> The idea of the "multitude" is inconsistent with historical materialism.
>
> It ignores the latter's idea of "communism" as requiring and expressing the
> "powers" of "universally developed" - of, in this sense, "enlightened" -
> "individuals".
> ...
> The degree of "superstition" and "prejudice" that remains widespread makes
> the "multitude" incapable of initiating this kind of "revolutionary praxis".
>
> Ted
I must say I gave up on Hardt and Negri after Empire, though I started Multitude. The suggestion that the politics of the multitude, which would somehow, in a weird sort of simultaneously structural and contingent but largely unconscious process, bring down capitalism, included giving up on employment, migrating in the hopes of finding employment elsewhere and any number of other depressive- or dropping out-like actions was more than I could take. Sounded more like a recipe for barbarism than socialism or communism... I simply couldn't buy in to the idea that so much of what they called politics fell into the realm of resistance.