PhD Student, Political Science
University of California, Irvine
In this paper, I aim to explicate the work of Herbert Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man and will situate this discussion in contemporary issues in border studies.2 The relevance of border studies and Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man is that there is a common theme of creation as well as the maintenance of normative social behaviours and structures that are incapable of perceiving alternatives to existing realities.3 Marcuse’s work falls along four main themes. The first is his concept of the one-dimensional man where he asserts that both public and private realms have become compartmentalized in a system of social domination.4 Second, technological rationality has developed the material basis of realizing human freedom, but is utilized in a suppressive manner, and there is a logic of rational productivity as well as consumption which fuels the capitalist system as a system of suppressed consumerism.5 Third, Marcuse argues that there is a process of “negative” dialectical thinking which sees existing realities as “other than they actually are” which denies the possibilities inherent in pre-existing realities, and is necessary in order to realize the liberatory possibilities in reality.6 Finally, Marcuse’s fourth theme addresses the difficulty for individuals to overcome the system of domination through technological rationality and that society concentrates all of its material power in the present establishment of capitalism in order to deny and prevent other alternatives from emerging to resist capitalism as the current prevailing socio-economic order.7
I begin by explicating Marcuse’s four themes central to his theory of a one-dimensional society. I will then touch on borders and the role that borders play in modern society, as well as some problematic issues concerning borders. Specifically, I focus on the case of the Blackfoot tribe, an indigenous group that resides in North America, and lives across the Alberta-Montana border. After this, I apply Marcuse’s theories of consumerism, domination, and technological rationality in the field of border studies, and argue that it best explains the contemporary problems present in borders.
The Public and the Private – Social Domination?
Marcuse argues that within the context of the capitalist system, that both public and private realms have become conflated with one another in a system of social domination.8 More specifically, he argues that humans are capable of rationality, and that rationalization is a form of domination. Marcuse argues that rationality, and in particular, technological rationality has produced a highly productive society in the form of consumerism in capitalism.9 In order to elucidate this discussion in terms of how social domination exactly affects the public and the private realms, Marcuse argues for a cultivation of necessities. Marcuse indicates that there is a distinction to be had for true needs and false needs. True needs include food, water, and shelter, and essentially are necessities that are absolutely necessary in terms of sustaining human life. Inversely, false needs are needs that have been constructed by society.10 Marcuse indicates that the problematic aspects associated with the cultivation of false needs is that they can only be met and satisfied through consuming products of the capitalist system. Marcuse coins this phenomenon as repressive desublimation. Repressive desublimation is a psychological state whereby individuals are conditioned to believe that false needs are true needs and that since false needs can be met through continual consumption of products created by capitalism, it leads people to believe that they are comfortable and satisfied.11For Marcuse, this is a concept that is detrimental to human life and human society, as it makes humans docile and unable to resist the effects of the consumerist capitalist culture.
This concept of domination as well as false and true needs ultimately links the realm of the public and the private together under a form of social control. False needs become internalized within our private lives and, as individuals, we become bound to consumption for satisfaction. Alternatively, true needs are still present within society in both a public and private sense, as we still require the basic necessities of life in order to survive. The reason why domination is successful in our private lives is because we associate the idea of false needs with that of true needs.
