― Martin Skidmore, Sunday, 4 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s, Sunday, 4 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
but this is me already bending this book to fit my own esthetic-politix, so give yr salt a sharp pinch as u read
― rosemary, Monday, 5 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
Pinefox, why?
extremely cheap, but largely RUBBISH books. In fact I can't think of one (just now off the top of my head) Collins book I wanted to read in ages. I picked up the Michael Bracewell thing on the 90s. but meh. might read Ween's Marx thing -- but it's hyowg.
― Alan Trewartha, Monday, 5 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Sterling Clover, Monday, 5 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Josh, Monday, 5 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
But now the Gramscian notion of "hedgemony" is turned against his squarely leninist aim of the seizure of ideological and political power and into hand-wringing in fear of "hierarchy" by the autonomists, and the savvier workers in the syndicatish COBAS federation thus leaving Italy circa 2003 needing W. Z. Foster circa 1920.
But back the the point, there's a syncretic adoption of autonomism and globalism in Empire which never actually resolves the concepts of centralization and hedgemony and fixes them in definite relations (both positive and negative) and leaves it open either to "Mass Strike" (early Luxemburg) type s-s-storming of the barricades or "Ultra-Imperialism" (Late Kautsky) type panglossianism (a globalized world can't fight against itself anymore) or more often simply suspendid mid-action between alternatives.
I don't know of this is more clear or less.
― the pinefox, Monday, 5 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
also wasn't late kautsky talking abt a kind of necessary truce of super-extended imperialisms plural (eg exactly what DIDN'T happen back then) => isn't h&n's idea that *as* the whole of the world disappears into america, america disappears as the whole of the world emerges within america?
i've got a bettah grip on one of the BAD reasons i like it: it dispenses in fine nietszchean sweep w.the tiresome imposed conformist moralisms of soc-dem civil society, which feels like a relief esp.when it's super-generalised extensions of same which used to justify imperialism blah blah (except of course a shared idea of CivSoc = part of the positive-constitutive thingie...)
― mark s, Monday, 5 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-one years ago) link
Anyone have any thoughts how they reconcile or don't with the CivSoc notions of bourdeiu?
― Josh (Josh), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 02:12 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 02:52 (twenty-one years ago) link
― adam (adam), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 04:57 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 07:53 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 11:21 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 11:26 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Josh (Josh), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 14:06 (twenty-one years ago) link
It's okay Josh I know *you* try. I'm more commenting on my lack of knowledge and pathetic attempts to stay abreast rather than any specific cases of obscurantism and obsfucation.
― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 14:19 (twenty-one years ago) link
― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 14:20 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 14:29 (twenty-one years ago) link
Gramsci -- The Modern Prince (to be read by way of Trotsky's "The Lessons Of October")
Lenin -- Imperialism (to be read by way of the a subscription to The Economist)
Luxemburg -- The Mass Strike (to be read by way of Lenin's "State and Revolution).
First speaks to the question of power, second to the question of the nation, and third to the question of autonomy. H&N claim to be "Communists" so they might as well confront the foax who already were.
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 8 October 2002 15:44 (twenty-one years ago) link
― Josh (Josh), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 02:59 (twenty-one years ago) link
It was great fun.
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 16 October 2002 05:11 (twenty-one years ago) link
hey and look I thought the same thing last month. at least I'm consistent.
― Josh (Josh), Sunday, 17 November 2002 19:31 (twenty-one years ago) link
"it rescues-redeems the ideas of the NoPoMo sect as regards the perspective of the YoPoMo sect, AND VICE VERSA) "
and then
"a clear idea is a little idea"
these threads always make me curious-how much have you all actually read in terms of theory,etc?i mean,have you all immersed yourself in it for years and read numerous lengthy tracts by the various people being discussed,that explain what nopomo and the like are?
― robin (robin), Thursday, 8 May 2003 15:32 (twenty years ago) link
― robin (robin), Thursday, 8 May 2003 15:36 (twenty years ago) link
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Thursday, 8 May 2003 15:54 (twenty years ago) link
― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 9 May 2003 11:35 (twenty years ago) link
― adam (adam), Friday, 9 May 2003 13:23 (twenty years ago) link
this book is a doozy. not at all dull though, i didn't think. is josh still here? probably not :(
i think i finally understand (and maybe even like!) the term deterritorialisation. h&n argue pretty well that the nation-state as once was 'supreme and sovereign' went through a changing hinge when kelsen's baby ws born (the u.n.; haha i liked this bit in the book it felt like they wr poking fun at his self-fulfilled grundnorm theory) - because sovereignty annexed to that could not be understood as operating on a purely territorial basis (the u.n. as such didn't have a territory or a bounds) - it's how they get from u.n. to Empire tht is tricky and fascinating and i don't really understand it.
the u.n.'s inadequacies were as much propulsion as its adequacies - wtf?!
yeh not anti-american in the usual dickhead way! great! obv ppl have argued long that we can understand the current world in terms of america being *the* imperialist force! which h&n show as wrong by saying that each nation-state is not even sovereign WITHIN its OWN boundaries.
still digesting this; but it reads like fun! 'fun'!
yeah wtf is up w. the biopolitix section - tht does need a re-reading.
haha koritfw
― cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 16:15 (twenty years ago) link
― cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 16:16 (twenty years ago) link
b. de sousa santos, 'towards a new legal common sense' 2nd edn. (the edn. is very important cs it's almost a NEW book entire);
k. marx, 'the german ideology' (extracts of this essay) & 'on the jewish question' (part 1)
s. marx, 'empire's law' (an essay on westlaw i think; which is from the winter 2003 edn. of the indiana journal of global legal theory)
m. weber, obv!, 'economy & society' (esp. the stuff on bureaucracy)
habermas, 'the theory of communicative action' (the stuff on lifeworld and system)
foucault's 'governmentality' essay.
n. luhmann, 'law as a social system' (mmm systems theory mmm)
h&n, 'empire' !!!
some stuff on risk society: u. beck, 'risk society'.
this *is* quite a stuff list bt i like most of it. i might be in trouble w. mark s now fr recommending this stuff ha
― cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 16:25 (twenty years ago) link
apologies fr being presumptuous; you might have obviously read half this stuff already.
