Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2001 06:47:47 -0700 Subject: Re: AUT: Getting back to Negri and Empire From: Sharon Vance <canito3-AT-earthlink.net> > > > Hi all, I've been away earning a living. Doing what? I know it is a personal question, but we have after all been discussing class, and class position. And I am just curious, I want to see if commie00's theory about one's class position and political position is correct. Back now and trying to catch up. > Seems in my 231 messages from this list, things have degenerated into a > pissing contest. So be it. Yay freedom of speech. > Anyway, Are we still on Empire? > One post asked for some commentary on the first part: i.e. the definition of > Empire as seen by Hardt Negri. So Negri and Hardt think that Empire is some benign system devoid of exploitation? This is the sense I get from your post here. > > Once power has been consolidated and constitutionalised, it's object is > destroyed, and the power dissolved. In Empire, struggle is futile because it > has become un-necessary: Left to it's own devices, national cultural and > social barriers will find their own levels, without the benefit of > theoretical input from any philosophical corner. The nard part to digest > about this is the instant obscelesence of an entire segment of leftist (and I > really hate words that end in "ist" and :ism") thought. > Those who have been alienated are those who still beat their tired drum > against the voices of change. > Truly the economic models prevalent in today's structures are far beyond > anything Spinoza, Marx, or Lenin could ever have imagined would be in place. What are these? Are they also beyond an unemployed workers' grasp? Are they beyond the grasp of a worker in a sweat shop? Is the race to the bottom something we can't understand? Or are these things not part of the complex economy you are referring to? > There is simply no philosophical mechanism in these camps to deal with the > present situation of globalization. Negri, instead of railing against it, has > seen it for the > mollifying influence it can be, if used (and I mean this constructively) > properly. > > It has been said that any tool can be a weapon if held properly. I also > believe that any obstacle can be a tool if approached correctly. > So why do we even need weapons if class is irrelevant? My 0.2 20 cent raise worth. [Actually it was 20 bucks. We went without a contact for almost a year. Our fearless president of UTLA kept threatening to take us out on strike, the bus drivers went, the public health workers tried to go and were stopped by a court injunction - does that kind of shit happen in Europe? And we kept voting for strikes. And in the end we got a 2% raise. And we kept getting these idiotic phone messages from said president telling us why we should vote for the contract. And then after we did, and many of us first year teachers found we only got an extra $20 (on one pay check, the next ones were actually less - they take the annual salary and divide it in some weird way so that you get less money when you need it most - the two paychecks before the end of the academic year and the dry month in August when you get nothing - I guess that is how they get all those teachers to teach summer school at even shittier working conditions and compensation - no sick leave etc.). And then fearless president has the nerve to ask us to take that $20 and give it to the campaigns of our 'friends' running for the school board - as reward for voting for our contract! Now there is philosophical mechanism to stick your teach into!] Sharon > My 0.2 Euros worth. > > Cheers, > Peter > > > > --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005