Consumption, Technological Rationality and Productivity
Central to Marcuse’s theory of a one-dimensional society is the relationship between consumption, technological rationality, and productivity. These three aspects work together in a positivist relationship, as a means to affirm and validate their existence within a capitalist society.12 For Marcuse, consumption is a natural part of being human, as consumption is necessary in order to satisfy our true and false needs. For example, if I am hungry, I will look to consume food in order to satiate this hunger, as a true need. Alternatively, if a new laptop is released on the market, and I desire to purchase it, I will purchase it in order to satiate my desire of wanting this particular laptop, as a false need. The distinction between true needs and false needs is that true needs are necessary in order to survive, where as false needs are necessities that we think we need in order to survive, but can survive without them. Consumption is at the heart of Marcuse’s theory as without consumption, it is impossible to have a capitalist system that is predicated on a supply-demand chain. The capitalist-consumption distinction is a major issue that is theorized by Marxists and the Frankfurt School, specifically in the 1st generation of the Frankfurt school. Structural Marxists argue that the state functions to serve the long-term interests of the bourgeois class, and this argument becomes made clearer further into the paper when I associate the market of migration as a capitalist venture that is supported by the state.13 Alternatively, the first generation of the Frankfurt School, specifically Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer outline a culture industry of consumption in that manufactured goods are produced in a uniform and consistent manner which results in an ease of consumption and the deception of choice between objects of consumption.14 I focus on this idea later on in the paper as passports are objects that are created with uniform technologies with biometric data. Returning to Marcuse, technological rationality is another concept in his work as it relies on two aspects. First, it relies on the fact that humans are rational creatures. Second, it assumes that creation is a product of rationality.15 The argument that Marcuse posits for technological rationality is that rational decision-making on a day to day basis ultimately incorporates technology and technological advances which can eventually change what is considered rational within that particular society.16 Finally, productivity is a key theory present in Marcuse. There are two elements of productivity in that there is a performative element of productivity as well as a rational element of productivity. Productivity is performative in the sense that it works within the schema of capitalism in that there is a maximization of production and profit which has created the preconditions for a qualitatively different and non-repressive form of life.17 More specifically, the performance principle presupposes a developmental period where domination becomes rationalized and that control over social labour reproduces society on a large scale which generally improves the material conditions of society.18 Productivity holds a rational component as it is conjoined with the nature of capitalism, which is a system of efficiency and where the social as well as economic value of a given commodity can be quantitatively measured.
Consumption, technological rationality and productivity all work in relation to each other in order to affirm their necessity within society as a mode of positivist thinking. Consumption is seen as a necessity in order to satisfy both false and true needs alike. Technological rationality is necessary in that technology is utilized to produce goods and services en masse in order to satiate both our false and true needs in a rational and systematic way. Finally, productivity is required in order to create any sort of goods or services within the context of the capitalist market. To simplify this, we can see consumption as the demand made manifest for a particular good or service, and production as a means to fulfill this demand. The method of fulfilling this demand is through the processes of technological rationality.
Negative Thinking and the Denial of Alternate Possibilities
Negative thinking, for Marcuse, is two-dimensional as it holds the capability of bearing witness to the contradictions present within a capitalist consumerist society and it is aware and cognizant of the forces of domination that are present in society.19 The purpose of dialectical or negative thinking is to expose the flaws present in society and then to overcome these contradictions present in society through revolutionary action.20 It is through negative dialectical thinking that we see a Marxist influence in Marcuse’s work, in that revolution serves as the agent of change within a society dominated by mass consumerism and capitalism. The difficulty for realizing revolution, for Marcuse, is that capitalist society produces contradictions and forms of domination, but also produces the social and psychological conditions that conceal these contradictions.21
The problem that Marcuse notes in the contradictions found in capitalism and consumerism is that they cannot be overcome from within or by capitalism itself. There are problematic aspects in society, which will naturally hold inherent contradictions and forms of domination, but these are papered over and concealed by producing social or psychological conditions that restrict our mode of thought.22 For Marcuse, these productions of social or psychological conditions prevent us from realizing alternate possibilities to society. Marcuse argues that negative dialectical thinking allows us to bear witness to the contradictions and forms of domination in society so that we may resist them and create a different reality, on a collective level.
