>I've said enough about Malthus & population thinking on various lists, so
>your quarrel must be with other LBO-talkers (like Max).
I wasn't quarreling on the issue itself, but as to whether it's possible to simply toss aside 'the problematic of self and other'. This is an occassion where I think it's at work.
>As for your
>remarks on 'migrants,' the French Revolution, & 'self/other problematic,' I
>think that the history of republicanism and imperialism can be better
>examined empirically than schematically. Philosophical considerations of
>race and nation of the kind offered by Balibar & Zizek, for instance, do
>not tell us much about the politics of Cuban-Americans and their fixation
>on Elian.
First, I think that US nationalism has some marked differences to Euro nationalism. In that sense, Balibar and Zizek don't always speak to US experiences. But so what? -- they're quite clear on that limitation and not everyone is in the US.
Second, unless that's what you might mean by a distinction between 'schematic' and 'empirical', then it makes little sense to me other than as, in turn, an implicit schematisation of a specific empirical instance. (I would also suggest that Balibar is not one who can easily be accused of disconnecting philosophy from consideration of empirical events and history, and nor for that matter would a careful reading of Zizek assert otherwise.)
Third, I haven't followed the battle over Elian, but what I have seen has been presented entirely through notions of the familial, not to mention a distinct reworking of the virgin birth, paternal rights and sovereignty... I wouldn't see this as separable from considerations of republicanism and imperialism, since in order to mobilise persons in a conflict, well, certain persons have to be mobilised.
>the philosophers who are trapped in an epistemic fallacy.
Epistemology is so alluring, such a mobile treasure-trove of transcendance.
>In any case, psychoanalysis offers no exit -- it simply inflates
>& eternalizes an aspect of what exists in ideology.
Eternalisation takes many forms, including that of granting validity to the empirical. But, then, I don't look to philosophy, or any kind of writing, to offer an "exit". That would be just too wacky.
Angela