :-es/1 or$ +he nvisi%le Master/$ in Renata Salecl an, Slavoj PiQek$ e,s$ Laze an, >oice as Love '%jects$ Jurham$ nc ())?.

remains an uncon,itional e2cess$ setting in motion permanent insurrection against the e2isting or,er$ an, can thus never %e .gentrifie,/$ inclu,e, in the e2isting or,er(*. +he point$ of course$ is that the %oun,ar- %etween these three universals is never sta%le an, fi2e,: Ogali%ertO can serve as the hegemonic i,ea which ena%les us to i,entif- with our particular social role < am a poor artisan$ %ut precisel- as such$ participate in the life of m- Nation&State as an e9ual an, free citizen=$ or as the irre,uci%le e2cess which ,esta%ilizes each fi2e, social or,er. 0hat was in the Eaco%in universe the ,esta%ilizing universalit- of the ,eal$ setting in motion the incessant process of social transformation$ %ecame later the i,eological fiction allowing each in,ivi,ual to i,entif- with his specific place in the social space. n Aegelese$ the alternative here is the following: is the universal .a%stract/ <oppose, to concrete content= or .concrete/ <in the sense that e2perience m- ver- particular mo,e of social life as the specific wa- of m- participation in the universal social or,er=? Bali%ar/s point$ of course$ is that the tension %etween the two is irre,uci%le: the e2cess of a%stract& negative&i,eal universalit-$ its unsettling&,esta%ilizing force$ can never %e fullintegrate, into the harmonious whole of a .concrete universalit- (F. Aowever$ there is another tension$ the tension %etween the two mo,es of .concrete universalit-/ itself$ which seems more crucial to,a-. +hat is to sa-$ the .real/ universalit- of to,a-/s glo%alization through the glo%al market involves its own hegemonic fiction <or even i,eal= of multiculturalist tolerance$ respect an, protection of human rights$ ,emocrac-$ an, so forth1 it involves its own pseu,o&Aegelian .concrete universalit-/ of a worl, or,er whose universal features of the worl, market$ human rights an, ,emocrac-$ allow each specific .life&st-le/ to flourish in its particularit-. So a tension inevita%l- emerges %etween this postmo,ern$ post&nation&state$ .concrete universalit-/$ an, the earlier .concrete universalit-/ of the Nation&State. Aegel was the first to ela%orate the properl- mo,ern para,o2 of in,ivi,ualization through secon,ar- i,entification. 4t the %eginning$ the su%ject is immerse, in the particular life&form into which he was %orn <famil-$ local communit-=1 the onl- wa- for him to tear himself awa- from his primor,ial .organic/ communit-$ to cut his links with it an, to assert himself as an .autonomous in,ivi,ual/$ is to shift his fun,amental allegiance$ to recognize the su%stance of his %eing in another$ secon,ar- communitwhich is universal an,$ simultaneousl-$ .artificial/$ no longer .spontaneous/ %ut .me,iate,/$ sustaine, %- the activit- of in,epen,ent free su%jects6nation versus local communit-1 a profession in the mo,ern sense <a jo% in a large anon-mous compan-= versus the .personalize,/ relationship %etween an apprentice an, his master&artisan1 the aca,emic communit- of knowle,ge versus the tra,itional wis,om passe, from generation to generation. n this shift from primar- to secon,ar- i,entification$ primari,entifications un,ergo a kin, of transu%stantiation: the- start to function as the form of appearance of the universal secon,ar- i,entification6sa-$ precisel- %- %eing a goo, mem%er of m- famil-$ there%- contri%ute to the proper functioning of m- Nation&State. +he universal secon,ar- i,entification remains .a%stract/ insofar as it is ,irectloppose, to the particular forms of primar- i,entification$ that is$ insofar as it compels the su%ject to renounce his primar- i,entifications1 it %ecomes .concrete/ when it
17 18

See Bali%ar$ La crainte ,es masses$ pp. @"(5#@. Aere$ the parallel is clear with Laclau/s opposition %etween the logic of ,ifference <societ- as a ,ifferential s-m%olic structure= an, the logic of antagonism <societ- as .impossi%le/$ thwarte, %- an antagonistic split=. +o,a-$ the tension %etween the logic of ,ifference an, the logic of antagonism assumes the form of the tension %etween the li%eral& ,emocratic universe of negotiation an, the .fun,amentalist/ universe of struggle %etween Loo, an, :vil.

