Re: [Marxism] Apartheid States, Large and Small

["Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" <ok.president+marxml@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> "Open border" is a contradiction in itself.
>
> Were not borders quite open in the 19th-century?. Even passports wre a
> late development.
>
> When a coherent left appears in the u.s. Open Bordrs will certainly be
> one of its key demands -- if not THE key demand. There will be no
> revolution in the U.S. without great participation by "illegal"
> immigrants.
>
> Carrol

"Open borders" is an "infinite demand" (in the terminology of the
debate between Zizek and Critchley -- see
<http://www.readysteadybook.com/Blog.aspx?permalink=20080605062449>).

I think the question remains open: should we as leftists raise
"infinite" demands, or "finite" demands?

I think Zizek in his new book makes a pretty convincing case in favor
of raising "finite" demands. Zizek has written:

"The lesson here is that the truly subversive thing is not to insist
on 'infinite' demands we know those in power cannot fulfil. Since they
know that we know it, such an 'infinitely demanding' attitude presents
no problem for those in power: 'So wonderful that, with your critical
demands, you remind us what kind of world we would all like to live
in. Unfortunately, we live in the real world, where we have to make do
with what is possible.'

The thing to do is, on the contrary, to
bombard those in power with strategically well-selected, precise,
finite demands, which can't be met with the same excuse."

 <http://www.long-sunday.net/long_sunday/2007/11/finitely-demand.html>

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu