On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Robin Green wrote:
On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 08:38:41AM [PHONE NUMBER REMOVED], auskadi tvcabo.co.mz wrote:
But is it as cut and dry as Caffentzis makes out - the Negrian focus is
on the cyborgs?
I don't think so. I haven't read Negri, but from what I have read of
this report:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/11/280632.html
on the famous debate between Negri and Callinicos (representing the
Marxist/Leninist/Trotskyite tendencies), Negri seems to be EXPANDING
the "revolutionary class" into what he calls the Multitudes - rather
than restricting attention to a small subset of the "working class".
In former (national) times this would have been called populism. Negri's
novelty is not in being a populist, but in redefining populism for a world
claimed/projected to be without national boundaries, as multitudinism.
But IMO multitudinism has exactly the same weaknesses and dangers as
populism.
Graham
Quote:
"Negri's speech was of course long and somewhat complicated but made
essentially those points that work is no longer confined to the
official working day but extends itself into all of life; going to
and from work, consuming etc. "The factory is no longer the sole
producer of value." He also attacked the traditional Marxist
conceptions of the relation of agricultural workers as being outside
the working class and their analysis of women etc. Essentially the
Trotskyist fetishisation of the factory and the blue collar, full
time worker etc., as being the main agent of social transformation.
The multitude was a "multiplicity of singularities", that realized
that value is produced across society and not just "at work"."
Or is it as has been claimed or stated to me in the past
on GO - that Negri sees the poor as the where the revolutionary
subjectivities will arise.
That's too simplistic as well.
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: projekt oekonux.de