Overcoming the Positivism of Capitalism and Technological Rationality
Marcuse argues that it is possible to overcome the system of capitalism as a form of domination, but notes that there are several difficulties in doing so. For one, capitalism is affirmed through positivist thinking in that it is a system that reaffirms its own existence as a result of the interplay of the relationship between consumerism, technological rationality and productivity. The second is that society concentrates all of its material power in its present form of capitalism in order to deny and prevent other alternatives from emerging in order to resist capitalism.23 This is closely linked with Marcuse’s idea of positivist thinking as a mode of thinking that denies possibilities to reality as it creates contradictions which are then concealed through social and psychological conditioning of society as a whole. The difficulty with positivist thinking is that rejecting it outright appears to be highly illogical, irrational and ineffective. To reject positivist thinking in capitalism, the cycle of consumption and production does not stop because one individual resists the positivist nature of capitalism. Rather, Marcuse’s goal is to create enough awareness of the insidious nature of capitalism in society so that society as a whole can resist capitalism and imagine a different reality.
Borders and Marcuse
My discussion of borders in relation to Marcuse will be situated in two arguments. The first argument focuses on the modern practices of constructing, maintaining and regulating borders. I aim to demonstrate that borders have been constructed as a means of creating an exception and to keep people out of a particular space. By exceptionality, I draw upon Giorgio Agamben’s definition of the state of exception. Agamben defines the state of exception as: the increase of power by governments which they employ under times of crisis and in a state of emergency.24 Agamben refers to the state of exception as a state where constitutional rights are diminished, reduced, and rejected in the process of claiming this increase of power by governments.25 On the one hand, citizens are directly affected by the state of exception by having their rights denied. On the other hand, the state of exception when applied to border studies denies individuals from entering a given state by treating them as the “other”. This creates a fracture between two politicized groups, the recognized “friend” and the unrecognized “other”. Furthermore, in drawing upon Marcuse’s One Dimensional Man, I contend that borders have emerged as a profitable capitalist market. The main theme of borders that I focus on is the overarching ethos of security as well as the creation of the “other” which creates a market for regulating borders and ensuring state sovereignty. This culture of security presupposes that there is an object of protection and an agent capable of violating the object of protection. In invoking Marcuse’s One-Dimensional Man, I argue that technology has created an easily controlled border made possible by imposing a capitalist system of mass consumption and production.
The second argument that I make focuses on the one-dimensional aspect of borders and how existing cases circumvent the current concept of borders as a one-dimensional reality. This reality of borders, I argue, is a process of moderating the human right of movement, which is granted through various human rights doctrines in liberal democratic societies. The reality of borders is contingent on mutual recognition of two or more sovereign states that have delineated their territory.26 The example that I will draw upon includes marginalized groups in Canadian society. In particular, the Blackfoot tribe has their ancestral territory that spans between the Alberta-Montana border. The Blackfoot tribe fosters a culture that is not at all synonymous with Canadian western culture.27 The Blackfoot peoples demonstrate the possibility of another dimension of society that is outside the mainstream, and another industry for borders.28 This is to say that the Blackfoot peoples do not recognize Canadian or American society as their own society, and they do not recognize the borders delineated by the sovereign states of Canada or the United States.29 This example of the Aboriginal peoples challenges the notion of a totalizing view of a One-Dimensional Society when situating this discussion in the practice of borders. I will extend my argument of the role of the passport in modern society in relation to the Aboriginal peoples in Canada and how the Canadian government has created concessions for the Aboriginal peoples in relation to the border. In particular, First Nation Canadian Indians and Aboriginal peoples are allowed to present their Secure Certificate of Indian Status (SCIS), accompanied with photo identification in order to cross the Canada-America border. This exception of documentation that was created and agreed upon by both Canada and the USA has effectively integrated the Aboriginal peoples into the western culture of border practices and created a sense of one-dimensionality at the border. This is due to the fact that Aboriginal peoples have consented to the borders delineated by Canada and the United States and consented to the agreement of providing documentation in order to cross borders.30 However, an argument can be made where concessions made for the Blackfoot tribe has also created a sense of one-dimensionality at the border by concealing and preventing the alternate possibility of travelling without documentation from occurring for the Aboriginal peoples.