(throw in this too, just to bait the pinefox: slavoj zizek 'what can lenin tell us about freedom?' i thk this is already up on the web, googlable.)
― cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 16:27 (twenty years ago) link
― g--ff (gcannon), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 16:31 (twenty years ago) link
― cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 27 January 2004 17:07 (twenty years ago) link
what did you make of the race section mark s? (it's in the section: pp. 183-204)
i still like this book a lot.
― cozen (Cozen), Monday, 2 February 2004 21:44 (twenty years ago) link
― cozen (Cozen), Monday, 2 February 2004 21:45 (twenty years ago) link
― cozen (Cozen), Tuesday, 3 February 2004 01:47 (twenty years ago) link
― cozen (Cozen), Wednesday, 4 February 2004 00:58 (twenty years ago) link
― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Wednesday, 4 February 2004 13:14 (twenty years ago) link
― cozen (Cozen), Thursday, 5 February 2004 01:35 (twenty years ago) link
http://www.zaratustra.it/empire.htm
or, download:
http://www.angelfire.com/cantina/negri/
― cozen (Cozen), Sunday, 20 June 2004 11:40 (nineteen years ago) link
― cozen (Cozen), Friday, 25 June 2004 18:59 (nineteen years ago) link
read it again:
"might be cast as a response to the threat conjured up by the Soviet experience, that is, to the increasing power of (the) workers' movement"
i mean sure, do go ahead and conflate the labour movement and the soviet experience, don't let basic chronology get in your way.
or indeed the hostility of many labour movements (in, say, germany or britain) for the soviets.
― Gaz Promantino (Brohan Hari), Thursday, 1 January 2009 16:48 (fifteen years ago) link
Where "the Soviet experience" is understood as "the apparent success of a worker's state" I think it's hard to argue that portions of the international labor movement weren't galvanized to such a degree that they helped bring about the welfare state.
― BIG HOOS is not a nacho purist fwiw (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Thursday, 1 January 2009 17:02 (fifteen years ago) link
but sure, it's a bit intemperately broad if you like. it's continental shit!
― BIG HOOS is not a nacho purist fwiw (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Thursday, 1 January 2009 17:05 (fifteen years ago) link
<3 analytic shit more and more imo.
less creepily crypto-hegelian-stalinist.
― Gaz Promantino (Brohan Hari), Thursday, 1 January 2009 17:37 (fifteen years ago) link
Late to post, but here's my review of Multitude:
http://www.citypages.com/2004-10-27/books/the-empire-strikes-back/
― Pete Scholtes, Thursday, 1 January 2009 17:58 (fifteen years ago) link
the reality of the soviet experience didn't have much if anything to do with the "international workers' movement" of course but i'm sure it was perceived as something like that by a lot of governments at the time.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 1 January 2009 18:38 (fifteen years ago) link
Been thinking of picking this up again, given events in the Middle East.
Anyone read the two sequels?
― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 26 February 2011 11:37 (thirteen years ago) link
there was a second sequel?
― HOOStory is back. Fasten your steenbelts. (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Saturday, 26 February 2011 19:46 (thirteen years ago) link
dollar dollar bills yall
― this odyssey that refuses to quit calling itself (history mayne), Saturday, 26 February 2011 19:54 (thirteen years ago) link
hope i dont have to read the first two to know what's going on
― Romford Spring (DG), Saturday, 26 February 2011 20:03 (thirteen years ago) link
anyone read the FOURTH book? it's called ASSEMBLY and i bought it today. after i'm gonna reread empire and see what's what
― adam, Monday, 18 June 2018 20:58 (five years ago) link
also im gonna read it on the train with like a really serious face and sometimes i'll nod appreciatively and others i'll just chuckle to myself
― adam, Monday, 18 June 2018 20:59 (five years ago) link
Antonio Negri (1933-2023) pic.twitter.com/iOaa3zDSpy— Daniel Zamora Vargas (@DanielZamoraV) December 16, 2023
― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 16 December 2023 12:22 (four months ago) link
blimey i was excited by this book -- y tho?
i would have to re-read it to recapture that i think
― mark s, Saturday, 16 December 2023 12:44 (four months ago) link
empire, i mean -- i never read any of the sequels (chapterhouse of empire, god emperor of empire)
― mark s, Saturday, 16 December 2023 12:45 (four months ago) link
still a solid and important book imo, 9/10ths of the critiques are from running dogs
― Honnest Brish Face (Noodle Vague), Saturday, 16 December 2023 14:13 (four months ago) link
Negri and Hardt wrote a followup essay in NLR in 2019 that’s well worth reading and quite jargon freehttps://newleftreview.org/issues/ii120/articles/empire-twenty-years-on
― Humanitarian Pause (Tracer Hand), Saturday, 16 December 2023 15:30 (four months ago) link
that's a nice read, thanks for sharing
― ꙮ (map), Saturday, 16 December 2023 16:55 (four months ago) link
Yup. Thanks, that's some read.
Thinking how much of the piece I can map to the odd twitter thread over the years.
When I read Empire I struggled quite a bit. But I wonder if I would sail through it now because I've basically read a lot of Marxist discourse via tweets.
― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 16 December 2023 17:13 (four months ago) link