reintegrates primar- i,entifications$ transforming them into the mo,es of appearance of the secon,ar- i,entification. +his tension %etween .a%stract/ an, .concrete/ universalitis clearl- ,iscerni%le in the precarious social status of the earl- 3hristian 3hurch: on the one han,$ there was the zealotr- of the ra,ical groups which saw no wa- to com%ine the true 3hristian attitu,e with the e2isting space of pre,ominant social relations$ an, thus pose, a serious threat to the social or,er1 on the other han,$ there were the attempts to reconcile 3hristianit- with the e2isting structure of ,omination$ so that participation in social life an, occup-ing a place within a hierarch- were compati%le with %eing a goo, 3hristian6in,ee,$ accomplishing -our ,eterminate social role was not onl- seen as compati%le with %eing a 3hristian$ it was even perceive, as a specific wa- to fulfil the universal ,ut- of %eing a 3hristian. n the mo,ern era$ the pre,ominant social form of the .concrete universal/ is the Nation& State as the me,ium of our particular social i,entities: the ,eterminate form of msocial life <as$ sa-$ worker$ professor$ politician$ farmer$ law-er= is the specific mo,e of m- participation in the universal life of m- Nation&State. 0ith regar, to this logic of transu%stantiation which guarantees the i,eological unit- of a Nation&State$ the 8nite, States of 4merica pla-s a uni9ue role of e2ception: the ke- element of the stan,ar, .4merican ,eolog-/ consists in the en,eavour to transu%stantiate the ver- fi,elit- to one/s particular ethnic roots into an e2pression of .%eing 4merican/: in or,er to %e .a goo, 4merican/$ one ,oes not have to renounce one/s ethnic roots6 talians$ Lermans$ Blacks$ Eews$ Lreeks$ 7oreans$ the- are .all 4mericans/$ that is$ the ver- particularit- of their ethnic i,entit-$ the wa- the- .stick to it/$ makes them 4mericans. +his transu%stantiation %- means of which the tension %etween m- particular ethnic i,entitan, m- universal i,entit- as a mem%er of a Nation&State is surpasse,$ is threatene, to,a-: it is as if the positive charge of pathetic patriotic i,entification with the universal frame of the 4merican Nation&State has %een seriousl- ero,e,1 .4mericanness/$ the fact of .%eing 4merican/$ less an, less gives rise to the su%lime effect of %eing part of a gigantic i,eological project6.the 4merican ,ream/6so that the 4merican state is more an, more e2perience, as a simple formal framework for the coe2istence of the multiplicit- of ethnic$ religious or life&st-le communities.

Modernis% in &everse +his gra,ual collapse6or$ rather$ loss of su%stance6of the .4merican ,ream/ %ears witness to the une2pecte, reversal of the passage from primar- to secon,ari,entification ,escri%e, %- Aegel: in our .postmo,ern/ societies$ the .a%stract/ institution of secon,ar- i,entification is increasingl- e2perience, as an e2ternal$ purel- formal frame that is not reall- %in,ing$ so that one is more an, more looking for support in .primor,ial/$ usuall- smaller <ethnic$ religious= forms of i,entification. :ven when these forms of i,entification are more .artificial/ than national i,entification6as is the case with the ga- communit-6the- are more .imme,iate/ in the sense of seizing the in,ivi,ual ,irectl- an, overwhelmingl-$ in his specific .wa- of life/$ there%- restraining the .a%stract/ free,om he possesses in his capacit- as the citizen of a Nation&State. 0hat we are ,ealing with to,a- is thus a reverse process to that of the earl- mo,ern constitution of a Nation: in contrast to the .nationalization of the ethnic/6the ,e& ethnicization$ the .su%lation/ <4ufhe%ung= of the ethnic into the national6we are now

,ealing with the .ethnicization of the national/$ with a renewe, search for <or reconstitution of= .ethnic roots/. +he crucial point here$ however$ is that this .regression/ from secon,ar- to .primor,ial/ forms of i,entification with .organic/ communities is alrea,- .me,iate,/: it is a reaction to the universal ,imension of the worl, market6as such$ it occurs on its terrain$ against its %ackgroun,. Dor that reason$ what we are ,ealing with in these phenomena is not a .regression/ %ut rather the form of appearance of its e2act opposite: in a kin, of .negation of negation/$ this verreassertion of .primor,ial/ i,entification signals that the loss of organic&su%stantial unitis full- consummate,. +o make this point clear$ one shoul, %ear in min, what is perhaps the fun,amental lesson of postmo,ern politics: far from %eing a .natural/ unit- of social life$ a %alance, frame$ a kin, of 4ristotelian entelechia towar,s which all previous ,evelopment a,vances$ the universal form of the Nation&State is rather a precarious$ temporar%alance %etween the relationship to a particular ethnic +hing <patriotism$ pro patria mori$ an, so forth= an, the <potentiall-= universal function of the market. 'n the one han,$ it .su%lates/ organic local forms of i,entification into the universal .patriotic/ i,entification1 on the other han,$ it posits itself as a kin, of pseu,o&natural %oun,ar- of the market econom-$ ,elimiting .internal/ from .e2ternal/ commerce6economic activitis thus .su%limate,/$ raise, to the level of the ethnic +hing$ legitimate, as a patriotic contri%ution to the nation/s greatness. +his %alance is constantl- threatene, from %oth si,es$ from the si,e of previous .organic/ forms of particular i,entification which ,o not simpl- ,isappear %ut continue their su%terranean life outsi,e the universal pu%lic sphere$ as well as from the si,e of the immanent logic of 3apital whose .transnational/ nature is inherentl- in,ifferent to the %oun,aries of Nation&State. 4n, to,a-/s new .fun,amentalist/ ethnic i,entifications involve a kin, of .,esu%limation/$ a process of ,isintegration of this precarious unit- of the .national econom-/ into its two constituent parts$ the transnational market function an, the relationship to the ethnic +hing (). t is therefore onl- to,a-$ in contemporar- .fun,amentalist/ ethnic$ religious$ life&st-le communities$ that the splitting %etween the a%stract form of commerce an, the relationship to the particular ethnic +hing$ inaugurate, %- the :nlightenment project$ is full- realize,: to,a-/s postmo,ern ethnic or religious .fun,amentalism/ an, 2enopho%ia are not onl- not .regressive/$ %ut$ on the contrar-$ offer the supreme proof of the final emancipation of the economic logic of market from the attachment to the ethnic +hing"G. +herein resi,es the highest speculative effort of the ,ialectic of social life: not in ,escri%ing the process of me,iation of the prim&or,ial imme,iac-6sa-$ the ,isintegration of organic communit- in .alienate,/ in,ivi,ualist societ-6%ut in e2plaining how this ver- process of me,iation characteristic of mo,ernit- can give %irth to new forms of .organic/ imme,iac-. +he stan,ar, stor- of the passage from Lemeinschaft to Lesellschaft shoul, therefore %e supplemente, %- an account of how this process of

