From: "Chris Wright" <cwright-AT-21stcentury.net>
Subject: Re: AUT: An interesting critique of Negri
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 23:10:22 -0600


Just in case it isn't clear, this whole "multitudes" thing is Negri, not
Holloway.  He has gone back to Spinoza, who is nothing if not abstruse and
turgid (note, intentional word choice:).  Not that John Holloway and the
folks who used to put out Common Sense always made life easy, but they
tended to be much clearer.  Negri is awfully painful to read, IMO.

Anyway, enough defending Senor Holloway.  Just wanted to be clear on whose
much was whose.

Cheers,
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ilan Shalif" <gshalif-AT-netvision.net.il>
To: <aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 4:45 AM
Subject: Re: AUT: An interesting critique of Negri


> Hi Peter and people.
>
> > On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 08:38:05PM +0200, Ilan Shalif wrote:
> > > Hi people.
> > > I just wonder if John Holloway or any other
> > > care to translate the texts regarding this discussion
> > > to a simple language every high school graduate who
> > > use English as second language can understand
> > > easily.
>
> It was a kind of a rhetoric question.
> (Ph.D. in psychology and fluent English that leave the electronic
dictionaly alone.)
>
> Incerting concepts like 'multitudes' and others smells with elitism if
> not worse.
>
> > Ilan - which bits in particular did you have a problem with? Maybe I
> > can do some translating...
>
> It was a bit of effort to get used to the new Jargon and discover
> that it does not include much new wisdom as it pretend.
> Ilan
>
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---