>IMHO, the "autonomists" glorify the Zapatistas and hence distort
>them beyond recognition b/c they are secretly disgusted by the
>prevailing apathy, consumerism, and cynicism of the First World
>working class, but they can't come right out and say it
As a matter of fact, Hardt & Negri say it, though not in so many words. To take just one example, they say the model for communist militancy is Saint Francis of Assisi (_Empire_ 413). :) For more examples of this kind, see Jon Beasley-Murray's review at <http://www.art.man.ac.uk/spanish/Writings/empire.html>.
>The reality is that the inner life of a First World autonomist is a
>lot more like the inner life of a First World proletarian than that
>of a Fourth World indigenous peasant, b/c the first two groups are
>both products of this bizarre post-modern capitalist society which
>is at one and the same time full of semi-fascist authoritarianism
>and libertine excess.
On one hand, they practically admit their fascination with America, "this bizarre post-modern capitalist society which is at one and the same time full of semi-fascist authoritarianism and libertine excess," as you put it: "Against the common wisdom that the U.S. proletariat is weak because of its low party and union representation with respect to Europe and elsewhere, perhaps we should see it as strong for precisely those reasons" (269).
On the other hand, they sound like dreamily utopian Social Democrats: "Hardt and Negri do make a couple of concrete proposals towards the end of Empire, first for global citizenship with open borders, and second for a universal 'social wage'" (Kam Shapiro, "From Dream to Desire: At the Threshold of Old and New Utopias," _Theory & Event_ 4.4 at <http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/theory_&_event/v004/4.4r_kam.html>).
Thus, the post-modern tango between autonomist desire & social democratic politics continues, this time in the name of the Empire (= "the embryonic global state," to use Pat's phrase).
Yoshie