19

'ne of the minor$ -et tell&tale$ events that %ear witness to this .withering&awa-/ of the Nation&State is the slow sprea,ing of the o%scene institution of private prisons in the usa an, other 0estern countries: the e2ercise of what shoul, %e the monopol- of the State <ph-sical violence an, coercion= %ecomes the o%ject of a contract %etween the State an, a private compan- which e2erts coercion on in,ivi,uals for the sake of profit6what we have here is simplthe en, of the monopol- on the legitimate use of violence which <accor,ing to Ma2 0e%er= ,efines the mo,ern State. 20 +hese three stages <pre&mo,ern communities$ the Nation&State an, to,a-/s emerging transnational .universal societ-/= clearl- fit the tria, of tra,itionalism$ mo,ernism$ an, postmo,ernism$ ela%orate, %- Dre,ric Eameson: here also$ the retro&phenomena that characterize postmo,ernism shoul, not ,eceive us6it is onl- with postmo,ernism that the %reak with pre&mo,ernit- is full- consummate,. +he reference to Eameson/s ;ostmo,ernism$ or$ the 3ultural Logic of Late 3apitalism <>erso$ Lon,on ())C= in the title of this essa- is thus ,eli%erate.

%ecoming&societ- of communit- gives rise to ,ifferent forms of new$ .me,iate,/ communities6sa-$ the .life&st-le communities/.

Multiculturalis% Aow$ then$ ,oes the universe of 3apital relate to the form of Nation&State in our era of glo%al capitalism? ;erhaps$ this relationship is %est ,esignate, as .auto&colonization/: with the ,irect multinational functioning of 3apital$ we are no longer ,ealing with the stan,ar, opposition %etween metropolis an, colonize, countries1 a glo%al compan- as it were cuts its um%ilical cor, with its mother&nation an, treats its countr- of origins as simpl- another territor- to %e colonize,. +his is what ,istur%s so much the patrioticalloriente, right&wing populists$ from Le ;en to Buchanan: the fact that the new multinationals have towar,s the Drench or 4merican local population e2actl- the same attitu,e as towar,s the population of Me2ico$ Brazil or +aiwan. s there not a kin, of poetic justice in this self&referential turn? +o,a-/s glo%al capitalism is thus again a kin, of .negation of negation/$ after national capitalism an, its internationalist!colonialist phase. 4t the %eginning <i,eall-$ of course=$ there is capitalism within the confines of a Nation&State$ with the accompan-ing international tra,e <e2change %etween sovereign Nation&States=1 what follows is the relationship of colonization in which the colonizing countr- su%or,inates an, e2ploits <economicall-$ politicall-$ culturall-= the colonize, countr-1 the final moment of this process is the para,o2 of colonization in which there are onl- colonies$ no colonizing countries6the colonizing power is no longer a Nation& State %ut ,irectl- the glo%al compan-. n the long term$ we shall all not onl- wear Banana Repu%lic shirts %ut also live in %anana repu%lics. 4n,$ of course$ the i,eal form of i,eolog- of this glo%al capitalism is multiculturalism$ the attitu,e which$ from a kin, of empt- glo%al position$ treats each local culture the wa- the colonizer treats colonize, people6as .natives/ whose mores are to %e carefull- stu,ie, an, .respecte,/. +hat is to sa-$ the relationship %etween tra,itional imperialist colonialism an, glo%al capitalist self&colonization is e2actl- the same as the relationship %etween 0estern cultural imperialism an, multiculturalism: in the same wa- that glo%al capitalism involves the para,o2 of colonization without the colonizing Nation&State metropole$ multi&culturalism involves patronizing :urocentrist ,istance an,!or respect for local cultures without roots in one/s own particular culture. n other wor,s$ multiculturalism is a ,isavowe,$ inverte,$ self&referential form of racism$ a .racism with a ,istance/6it .respects/ the 'ther/s i,entit-$ conceiving the 'ther as a self&enclose, .authentic/ communit- towar,s which he$ the multiculturalist$ maintains a ,istance ren,ere, possi%le %- his privilege, universal position. Multiculturalism is a racism which empties its own position of all positive content <the multiculturalist is not a ,irect racist$ he ,oesn/t oppose to the 'ther the particular values of his own culture=$ %ut nonetheless retains this position as the privilege, empty point of universality from which one is a%le to appreciate <an, ,epreciate= properl- other particular cultures6the multiculturalist respect for the 'ther/s specificit- is the ver- form of asserting one/s own superiorit-. 0hat a%out the rather o%vious counter&argument that the multiculturalist/s neutralit- is false$ since his position silentl- privileges :urocentrist content? +his line of reasoning is