These two arguments culminate in the argument that borders are one dimensional and are influenced by technology, but there are alternatives to the common practice of borders. Furthermore, these alternatives offer possible contestations to the totalizing nature of a one-dimensional society. For Marcuse, this is a contestation of the possible and the actual. In the context of the border, the border is the actual, but the possible are the alternatives that are generated as a result of border practices. However, in response to these alternatives to the common practice of borders, countries are quashing these alternate realities in order to create a uniform border practice which perpetuates a cycle of contesting the reality of alternatives and conflating the actual with the possible.
Creating and Maintaining the One-Dimensional Border
In this section, I argue that political borders have been constructed, maintained and regulated in order to keep certain individuals out of a particular space, but mostly to allow particular individuals within this same space. Agamben’s state of exception can serve as an explanation for why borders have been created. Agamben’s theory, when applied to border studies accomplishes two things. First, citizens, lose their rights as citizens, which jeopardizes their political existence. In this particular situation, there is a suspension of the rights of citizens in order to increase political power with the goal of mobilizing a particular action. Second, those that are deemed to be enemies of the state are still denied by the state and are not admitted into the sovereign territory of the state because of a state of emergency.31 The state of exception affects the rights of movement for citizens and non-citizens alike. To connect Agamben to Marcuse, I argue that borders have emerged as a profitable capitalist market in the next section.
The main theme of borders in terms of their construction, maintenance and regulation is the idea of security and the creation of an “Other” which creates a market for regulating borders. This can be best explained in talking about state expenditures on borders and immigration. First, a physical border has to be created in order to keep the “Other” out. There is a market for the creation of borders which emerges because of a friend-enemy distinction. In other words, security propagates the spending of resources in order to ensure protection and safety. Second, a method to regulate border passage needs to be employed. The current method is the use of passports or official travel documentation. There is a market present for passports in that passports need to be obtained from a state in order to travel. There is a demand for foreign nationals to possess a passport when crossing borders abroad. Passports are regulated and distributed by various governments, but there are still costs associated to passports, which creates a market for the producer of the passport, the government, and the consumer of the passport, the traveler. There is a political value attributed to passports in that certain passports are “stronger” than other passports which gives particular humans social and political advantages over other individuals that may have “weaker” passports.32 The strength of a passport can be evaluated by the number of visa agreements that the country’s passport has with other countries. The problem with passports and nationality is that for the most part, individuals are unable to determine their own nationality or national identity, in systems that both employ jus soli or jus sanguinis principles. For example, if an individual is born in the United States of America, and is a holder of a US passport, they are afforded many benefits, as the USA has 157 visa agreements with different countries.33 This means that citizens of the USA that possess a passport can travel to 157 countries without having to apply for a visa in advance of their trip. Alternatively, if an individual is born in Afghanistan, and travel, Afghanistan has only 24 visa agreements with different countries, which results in difficulties with travelling.34 In other words, in countries that have more visa agreements, there is a sense of a passport privilege in that travelers can move with ease between countries. Alternatively, for countries that have fewer visa agreements, travelers need to purchase visas before being able to travel, which perpetuates a market for migration. In other words, for individuals that come from countries that have “weaker passports”, they are more vulnerable and susceptible to the capitalist enterprise of travel and migration.
Next, there is a market present in border profiling in that border officials need to be trained in how to profile individuals that cross borders, and trained in the use of various technologies in order to profile individuals. This connects to my final point where security measures are employed to ensure that border crossings are legitimate and safe. Border technologies like full body scanners and metal detectors ensure that individuals crossing borders are not armed with illicit goods.35 Border technologies need to be created, maintained and utilized, which creates a market for border technologies and border officials to man these technologies. With these three processes, technology plays a large role in the creation, maintenance and regulation of borders which is motivated by the capitalist logic of productivity and consumption.
