but I don't think you've accurately characterized what she's saying: she's talking about physically, materially enacting a politics. (is this what Eric B means by biopolitics? I never understand that language...)
Regardless, Natasha's is a thoroughly materialist vision of social change as political practice. Ideas change in the process of putting your ass on the line trying to change the society you live in. The idealism problem rests with the rest of the folks in the room, unfortunately.
> I'm not sure what Foucault would have said about the possibility of
> interacting "in an uncoded way". But anyway, is this not saying 'it's
> all in our heads', the manacles are mind forg'd? Even if this were
> true, if we all needed to just cast off the 'codings' in our
> relations, how is it supposed to spread into society at large? The
> movement develops through the bulk of the population being drawn into
> activist culture?
>
> Mike
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)