right$ %ut for the wrong reason. +he particular cultural %ackgroun, or roots which alwa-s support the universal multiculturalist position are not its .truth/$ hi,,en %eneath the mask of universalit-6.multiculturalist universalism is reall- :urocentrist/6%ut rather the opposite: the stain of particular roots is the phantasmatic screen which conceals the fact that the su%ject is alrea,- thoroughl- .rootless/$ that his true position is the voi, of universalit-. Let me recall here m- own paraphrase of ,e Tuince-/s witticism a%out the simple art of mur,er: how man- people have %egan with an innocent group se2 org- an, en,e, with sharing meals in a 3hinese restaurant "(K +he point of this paraphrase is to reverse the stan,ar, relationship %etween the surface&prete2t an, the unacknowle,ge, wish: sometimes$ the most ,ifficult thing is to accept the appearance at its surface value6we imagine multiple phantasmatic scenarios to cover it up with .,eeper meanings./ t ma- well %e that m- .true ,esire/ to %e ,iscerne, %ehin, mrefusal to share a 3hinese meal is m- fascination with the fantas- of a group org-$ %ut the ke- point is that this fantas- which structures m- ,esire is in itself alrea,- a ,efence against m- .oral/ ,rive which goes its wa- with a%solute coercion. . . 0hat we fin, here is the e2act e9uivalent of Jarian Lea,er/s e2ample of the man in a restaurant with his ,ate$ who$ when asking the waiter for the ta%le$ sa-s .Be,room for two$ pleaseK/ instea, of .+a%le for two$ pleaseK/ 'ne shoul, turn aroun, the stan,ar, Dreu,ian e2planation <.'f course$ his min, was alrea,- on the night of se2 he planne, after the mealK/=: this intervention of the su%terranean se2ual fantas- is rather the screen which serves as the ,efence against the oral ,rive which effectivel- matters to him more than se2"". n his anal-sis of the Drench revolution of (F@F <in +he 3lass& Struggles in Drance=$ Mar2 provi,es a similar e2ample of such a ,ou%le ,eception: the ;art- of 'r,er which took over after the Revolution$ pu%licl- supporte, the Repu%lic$ -et secretl-$ it %elieve, in Restoration6the- use, ever- opportunit- to mock repu%lican rituals an, to signal in an- wa- possi%le where .their heart is/"C. +he para,o2$ however$ was that the truth of their activit- resi,e, in the e2ternal form the- privatel- mocke, an, ,espise,: this repu%lican form was not a mere sem%lance %eneath which the ro-alist ,esire lurke,6it was rather the secret clinging to Ro-alism which ena%le, them to fulfil their actual historical function$ to implement the %ourgeois repu%lican law an, or,er. Mar2 himself mentions how mem%ers of the ;art- of 'r,er foun, immense pleasure in their occasional Ro-alist .slips of the tongue/ against the Repu%lic6referring$ for instance$ to Drance as a 7ing,om in their parliamentar- ,e%ates: these slips of the tongue articulate, their phantasmatic illusions which serve, as the screen ena%ling them to %lin, themselves for the social realit- of what was going on on the surface.

The Machine in the 'host 4n,$ mutatis mutan,is$ the same goes for to,a-/s capitalist who still clings to some particular cultural heritage$ i,entif-ing it as the secret source of his success6Eapanese e2ecutives participating in tea ceremonies or o%e-ing the %ushi,o co,e6or for the inverse case of the 0estern journalist in search of the particular secret of the Eapanese
21 22 23

Slavoj PiQek$ :njo- Mour S-mptomK$ New Mork ())C$ p. (. See Jarian Lea,er$ 0h- Jo 0omen 0rite More Letters +han +he- ;ost?$ Lon,on ())?.

