> I think that you meant to say that the invasion and occupation of
> Iraq was more of a neocon ambition than anything else
[text deleted]
> That said, in the minds of a number of LBO-talkers, affection for
> Negri's "Empire" dovetails affection for Democrats
By no means. I have my disagreements with Hardt & Negri, but they do have a point when they argue that multinational capitalism is far more decentered and networked than its monopoly-era predecessor. I especially like their emphasis on the multitude: there's a powerful utopian energy buzzing in that concept, also evident in the great video/informatic works of art of our era, from Kieslowski's The Three Colors trilogy to Miyazaki's Spirited Away.
I'd argue that the US oiligarchy's Terror War is, in its own twisted way, a deeply provincial, atavistic and self-destructive protest *against* globalization (a.k.a. the rise of multinational capital to hegemony). Osama Bush Hussein is a single organism, the Bushists are the Baathists, and the Occupation begins at home.
-- DRR