zizek on kurricane katrina
the often curmudegonly arts and letters daily really came through today, when it lead me to a rather wonderful slavoj zizek essay concerning hurricane katrina. like a lot of people, i maintain an ongoing attraction/repulsion to zizek, but in this one, he puts his tendency to over-antagonize things aside, and gets down to the real nitty gritty of american chauvinism. a taste:
A couple of years ago, an ominous decision of the European Union passed almost unnoticed: a plan to establish an all-European border police force to secure the isolation of the Union territory, so as to prevent the influx of the immigrants. This is the truth of globalization: the construction of new walls safeguarding the prosperous Europe from a flood of immigrants. One is tempted to resuscitate here the old Marxist “humanist” opposition of “relations between things” and “relations between persons”: In the much celebrated free circulation opened up by the global capitalism, it is “things” (commodities) which freely circulate, while the circulation of “persons” is more and more controlled. We are thus not dealing with “globalization as an unfinished project,” but with a true “dialectics of globalization.” The segregation of the people is the reality of economic globalization. This new racism of the developed world is in a way much more brutal than the previous one: Its implicit legitimization is neither naturalist (the “natural” superiority of the developed West) nor culturalist (we in the West also want to preserve our cultural identity). Rather, it ‘s an unabashed economic egotism-the fundamental divide is the one between those included into the sphere of (relative) economic prosperity and those excluded from it.
two more related thoughts:
1. it's a shame that the hurricane has overshadowed the humanitarian crisis that most directly followed it, namely the earthquake in the middle east. i went so gung-ho after katrina, that i put my sally-struthers-impulse aside, i guess. but i should mention that certain organizations are doing things to help, and we should all support them.
2.
as upsetting as it's been to find many of my good-hearted-white-liberal-friends resistant to the idea that "hurricane katrina was about race," what is even more disturbing is the stabilzing, therapuetic effect that blaming it on class has for such people. i have recently forbid myself from arguing about the hurricane (hence punchy blog post), after a series of snarky everyday conversations that went nowhere. and in each of them, the same process occurred: the hurricane comes up in conversation, i bring up the issue of race/racism, my friend/opponent expresses doubts about that argument... and OUT OF THE CLEAR BLUE SKY along comes "class" to make us all feel better.
how estranged has american culture become from any sense of co-operative action when a word like "class" is our buzzword of touchy-feely indifference? when these talking heads on television (or, for that matter, in my everyday life) point to "class" as the culprit, the conversation effectively stops there. "class" equals conversation over-- you've expressed your tepid "concern" in the most inoffensive manner possible and may then retreat back into your everyday indifference. "class," in this guise, equals an unfortunate circumstance, glossing over the very-real institutional cruelty that emerged before our very eyes in NOLA. it mirrors the "natural distaster" itself, as something omnipotent and indiscriminate over which we have little power.
now, of course, the real definition of class has nothing to do with any of this. i wish to hell people would remember it. rant over. good night!
A couple of years ago, an ominous decision of the European Union passed almost unnoticed: a plan to establish an all-European border police force to secure the isolation of the Union territory, so as to prevent the influx of the immigrants. This is the truth of globalization: the construction of new walls safeguarding the prosperous Europe from a flood of immigrants. One is tempted to resuscitate here the old Marxist “humanist” opposition of “relations between things” and “relations between persons”: In the much celebrated free circulation opened up by the global capitalism, it is “things” (commodities) which freely circulate, while the circulation of “persons” is more and more controlled. We are thus not dealing with “globalization as an unfinished project,” but with a true “dialectics of globalization.” The segregation of the people is the reality of economic globalization. This new racism of the developed world is in a way much more brutal than the previous one: Its implicit legitimization is neither naturalist (the “natural” superiority of the developed West) nor culturalist (we in the West also want to preserve our cultural identity). Rather, it ‘s an unabashed economic egotism-the fundamental divide is the one between those included into the sphere of (relative) economic prosperity and those excluded from it.
two more related thoughts:
1. it's a shame that the hurricane has overshadowed the humanitarian crisis that most directly followed it, namely the earthquake in the middle east. i went so gung-ho after katrina, that i put my sally-struthers-impulse aside, i guess. but i should mention that certain organizations are doing things to help, and we should all support them.
2.
as upsetting as it's been to find many of my good-hearted-white-liberal-friends resistant to the idea that "hurricane katrina was about race," what is even more disturbing is the stabilzing, therapuetic effect that blaming it on class has for such people. i have recently forbid myself from arguing about the hurricane (hence punchy blog post), after a series of snarky everyday conversations that went nowhere. and in each of them, the same process occurred: the hurricane comes up in conversation, i bring up the issue of race/racism, my friend/opponent expresses doubts about that argument... and OUT OF THE CLEAR BLUE SKY along comes "class" to make us all feel better.
how estranged has american culture become from any sense of co-operative action when a word like "class" is our buzzword of touchy-feely indifference? when these talking heads on television (or, for that matter, in my everyday life) point to "class" as the culprit, the conversation effectively stops there. "class" equals conversation over-- you've expressed your tepid "concern" in the most inoffensive manner possible and may then retreat back into your everyday indifference. "class," in this guise, equals an unfortunate circumstance, glossing over the very-real institutional cruelty that emerged before our very eyes in NOLA. it mirrors the "natural distaster" itself, as something omnipotent and indiscriminate over which we have little power.
now, of course, the real definition of class has nothing to do with any of this. i wish to hell people would remember it. rant over. good night!