Karl Marx, The Class Struggles in Fran e! 1848 t" 1850#, in Sur$e%s &r"' (xile) *"liti al +ritings! ,"lu'e 2, -"n."n 1973)

success: this ver- reference to a particular cultural formula is a screen for the universal anon-mit- of 3apital. +he true horror ,oes not resi,e in the particular content hi,,en %eneath the universalit- of glo%al 3apital$ %ut rather in the fact that 3apital is effectivelan anon-mous glo%al machine %lin,l- running its course$ that there is effectivel- no particular Secret 4gent who animates it. +he horror is not the <particular living= ghost in the <,ea, universal= machine$ %ut the <,ea, universal= machine in the ver- heart of each <particular living= ghost. +he conclusion to %e ,rawn is thus that the pro%lematic of multiculturalism 5 the h-%ri, coe2istence of ,iverse cultural life&worl,s 5 which imposes itself to,a- is the form of appearance of its opposite$ of the massive presence of capitalism as universal worl, s-stem: it %ears witness to the unprece,ente, homogenization of the contemporarworl,. t is effectivel- as if$ since the horizon of social imagination no longer allows us to entertain the i,ea of an eventual ,emise of capitalism 5 since$ as we might put it$ ever-%o,- silentl- accepts that capitalism is here to sta- 5 critical energ- has foun, a su%stitute outlet in fighting for cultural ,ifferences which leave the %asic homogeneit- of the capitalist worl,&s-stem intact. So we are fighting our pc %attles for the rights of ethnic minorities$ of ga-s an, les%ians$ of ,ifferent life&st-les$ an, so on$ while capitalism pursues its triumphant march 5 an, to,a-/s critical theor-$ in the guise of .cultural stu,ies/$ is ,oing the ultimate service to the unrestraine, ,evelopment of capitalism %- activel- participating in the i,eological effort to ren,er its massive presence invisi%le: in a t-pical postmo,ern .cultural criticism/$ the ver- mention of capitalism as worl, s-stem ten,s to give rise to the accusation of .essentialism/$ .fun,amentalism/ an, other crimes. +he structure here is that of a symptom. 0hen one is ,ealing with a universal structuring principle$ one alwa-s automaticall- assumes that6in principle$ precisel-6it is possi%le to appl- this principle to all its potential elements$ an, that the empirical non&realization of the principle is merel- a matter of contingent circumstances. 4 s-mptom$ however$ is an element which6although the non&realization of the universal principle in it appears to hinge on contingent circumstances6has to remain an e2ception$ that is$ the point of suspension of the universal principle: if the universal principle were to appl- also to this point$ the universal s-stem itself woul, ,isintegrate. 4s is well known$ in the paragraphs on civil societ- in his ;hilosoph- of Right$ Aegel ,emonstrate, how the large class of .ra%%le <;oe%el= in mo,ern civil societ- is not an acci,ental result of social mismanagement$ ina,e9uate government measures or economic %a, luck: the inherent structural ,-namics of civil societ- necessaril- give rise to a class which is e2clu,e, from the %enefits of civil societ-$ a class ,eprive, of elementar- human rights an, therefore also ,elivere, of ,uties towar,s societ-$ an element within civil societ- which negates its universal principle$ a kin, of .un&Reason inherent to Reason itself/6in short$ its s-mptom. Jo we not witness the same phenomenon to,a-$ an, in even stronger shape$ with the growth of an un,erclass e2clu,e,$ sometimes for generations$ from the %enefits of affluent li%eral&,emocratic societ-? +o,a-/s .e2ceptions/6the homeless$ the ghettoize,$ the permanentl- unemplo-e,6are the s-mptom of the late capitalist universal s-stem$ a growing an, permanent remin,er of how the immanent logic of late capitalism works: the proper capitalist utopia is that$ through appropriate measures <for progressive li%erals$ affirmative action1 for conservatives$ a return to self&reliance an,

famil- values=$ this .e2ception/ coul, %e6in the long term an, in principle$ at least6 a%olishe,. 4n, is not a homologous utopia at work in the notion of a .rain%ow coalition/: in the i,ea that$ at some utopian future moment$ all .progressive/ struggles6for gaan, les%ian rights$ for the rights of ethnic an, religious minorities$ the ecological struggle$ the feminist struggle$ an, so on6will %e unite, in the common .chain of e9uivalences/? 4gain$ this necessit- of failure is structural: the point is not simpl- that$ %ecause of the empirical comple2it- of the situation$ all particular .progressive/ fights will never %e unite,$ that .wrong/ chains of e9uivalences will alwa-s occur6sa-$ the enchainment of the fight for 4frican&4merican ethnic i,entit- with patriarchal an, homopho%ic i,eolog-6%ut rather that emergencies of .wrong/ enchainments are groun,e, in the ver- structuring principle of to,a-/s .progressive/ politics of esta%lishing .chains of e9uivalences/: the ver- ,omain of the multitu,e of particular struggles with their continuousl- shifting ,isplacements an, con,ensations is sustaine, %- the .repression/ of the ke- role of economic struggle6the leftist politics of the .chains of e9uivalences/ among the pluralit- of struggles is strictl- correlative to the silent a%an,onment of the anal-sis of capitalism as a glo%al economic s-stem an, to the acceptance of capitalist economic relations as the un9uestiona%le framework"@. +he falsit- of elitist multiculturalist li%eralism thus resi,es in the tension %etween content an, form which characterize, alrea,- the first great i,eological project of tolerant universalism$ that of freemasonr-: the ,octrine of freemasonr- <the universal %rotherhoo, of all men %ase, on the light of Reason= clearl- clashes with its form of e2pression an, organization <a secret societ- with its rituals of initiation=6the ver- form of e2pression an, articulation of freemasonr- %elies its positive ,octrine. n a strictlhomologous wa-$ the contemporar- .politicall- correct/ li%eral attitu,e which perceives itself as surpassing the limitations of its ethnic i,entit- <.citizen of the worl,/ without anchors in an- particular ethnic communit-=$ functions$ within its own societ-$ as a narrow elitist upper&mi,,le&class circle clearl- opposing itself to the majorit- of common people$ ,espise, for %eing caught in their narrow ethnic or communit- confines.

