> Angelus,
> Would you specify the positive content of the
> subjectivity you
> seemingly want to "recover" against its
> subordination to an
> objectivity the meaning of which is also unclear to
> me?
I am not so sure about whether there is some pre-existing subjectivity to recover. For all I know, there might never have been a case of human beings relating to objective reality in a way unmediated by fetish relationships. This is why I want to do more reading on anthropology and natural history.
> For example,
> the subjectivity for which Alain Badiou militates
> may well be very
> different in form and content than the subjectivity
> you have in mind?
I don't know, having not read Badiou. And as I wrote above, I'm not sure if there is some pre-existing, untainted subjectivity that exists to be reclaimed. Robert Kurz, in his anti-Enlightenment turn of the past four years, suggests that even the "form" subject is specific, or at least simultaneous, to the rise of capitalism. That is suggestive, but it might also be an overstatement, and until I make the time to read Kant and Hegel, not one I would want to offer an authoritative statement about one way or the other.
> It's also not clear to me why every regulation of
> commodity exchanges
> should be understood (dismissed) as a conspiracy
> waged by the
> capitalist or working class?
I don't think this. What statement of mine leads you to think that I do?
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com