>I wonder if this is not a good expression of the limits of the politics
>of desire. What Paul is describing, the transition from an acquisitive
>society to a ludic society, is no revolution at all. Clinton is in the
>White House, Bill gates has overtaken the big blue and the hippie
>generation have come home at last. What's the difference? Only that they
>are lazier and less decisive, but they are certainly just as
>destructive.
Uh, James, just what's ludic about Bill Gates? Clinton may like his blowjobs and pizza, but he's still a loyal servant of Wall Street and the Fortune 500. Neither seems very lazy to me either.
Doug