(or a )e tist Suspension o the )a! Aow$ then$ ,o leftists who are aware of this falsit- of multiculturalist postmo,ernism react to it? +heir reaction assumes the form of what Aegel calle, the infinite ju,gement: the ju,gement which posits the speculative i,entit- of two thoroughl- incompati%le terms6Aegel/s %est&known e2ample is from the su%&chapter on phrenolog- in his 'henomenology of (pirit: .the Spirit is a %one/. +he infinite ju,gement which encapsulates this reaction is: .4,orno <the most sophisticate, .elitist/ critical theorist= is Buchanan <the lowest of 4merican rightist populism=./ +hat is to sa-$ these critics of postmo,ern multiculturalist elitism6from 3hristopher Lasch to ;aul ;iccone6risk en,orsing neo&conservative populism$ with its notions of the reassertion of com&munit-$ local ,emocrac- an, active citizenship$ as the onl- politicall- relevant answer to the all& pervasive pre,ominance of .instrumental Reason/$ of the %ureaucratization an, instrumentalization of our life&worl,"#. 'f course$ it is eas- to ,ismiss to,a-/s populism
24 25

See 0en,- Brown$ States of njur-$ ;rinceton ())#. See ;aul ;iccone$ .;ostmo,ern ;opulism/$ +elos$ no. (GC$ Spring ())#. :2emplar- here is also the attempt %:liza%eth Do2&Lenovese to oppose to the upper&mi,,le&class feminism intereste, in the pro%lems of literar- an, cinema theor-$ les%ian rights$ an, so forth$ a .famil- feminism/ which focuses on the actual concerns of or,inar- working women

as a nostalgic reactive formation to the process of mo,ernization$ an, as such inherentl- paranoiac$ in search of an e2ternal cause of malignanc-$ of a secret agent who pulls the strings an, is thus responsi%le for the woes of mo,ernization 5 Eews$ international capital$ non&patriotic multiculturalist managers$ state %ureaucrac- an, so on1 the pro%lem is rather to conceive this new populism as a new form of .false transparenc-/ which$ far from presenting a serious o%stacle to the capitalist mo,ernization$ paves the wa- for it. n other wor,s$ far more interesting than %emoaning the ,isintegration of communit- life through the impact of new technologies is to anal-ze how technological progress itself gives rise to new communities which gra,uall- .naturalize/ themselves 5 like virtual communities. 0hat these leftist a,vocates of populism fail to perceive is that to,a-/s populism$ far from presenting a threat to glo%al capitalism$ remains its inherent pro,uct. ;ara,o2icall-$ to,a-/s true conservatives are rather the leftist .critical theorists/ who reject li%eral multiculturalism as well as fun,amentalist populism$ those who clearlperceive the complicit- %etween glo%al capitalism an, ethnic fun,amentalism. +hepoint towar,s the thir, ,omain which %elongs neither to glo%al market&societ- nor to the new forms of ethnic fun,amentalism: the ,omain of the political$ the pu%lic space of civil societ-$ of active responsi%le citizenship 5 the fight for human rights$ ecolog- an, so forth. Aowever$ the pro%lem is that this ver- form of political space is more an, more threatene, %- the onslaught of glo%alization1 conse9uentl-$ one cannot simpl- return to it or revitalize it. +o avoi, a misun,erstan,ing: our point is not the ol, .economic essentialist/ one accor,ing to which$ in the case of :nglan, to,a-$ the La%our victorreall- ,i, not change an-thing 5 an, as such is even more ,angerous than continuing +or- rule$ since it gave rise to the mislea,ing impression that there was a change. +here are a lot of things the La%our government can achieve1 it can contri%ute a lot to the passage from tra,itional :nglish parochial jingoism to a more .enlightene,/ li%eral ,emocrac- with a much stronger element of social soli,arit- <from health care to e,ucation=$ to the respect for human rights <in its ,iverse forms$ from women/s rights to the rights of ethnic groups=1 one shoul, use the La%our victor- as an incentive to revitalize the ,iverse forms of the struggle for Ogali%ertO. <0ith the Socialist electoral victor- in Drance$ the situation is even more am%iguous$ since Eospin/s programme ,oes contain some elements of a ,irect confrontation with the logic of capital.= :ven when the change is not su%stantial %ut a mere sem%lance of a new %eginning$ the verfact that a situation is perceive, %- the majorit- of the population as a .new %eginning/ opens up the space for important i,eological an, political rearticulations6as we have alrea,- seen$ the fun,amental lesson of the ,ialectic of i,eolog- is that appearances ,o matter. Nonetheless$ the post&Nation&State logic of capital remains the Real which lurks in the %ackgroun,$ while all three main leftist reactions to the process of glo%alization 5 li%eral multiculturalism1 the attempt to em%race populism %- wa- of ,iscerning$ %eneath its fun,amentalist appearance$ the resistance against .instrumental reason/1 the attempt to keep open the space of the political6seem inappropriate. 4lthough the last approach is %ase, on the correct insight a%out the complicit- %etween multiculturalism an, fun,amentalism$ it avoi,s the crucial 9uestion: how are we to reinvent political space in to,a-/s con,itions of glo%alization? +he politicization of the series of particular
an, articulates concrete 9uestions of how to survive within the famil-$ with chil,ren an, work. See :liza%eth Do2& Lenovese$ Deminism is Not the Stor- of m- Life$ New Mork ())?.