The border is one-dimensional because border crossings are compartmentalized into a system of social domination in that individuals that seek to cross borders are subject to the border crossing policies and processes.36 The border agent is the sole authority that can either allow or refuse entry into a country. There is a clear power differential between the individual that crosses the border and the border agent that mans the border. The individual does not have any power in determining his or her freedom of movement when looking to move across borders; instead, this ability to move across borders is determined by the border official. Second, technological rationality and the role of technology in border security can be used in order to allow for the unrestrained freedom of movement, but instead it is utilized in a suppressive manner, to control the movement of individuals.37 Within this restriction of movement and the use of technology, there is a logic of rational productivity that emerges due to security. In other words, it is more profitable to subject individuals to acquiring passports and/or visas for travel, creating borders, training officials to regulate these borders, and to create technologies that would assist in regulating or maintaining these borders. Inversely, it would not be profitable to have open borders and to allow individuals to cross territories without any restrictions as security violations would likely occur and that there would no longer be a market for border or movement controls.
Currently, there are both legal and illegal markets to migration and border crossings. Legal markets for movement are subject to the system of domination within borders which require the possession of legal documents, and to be subject to border practices. Within the legal market for border crossing, there is a system of domination which is dehumanizing as individuals become “sterilized” at the border, and that passports hold more value compared to human life, as passports determine the eligibility of movement which is determined by a border official. Illegal markets for movement involve smuggling and illegal migration. Illegal markets are also subject to the dominating practices of border controls, and as a result must constantly find new methods to circumvent border practices which are constantly improving due to technological innovations. Therefore, the construction, maintenance and regulation of borders results in the suppression of freedoms as a result of domination within border practices that are propagated by technological rationality and instrumental rationality in capitalism.
An Alternate Reality of the Marcusian Border?
In this section, I focus on the case of the Blackfoot tribe and how the Canadian-American border exists as a social structure that is unable to perceive alternative to existing realities. First, I begin with a brief explication of the Blackfoot tribe and some of the issues that they face. Specifically, I focus on how the Blackfoot tribe has historically faced difficulties by both the Canadian and American government in respect to providing legal documentation in order to cross the Canada-U.S. border. Second, I outline how, in the past, the Blackfoot peoples were able to resist the requirement of legal documentation by illegally crossing the Canada-U.S. border. In this section, I argue that Marcuse’s logic of a negative dialectic can be applied as a means of resistance against the totality of borders and immigration. Finally, I focus on the current landscape for the Blackfoot tribe and how both the Canadian and U.S. government created concessions for Indigenous peoples, and created the Secure Certificate of Indian Status (SCIS) as a legal document specifically for Indigenous peoples in Canada and the United States, which results in the integration of the Indigenous peoples into the western culture of border practices, and creates a sense of one-dimensionality at the border.
The Blackfoot tribe is an Indigenous group that has their ancestral territory that spans between the Alberta-Montana border. The Blackfoot tribe, like many other Indigenous communities, fosters a culture that is not at all synonymous with Canadian western culture.38 In Canada, Indigenous communities were forced to assimilate into Anglo or Franco western culture, which resulted in a loss of land, culture, language and history. However, the Blackfoot peoples demonstrate the possibility of another dimension of society that is outside the mainstream, and another industry for borders. This is to say that the Blackfoot peoples do not recognize Canadian or American society as their own society, and they do not recognize the borders delineated by Canada or the United States. The problem becomes one of recognition. Both the Canadian and American governments require all individuals that are travelling internationally, across borders, to possess a passport in order to verify the holder’s identity. Failure to provide a passport upon entry into Canada or the United States can result in being held and/or deported. Thus, this results in a tumultuous relationship between the Blackfoot tribe, whose ancestral territory spans across the Canada-U.S. border, and the Canadian and American governments, who require legal documentation in order to cross borders. The Blackfoot tribe, in recent history, eschewed attempts from both the Canadian and American government to “modernize” with the border, and acquire passports in order to make their border crossings safer and more secure for all parties involved, as they perceived this to be a form of forced assimilation into western culture.
