Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 22:56:55 -0100
Subject: Re: Empire and the "Facts"


Steve/All

Hugh wrote:

> As for 20th century revolutions, and there are always about 20 to 40 wars
> going on,
> I wonder how Cuba, North Korea, Viet Nam, China, Iran, Iraq, and numerous
> Central and South American and South African revolutions fit into Empire's
> (the book) assessment of the political potential of the global multitude.

Steve replied:

>Don't know - I am suspicious of that kind of globalising theorisation, the
>cultural differend is too great.

Steve wrote:

>Worth saying, I suppose, that I am by no means suggesting that we resurrect
marx
>- rather I'm just trying to painfully suggest that it's necessary to
understand
 >the line of intellectual descent that Empire and associated texts derive
from.

Yes, we are trying to understand the background and  reasoning that leads to
the theory of  "Empire". The role of the above-named Revolutions in N&H's
development of  the "Empire" thesis may be of significance, but more
important, perhaps, to my way of thinking,  is an understanding of
present-day  realities in those countries and the other countries to which
the "Empire" thesis would apply..

We've had some success working toward a mutual definiition of the terms N&H
use, and we e wish they had provided more data on countries, international
agencies, capital flows,  labor practices, NGO's, etc.as they exist today.

Within the last three or four yeas, several books and articles have dealt
with globalisation.  I hope to cite them in a summing up within a few days.

More data is needed to define problems of globalisation to which the
"Empire" thesis is addressed.

Have the new technologies, which have recently contributed so much to the
development of global capitalism, also changed "subjectivites" of a global
"multitude" or the "multitude" of workers within industrialized nations?

That is an enormous question, and we may not be able to get good and
sufficient information on which to make our judgments.

A military campaign must have a map of the terrain, knowledge of manpowerr
and armanents of  opposing forces, their strengths and weaknesses. This is
the basis for a plan (theory) of attack.

 Managemnet executing a friendly or unfriendly takeover of another company
must obtain knowledge of its products, sales and financial condition, as
well as knowledge of its production plants, quipment and employees.

With a reasonably accurate appraisal of the the existing problems which
globalization poses for the multitude there would be a basis for estimating
the efficacy of the
"Empire" thesis, and, a matter which troubles some reviewers, whether its
theories are
significantly different from theories preceding them.,

regards,
Hugh