struggles which leaves intact the glo%al process of capital is clearl- not sufficient. 0hat this means is that one shoul, reject the opposition which$ within the frame of late capitalist li%eral ,emocrac-$ imposes itself as the main a2is of i,eological struggle: the tension %etween .open/ post&i,eological universalist li%eral tolerance an, the particularist .new fun,amentalisms/. 4gainst the li%eral centre which presents itself as neutral an, post&i,eological$ rel-ing on the rule of the Law$ one shoul, reassert the ol, leftist motif of the necessit- to suspen, the neutral space of Law. 'f course$ %oth the Left an, the Right involve their own mo,e of the suspension of the Law on %ehalf of some higher or more fun,amental interest. +he rightist suspension$ from anti&Jre-fusar,s to 'liver North$ acknowle,ges its violation of the letter of the Law$ %ut justifies it via the reference to some higher national interest: it presents its violation as a painful self&sacrifice for the goo, of the Nation "?. 4s to the leftist suspension$ suffice it to mention two films$ 8n,er Dire <Roger Spottiswoo,e$ ()FC= an, 0atch on the Rhine <Aerman Shumlin$ ()@C=. +he first takes place ,uring the Nicaraguan revolution$ when an 4merican photojournalist faces a trou%lesome ,ilemma: just prior to the victor- of the revolution$ Somozistas kill a charismatic San,inista lea,er$ so the San,inistas ask the journalist to fake a photograph of their ,ea, lea,er$ presenting him as alive an, thus %el-ing the Somozistas/ claims a%out his ,eath6in this wa-$ he woul, contri%ute to a swift victor- of the revolution an, re,uce %loo,she,. ;rofessional ethics$ of course$ strictl- prohi%it such an act$ since it violates the un%iase, o%jectivit- of reporting an, makes the journalist an instrument of the political fight1 the journalist nevertheless chooses the .leftist/ option an, fakes the picture. n 0atch on the Rhine$ %ase, on a pla- %- Lillian Aellmann$ this ,ilemma is even more aggravate,: in the late ()CGs$ a fugitive famil- of Lerman political emigrants involve, in the anti&Nazi struggle comes to sta- with their ,istant relatives$ an i,-llic all& 4merican small&town mi,,le&class famil-1 soon$ however$ the Lermans face an une2pecte, threat in the guise of an ac9uaintance of the 4merican famil-$ a rightist who %lackmails the emigrants an,$ via his contacts with the Lerman em%ass-$ en,angers mem%ers of the un,ergroun, in Lerman- itself. +he father of the emigrant famil- ,eci,es to kill him an, there%- puts the 4merican famil- in a ,ifficult moral ,ilemma: the empt- moralizing soli,arit- with the victims of Nazism is over1 now thehave effectivel- to take si,es an, ,irt- their han,s with covering up the killing. Aere also$ the famil- ,eci,es on the .leftist/ option. .Left/ is ,efine, %- this rea,iness to suspen, the a%stract moral frame$ or$ to paraphrase 7ierkegaar,$ to accomplish a political suspension of the :thical.

The $niversality to Co%e +he lesson of all this$ which gaine, actualit- in relation to the 0estern reaction to the Bosnian war$ is that there is no wa- to avoi, %eing partial$ since neutralit- involves taking si,es6in the case of the Bosnian war$ the .%alance,/ talk a%out the Balkan ethnic .tri%al warfare/ alrea,- en,orses the Ser%ian stan,point: the humanitarian li%eral e9ui,istance can easil- slip into or coinci,e with its opposite an, effectivel- tolerate the most violent .ethnic cleansing/. So$ in short$ the leftist ,oes not simpl- violate the
26