In order to circumvent the problem of borders and providing legal documentation at the Canada-U.S. border, the Blackfoot tribe has historically illegally crossed the land border, and as a result, resisted the requirement of both Canada and the U.S. to provide legal documentation. What makes this remarkable is that in the face of two sovereign states, with two delineated territories, that the Blackfoot tribe resists the imposition of a border that cuts across their ancestral territory. I argue that here, we can find the beginnings of Marcuse’s negative dialectics, which reveals the contradictions present within borders in that borders have historically been created to keep foreigners out, while ensuring the security of the state and its citizens. However, in the case of the Blackfoot peoples, they are not foreigners to North America, they are the original inhabitants of North America prior to settler-colonialism and forced assimilation. For Marcuse, the purpose of negative thinking is to expose the flaws present in society, in this case with borders, and to overcome these contradictions through revolutionary action. For the Blackfoot peoples, this revolutionary action was the clandestine crossing of the Canada-U.S. border. What makes the border an insidious social construct is that it produces contradictions and forms of domination, but also produces the social and psychological conditions that conceal these contradictions.
Currently, the Indigenous peoples of Canada and the Canadian government have come to an agreement for the problem of presenting legal documentation at the border. The Canadian government has created concessions for the Indigenous peoples, specifically regarding border crossings. In particular, First Nation Canadian Indians and Indigenous peoples are allowed to present their Secure Certificate of Indian Status (SCIS), accompanied with a photo in order to cross the Canada-America border.39 This exception of documentation that was created and agreed upon by Canada and the US, which has resulted in the integration of the Indigenous peoples into the western culture of border practices and created a sense of one-dimensionality at the border. This is due to the fact that Indigenous peoples have consented to the borders delineated by Canada and the United States and consented to the agreement of providing documentation in order to cross borders. For Marcuse, we can see the creation of a One-Dimensional Border where concessions made for the Blackfoot tribe has also created a sense of one-dimensionality at the border by concealing and preventing the alternate possibility of travelling without documentation from occurring for the Aboriginal peoples.
There are two lessons that can be taken from this example concerning the Blackfoot tribe. On the one hand, this example demonstrates that an alternate reality of borders is possible, and that this alternate reality resists the capitalist system of borders. This is to say that the Blackfoot peoples have innovated new ways to cross borders without directly contributing to the system of constructing, maintaining and regulating borders. However, the second lesson that can be taken from this case study is one that is far less inspiring. The problem is that the Aboriginal tribes consented to a form of documentation that was recognized by both the Canadian and the American government. In doing so, the Blackfoot peoples have subject themselves into the positivist nature of capitalism in borders. Their special documentation, the Aboriginal identification card, contributes to insidious elements inherent within capitalism. For one, all Aboriginal peoples require this form of documentation in place of a passport in order to cross a border, which effectively creates a market for this type of documentation. Next, when utilizing this documentation to officially move across borders, they must be subject to the same border controls that regular individuals are subject to. When connecting this example to Marcuse’s theory of capitalism as a form of positivist logic, he argued that capitalism concentrates all of its energies and material wealth into itself, which makes it extremely difficult for alternatives to capitalism from emerging in society.40 In other words, though the Aboriginal peoples demonstrated years of resistance to both the sovereign states of Canada and America, once they consented to the political borders that were delineated by both states and to their form of border controls, they effectively lost the capacity to realize an alternate reality in the context of the capitalism of borders. The problem with this case study is that it demonstrates the capability of resistance and negative dialectics, when the Aboriginal peoples did not consent to the delineated border, and conducted their movement in a clandestine fashion. In this way, Marcuse’s articulation of negative dialectics can be attributed to this case study in terms of demonstrating the flaws inherent within a capitalist enterprise of immigration and borders. However, the major difficulty that arises is when the Aboriginal peoples consented to the Government of Canada and the border. The concession that was made for the Aboriginal peoples is in the form of the SCIS, and in this way, the Aboriginal peoples were reintegrated into the capitalist enterprise of borders and immigration. To conclude, this case study is meant to illustrate the emancipatory potential of negative dialectics and resistance to a capitalistic structure, in this case, of borders and immigration.
