Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 07:05:27 -0400
From: Alessandro Coricelli <alessandro.coricelli-AT-rcn.com>
Subject: Re: AUT: Bad Faith - was Black Blocks



--Apple-Mail-1890580561-1
	format=flowed;
	charset=us-ascii


On Thursday, July 26, 2001, at 01:21 AM, rcam wrote:

> Alessandro:
>
> : no, you're right. And you'd be right again if you stated that the
> : "models"(even as far forms of struggle, "tactics, are concerned) are
> : still to be determined(through practical experimentation) by the
> : "multitude".
>
> I'm much happier with this, than with what you wrote previously:
>
> : Again, from what I gather, the main (military) objective of the
> : "multitude" in Genoa was to force(creatively and, why not,
> : "theatrically") was to force the fences around the "zona rossa".
>
> What I got from previous discussion was a forsaking the concept of 
> (and a
> practice adequate to) the multitudes in favour of asserting a 
> sovereignty,
> setting about policing the borders of 'the anti-capitalist movement' and
> deporting those whom one wishes to cast as 'outsiders' or 'imports'.
> Multitude does not mean ya basta, 'the majority', 'united front', or 
> Genoa
> Social Forum, and it certainly does not mean the re-assertion of a 
> sovereign
> will that might be expressed in terms of an "objective".


what can I say? From a stand point, I don't see much of a contradiction 
in my two statements, from another , what you have been writing(saw your 
other posters) is very convincing.
OK, maybe I get it, and you're right.  With creativity, "brains" and 
"hearts" and "bodies" and "languages", we've got to think, see things,  
and act "plurally". I agree.


ciao,
alessandro

p.s. I can talk just for myself. I'm nobody.

--Apple-Mail-1890580561-1
	charset=us-ascii


On Thursday, July 26, 2001, at 01:21 AM, rcam wrote:


<excerpt>Alessandro:


: no, you're right. And you'd be right again if you stated that the

: "models"(even as far forms of struggle, "tactics, are concerned) are

: still to be determined(through practical experimentation) by the

: "multitude".


I'm much happier with this, than with what you wrote previously:


: Again, from what I gather, the main (military) objective of the

: "multitude" in Genoa was to force(creatively and, why not,

: "theatrically") was to force the fences around the "zona rossa".


What I got from previous discussion was a forsaking the concept of
(and a

practice adequate to) the multitudes in favour of asserting a
sovereignty,

setting about policing the borders of 'the anti-capitalist movement'
and

deporting those whom one wishes to cast as 'outsiders' or 'imports'.

Multitude does not mean ya basta, 'the majority', 'united front', or
Genoa

Social Forum, and it certainly does not mean the re-assertion of a
sovereign

will that might be expressed in terms of an "objective".

</excerpt>


what can I say? =46rom a stand point, I don't see much of a
contradiction in my two statements, from another , what you have been
writing(saw your other posters) is very convincing.

OK, maybe I get it, and you're right.  With creativity, "brains" and
"hearts" and "bodies" and "languages", we've got to think, see things,=20
and act "plurally". I agree. <color><param>0000,0000,DEB7</param>

</color>

<color><param>0000,0000,DEB7</param>

</color>ciao,

alessandro


p.s. I can talk just for myself. I'm nobody.
--Apple-Mail-1890580561-1--


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