Thomas Seay wrote:
>>>Hardt and Negri examine the present political and
>>>ontological landscape in "Empire".
>>>
>>>It is true that they dont prescribe exact actions to
>>>be taken in "Empire". There is no recipe book for
>>>this novel situation...the desires and movements that
>>>form as we go forward will determine the various
>>>directions that the multitudes take. I think Hardt
>>>and Negri are quite conscious of the fact that they
>>>dont have a recipe book...and would have it no other
>>>way.
Doug:
> >I made that criticism, but I also said the book was richly
> >suggestive for what the praxis-minded should do. For those practical
> >minds who were open to fresh experience, of course.
> >
Yoshie Furuhashi:
> Since when have you become an ascetic, though, Doug? :-0 The image
> of "the future life of communist militancy" in _Empire_ is that of
> "Saint Francis of Assisi":
>
> ***** Consider his work. To denounce the poverty of the multitude
> he adopted that common condition and discovered there the ontological
> power of a new society. The communist militant does the same,
> identifying in the common condition of the multitude its enormous
> wealth. (p. 413) *****
>
> If that's attractive, why not Dorothy Day & the Catholic Worker?
One of the characteristics of contemporary capitalism, at least as it's practiced in the United States, which makes it importantly different from that criticized by Marx, is the predominance of created as opposed to natural or traditional "needs". These are necessary to create the ever-increasing demand which in turn creates the "need" for ever-increasing production and thus the expert leaders and rulers of production, the bourgoisie, and their system, capitalism. This production produces the surpluses which, as ever, fuel and drive imperial rule. A politics which broke this cycle to any large extent would be revolutionary because it would deprive the ruling class of its raison d'etre as well as the actual material goods it needs to project its power. The formation of communal and cooperative groups based on mutual aid or even less radical arrangements would be one way for people to begin implement such a revolution: they could begin to withdraw their support from the ruling class.
That is, I think Dorothy Day was onto something, which is unfortunately masked by the religious particularism of her movement.
-- Gordon