In this paper, I began by explicating Marcuse’s four main themes of a one-dimensional society. Briefly put, his four themes are: public and private realms have become compartmentalized in a system of social domination; technological rationality has developed the material basis of human freedom, but is utilized in a suppressive manner, and there is a logic of rational productivity as well as consumption which fuels the capitalist system as a system of suppressed consumerism; there is a process of “negative” dialectical thinking which sees existing realities as “other than they actually are” which denies the possibilities inherent in pre-existing realities, and is necessary in order to realize the liberatory possibilities in reality; and the difficulty for individuals to overcome the system of domination through technological rationality and that society concentrates all of its material power in the present establishment of capitalism in order to deny and prevent other alternatives from emerging to resist capitalism.
Next, I applied Marcuse’s theory of a one-dimensional society in order to critique the capitalist structure that is present found in borders. I demonstrated a possibility of challenging the capitalist system of borders by invoking the example of the Blackfoot peoples, who demonstrated an alternative to conventional border practices. The Blackfoot tribe, in the past, traversed the US-Canada border in a clandestine fashion, but their movement has become regulated by both the Canadian and American governments through the requirement of possessing particular Aboriginal-specific documentation. This culminates in the argument that Marcuse’s theories of consumerism, domination, and technological rationality, when applied in the field of border studies, best explains the contemporary problems present in borders.
Adorno, Theodor W., and Max Horkheimer. Dialectic of enlightenment. Vol. 15. Verso, 1997. Print.
Agamben, Giorgio. State of Exception. Chicago: U of Chicago, 2005. Print.
Althusser, Louis. For Marx. Verso Press. 2005. Print.
Helleiner, Jane. "Over the River: Border childhoods and border crossings at Niagara." Childhood 14.4 (2007).
Karyotis, Georgios. "European migration policy in the aftermath of September 11: The security–migration nexus." Innovation 20.1 (2007).
Lukács, György. History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectics. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1971. Print.
Marcuse, Herbert. One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced society. Routledge, 2013. Print.
Schmitt, Carl. The concept of the political: Expanded edition. University of Chicago Press, 2008. Print.
Somerville, Margaret, and Tony Perkins. "Border work in the contact zone: Thinking Indigenous/non-Indigenous collaboration spatially." Journal of Intercultural Studies 24.3 (2003).
Sparke, Matthew B. "A neoliberal nexus: Economy, security and the biopolitics of citizenship on the border." Political geography 25.2 (2006).
Weber, Max, Peter Lassman, and Ronald Speirs. Weber: Political Writings. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1994. Print.
Wissler, Clark. Material culture of the Blackfoot Indians. Vol. 5. The Trustees, 1910.
1 I thank Terry Maley, Robert Latham, Lucas Osterreich, Mackenzie Galway, Tanisha Jacob, the ASPECT Conference @ Virginia Tech – especially Jordan Laney, Shelby Ward, Eli Jamison and Christian Matheis for providing excellent critiques on the first draft of this paper, the Political Theory discussion group at the University of California, Irvine – especially Chungjae Lee, Stacey Liou, Benjamin Hoyt and Anna Setyaeva.
2 See: Vaughan-Williams 2009; Aradau 2008; and Guild 2009.
3 Marcuse, Herbert. One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced society. Routledge, 2013. p.4.
4 Ibid, p.15.
5 Ibid, p.32.
6 Ibid,. p.56.
7 Ibid, p.77.
8 Ibid, p.23.
9 Ibid, p.25.
10 Ibid, p.31.
11 Ibid, p.36.
12 Ibid, p.63.
13 Althusser, Louis. For Marx. Verso Press. 2005. Print.
14 Adorno, Theodor W., and Max Horkheimer. Dialectic of enlightenment. Vol. 15. Verso, 1997.
15 Marcuse, Herbert. One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced society. Routledge, 2013, p.78.