"Peter K." wrote:
>
> >Why did
> I give the URLs then? They led to reviews by people who had at
> least looked at the book, presumably.
>
Who on this list has commented on the book without reading it? I've read it three times, the second and third time with focus on trying to find what Doug meant by it containing "new" ideas. No one has yet been able to substantiate that claim. The main idea, that "Empire" has replaced imperialism, is just another version of the End of History, well swathed in empty anti-capitalist rhetoric. At the end the authors leave one with no possible reaction to capitalism (or "Empire") except a cry of anguish at the immorality of it all and a pipedream about it going away by itself when that invisible and non-existent multitude huff and puff and blow its walls down.
When an organization exists grounded in the work, then perhaps one could look at it again. In the meantime it exists only in cyberspace as an excuse for replacing thinking with an endless repetition of the need to think. What was the name of that Dem candidate for president who went on calling for new ideas?
Carrol