Re: AUT: Linebaugh and Rediker, _The Many-Headed Hydra_

["Chris Wright" <cwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Could you take that a bit further?  If you mean that class formation happens
in the context of and is shaped by racial and gender formation, I agree
completely.  Class is, as some people say, raced and gendered.  If not,
please clarify.

Thanks,
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rowan Wilson" <wilson_rowan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 7:59 AM
Subject: Re: AUT: Linebaugh and Rediker, _The Many-Headed Hydra_


> Hi Andromache, Chris, Rob, Jon and all
>
> Andromache, when I said 'ultra left/Seattle', this was just a clumsy
> shorthand for the recent resurgence of non-hierarchical struggle.
>
> Rob and Chris, i very much agree on the need to place current forms of
> racism in the historical context of capitalism (and thanks for the bits of
> history too, btw). However, I would like to be fussy and add that it is
also
> vital to see capitalism in the context of racism and patricarchy - that is
> to say capitalism wasn't born outside of these 'isms'. Capitalism didn't
> just draw on versions of racism then present, it is also a product of
these
> 'isms' itself.
>
>
> Cheers
> Rowan
>
>
> >From: Chris Wright <cwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Reply-To: aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >To: aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: Re: AUT: Linebaugh and Rediker, _The Many-Headed Hydra_
> >Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 20:03:43 -0600
> >
> >Good day to you too, Rob!
> >
> >Thanks for the comments.  I agree with the bent of what you are saying,
and
> >since I made brief comments, let me just add that we don't have any easy
> >way
> >to separate the binary opposition of exploiter/exploited from the
> >fragmented
> >relations that appear as race, gender, sexuality, etc..., either in
> >analysis
> >or in practice.  As such, I don't think we can separate every struggle
out
> >neatly and just say "Hey, everyone has their own struggle."  That would
be
> >exactly the mistake of Foucault.  Rather, we have to see how all the
> >struggles interpenetrate.  Each racialized group has its own conflicts of
> >class, gender, sexuality, etc.  There is no way to discuss politics in
the
> >African American without confronting the problem of the "Black
bourgeoisie"
> >and the class fracturing of that community.  But that could be said for
all
> >of these different oppressions.  rather, I suggest we try to engage them
at
> >all levels at once, in way that recognizes the complexity of these
problems
> >and does not add Leftist fetishism to all the rest.  Obviously, any
> >specific
> >fetishized relation may weigh heavier at any given moment, but that is a
> >political problem we can only deal with if we start from the idea that
this
> >world has both the binary opposition of class created by the separation
of
> >doing from doer and a multiplicity of other power relationships which
arise
> >from that polarity without being reducible to it.  That is the really
> >short-hand answer, btw.
> >
> >As for pre-existing oppressions, I agree.  It is not like patriarchy, for
> >example, just magically appeared with capitalism.  Capital drew on the
> >already existing subordination of women, BUT it radically reconfigured
that
> >oppression in response to its own mode of existence, its own historical
> >peculiarity.  That's why I am cautious about talking about certain forms
of
> >oppression outside their historical context.  The form they take, their
> >mode
> >of existence, makes them different, even when they have similar
> >appearances.
> >The importance of history is to understand the specific ways they exist
> >differently.  Bourgeois history exactly moves to conceal the specificity
of
> >certain types of relations because it needs them to be eternal
> >characteristics of 'human nature'.  The devil is in the details, or in
this
> >case, the spectre.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Chris
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Rob Schaap" <rws@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >To: <aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 1:02 PM
> >Subject: Re: AUT: Linebaugh and Rediker, _The Many-Headed Hydra_
> >
> >
> > > G'day Autonomists,
> > >
> > > Quoth Chris:
> > >
> > > >The idea that racism has an origin in the late 18th/early 19th
century
> >does
> > > >not necessarily have any bearing on whether racism as we know it is
> >peculiar
> > > >to capitalism.  Then again, and i have not read the book so I am only
> > > >commenting on what I have read in this discussion, the idea of a
> >starting
> > > >point in this sense, of an origin, has its own problems.  Part of the
> >way
> >to
> > > >unravel the problem requires us to understand that the form of the
> > > >oppression, its mode of existence, is essential to understanding why
it
> >is
> > > >different.  That mode of existence has to be connected to our
history,
> >as
> > > >well.  And racialization has to be understood as a process, an
ongoing
> > > >process which did not "happen" in the 18th century but which
continues
> >to
> > > >happen today.
> > >
> > > Sounds right to me.  But it's always hard, I think, to draw neat lines
> > > between those components of a living prejudice which draw their
> >nourishment
> > > from current functionalities for capitalism (eg undermining the
> > > 'class-for-itself' moment so central to, say, Lukacss theory) and
those
> > > which are spawned or sustained by capitalist relations, because they
> >excite
> > > that initial search for alternative meanings, for filling the empty
> >holes
> > > the alienation excavator gouges into us.
> > >
> > > Then you get to having to distinguish between (often pre-modern)
> >residual
> > > cultural components (eg Christianity per se) and the tendentious
> >inventions
> > > of the past (and the demagoguery often at the root of it - eg. the
> > > bible-based economics and bible-based public responsibility stuff
that's
> > > sweeping the US apre-coup).
> > >
> > > I do think that not every component of our being, and not every moment
> >in
> > > our lives, is written by capitalism - some of it is residual, some of
it
> >is
> > > stuff not commodified yet, some of it simply coz capitalism can't do
the
> > > job, and some of it is, dare I say it, human essence.  But I'm
> >blabbering
> > > off-topic now ...
> > >
> > > Anyway, I only mentioned my reservations because it's often well to
> >remind
> > > ourselves, obvious though it probably is, that shit happens in all
> >worlds -
> > > and that we cannot ensure the absence of 'isms', needless cleavages
and
> > > lingering exploitations, in a post-prol-revo.  Isms are material
> >realities
> > > - they're structures - and their existence and potential to hang on
need
> > > expressly to be factored into our sensibilities, publicity, strategies
> >and
> > > hopes.
> > >
> > > I kinda like the sort of approach Albert and Hahnel were talking about
> >in
> > > their *Unorthodox Marxism* way back in '79 - I' seem to have lost it
for
> > > the moment - not quite autonomism, perhaps, but a way of signalling to
> >the
> > > many and varied seekers-of-a-better-world and rejecters-of-shit a
sense
> > > that stuff's connected and that we are all therefore connected, too.
> >I'm
> > > no All-Power-To-The-Party man, but neither am I committed to some
> > > fetishised autonomy whereby, for instance, the racially oppressed
think
> > > race is all, the sexually oppressed that gender is all, and the
pinkoes
> > > among us  mouth sympathies at 'em without actually factoring their
> >concerns
> > > right at the front end of our efforts.
> > >
> > > No sign of that here just now - but we've all seen examples of this
> >kinda
> > > stuff on other lefty channels, eh?
> > >
> > > Anyway, I'm just avoiding work ...
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Rob.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >      --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >      --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---



     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---