+he most concise formulation of the rightist suspension of pu%lic <legal= norms was provi,e, %- :amon ,e >alera: .+he people has no right to ,o wrong./

li%eral/s impartial neutralit-1 what he claims is that there is no such neutralit-. +he clichO of the li%eral 3entre$ of course$ is that %oth suspensions$ the rightist an, the leftist$ ultimatel- amount to the same$ to a totalitarian threat to the rule of Law. +he entire consistenc- of the Left hinges on proving that$ on the contrar-$ each of the two suspensions follows a ,ifferent logic. 0hile the Right legitimizes its suspension of the :thical %- its anti&universalist stance$ %- wa- of a reference to its particular <religious$ patriotic= i,entit- which overrules an- universal moral or legal stan,ar,s$ the Left legitimizes its suspension of the :thical precisel- %- means of a reference to the true 8niversalit- to come. 'r$ to put it in another wa-$ the Left simultaneousl- accepts the antagonistic character of societ- <there is no neutral position$ struggle is constitutive=$ an, remains universalist <speaking on %ehalf of universal emancipation=: in the leftist perspective$ accepting the ra,icall- antagonistic6that is$ political6character of social life$ accepting the necessit- of .taking si,es/$ is the onl- wa- to %e effectivel- universal. Aow are we to comprehen, this para,o2? t can onl- %e conceive, if the antagonism is inherent to universalit- itself$ that is$ if universalit- itself is split into the .false/ concrete universalit- which legitimizes the e2isting ,ivision of the 0hole into functional parts$ an, the impossi%le!real ,eman, of .a%stract/ universalit- <Bali%ar/s Ogali%ertO=. +he leftist political gesture par e2cellence <in contrast to the rightist motif .to each his or her own place/= is thus to 9uestion the concrete e2isting universal or,er on %ehalf of its s-mptom$ of the part which$ although inherent to the e2isting universal or,er$ has no .proper place/ within it <sa-$ illegal immigrants or the homeless in our societies=. +his proce,ure of i,entif-ing with the s-mptom is the e2act an, necessar- o%verse of the stan,ar, critical an, i,eological move of recognizing a particular content %ehin, some a%stract universal notion <.the UmanV of human rightl- is effectivel- the white male owner/=$ of ,enouncing the neutral universalit- as false: in it$ one patheticall- asserts <an, i,entifies with= the point of inherent e2ception!e2clusion$ the .a%ject/$ of the concrete positive or,er$ as the onl- point of true universalit-$ as the point which %elies the e2isting concrete universalit-. t is eas- to show that$ sa-$ the su%,ivision of the people who live in a countr- into .full/ citizens an, temporar- immigrant workers privileges .full/ citizens an, e2clu,es immigrants from the pu%lic space proper6in the same wa- in which man an, woman are not two species of a neutral universal genus of humanit-$ since the content of the genus as such involves some mo,e of .repression/ of the feminine1 much more pro,uctive$ theoreticall- as well as politicall-6since it opens up the wa- for the .progressive/ su%verting of hegemon-6is the opposite operation of i,entif-ing universalit- with the point of e2clusion$ in our case$ of sa-ing .we are all immigrant workers./ n a hierarchicall- structure, societ-$ the measure of its true universalit- resi,es in the wa- its parts relate to those .at the %ottom/$ e2clu,e, %an, from all others6in e2&Mugoslavia$ for e2ample$ universalit- was represente, %4l%anian an, Bosnian Muslims$ looke, ,own on %- all other nations. +he recent pathetic statement of soli,arit- .Sarajevo is the capital of :urope/ was also an e2emplar- case of such a notion of e2ception as em%o,-ing universalit-: the wa- the enlightene, li%eral :urope relate, to Sarajevo %ore witness to the wa- it relate, to itself$ to its universal notion"*.
27

+his$ perhaps$ is how one shoul, rea, Ranciere/s notion of singulier universel: the assertion of the singular e2ception as the locus of universalit- which simultaneousl- affirms an, su%verts the universalit- in 9uestion. 0hen we sa-$ .0e are all citizens of Sarajevo/$ we are o%viousl- making a .false/ nomination$ a nomination which violates the proper geopolitical ,isposition1 however$ precisel- as such$ this violation gives wor, to the injustice of the e2isting geopolitical or,er. See Eac9ues Rancieree$ La MOsentente$ ;aris ())#.

+his assertion of the universalit- of antagonism in no wa- entails that .in social life$ there is no ,ialogue$ onl- war/. Rightists speak of social <or se2ual= warfare$ while leftists speak of social <or class= struggle. +here are two variations on Eoseph Loe%%els/ infamous statement .0hen hear the wor, UcultureV$ reach for m- pistol/: .0hen hear the wor, UcultureV$ reach for m- che9ue&%ook/$ pronounce, %- the c-nical cinema pro,ucer in Lo,ar,/s MOpris$ an, the leftist :nlightene, reversal$ .0hen hear the wor, .gun/$ reach for culture./ 0hen to,a-/s neo&Nazi street&fighter hears the wor, .0estern 3hristian culture/$ he reaches for his gun in or,er to ,efen, it from the +urks$ 4ra%s$ Eews$ there%- ,estro-ing what he purports to ,efen,. Li%eral capitalism has no nee, for such ,irect violence: the market ,oes the jo% of ,estro-ing culture far more smoothl- an, efficientl-. n clear contrast to %oth these attitu,es$ the leftist :nlightenment is ,efine, %- the wager that culture can serve as an efficient answer to the gun: the out%urst of raw violence is a kin, of passage W l/acte roote, in the su%ject/s ignorance6as such$ it can %e counteracte, %- the struggle whose main form is reflective knowle,ge. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&