aut-op-sy
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]
Date:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Thread:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Index:  [ Author  | Date  | Thread  ]

AUT: Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 13:39:05 -0300

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0224_01C0A0C2.A766B6C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

John and folks,

Sorry by my english. I'm an speaker-spanish, you know John, and I desire =
to put some things (topics) in the real place about Negri's ideas.

First I agree with you John that Negri's prose is very difficult to =
follow, too difficult to read and understand. That's the matter why I =
don't think that's a language's problem as somebody put. Really I don't =
think so. I'm persuaded that the really problem it's the ignorance (I =
don't found another better word) of some items that Negri offer to the =
lecturer. In short, he drives us to study some social spaces =
(specialities?) like philosophy, epistemology and politics philosophy, =
spaces that are really strange for us, because we are not ourselves =
familiarized with them So that's the problem for me with the Negri's =
lecture.

Second. Definitively Negri's analysis are in opposition with the =
dialectic. So you can't criticise him because he has a "positive =
lecture" of the capitalism. Negri has an antagonist lecture of the =
capitalism. To criticise  Negri in this topic -and the autonomist in =
general- we must criticise the antagonist lecture based on Spinoza's =
interpretation.

Dialectic vs antagonism. That's the really discussion. Not other. I =
don`t think that Negri has a positive capitalism lecture. If you see him =
with dialectics glasses may be. But if you see him with antagonistic =
glasses, then Negri's lecture his entirely negative. But in this case is =
a negative non dialectical lecture. What Negri  offers us is the =
constituent power of the social worker after the diffusion of the social =
factory. Until that moment Negri`s analysis is a dialectical one`s, Then =
he will reject the dialectic and will replace it by an antagonistic =
analysis.
You can't think in dialectical terms if you are an spinozian follower. =
You must see the social worker and capital as completely antagonic. =
Spinozian thought removes any possibility of synthesis. The resolution =
of the antagonism means the dead of the other, its disparition without =
any synthesis. Negri leaves the  dialectic after the struggles on 68 =
when the working class accumulated power facing up the capital. In the =
dialectis perspective the working class's positive proyect comes after =
the negation of capital. It comes in a future time promised as the =
result of the negative dialectic. In the antagonist proyect the working =
class proyect begins with an afirmation. It comes close the practice =
cooperation and desires of the working class, which are developing with =
their own struggles.In that perspective the real tendency is for here =
and now. In the dialectic perspective the synthesis is looking as a =
miracle of resurrection that contains something of what it tries to =
displace. It lives after his own suppression. The non dialectic negation =
implies the death of the other.
=20
=20
Just enough=20
=20
Cheers=20
=20
=20
Cesar Altamira
caltamira@xxxxxxxxxxxx

------=_NextPart_000_0224_01C0A0C2.A766B6C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>John and folks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sorry by my english. I'm an =
speaker-spanish, you=20
know John, and </FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I desire to put some=20
things&nbsp;(topics) in the real&nbsp;place about&nbsp;Negri's=20
ideas.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>First I agree with you John that =
Negri's prose=20
is&nbsp;very difficult to follow, too difficult to read and=20
understand.&nbsp;That's the matter why I&nbsp;don't think that's a =
language's=20
problem as somebody put. Really I don't think so. I'm =
persuaded&nbsp;that the=20
really problem it's&nbsp;the ignorance (I don't found another better=20
word)&nbsp;of some items that Negri offer to the lecturer. In short, he=20
drives&nbsp;us to study some&nbsp;social spaces (specialities?) like =
philosophy,=20
epistemology and politics philosophy, spaces&nbsp;that are really =
strange for=20
us, because&nbsp;we are not ourselves familiarized&nbsp;with them So =
that's the=20
problem for me with the Negri's lecture.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Second. Definitively Negri's analysis =
are&nbsp;in=20
opposition with the&nbsp;dialectic. So you can't criticise him because =
he has a=20
"positive lecture" of the capitalism. Negri has an antagonist lecture of =
the=20
capitalism.&nbsp;To criticise&nbsp; Negri in this topic -and the =
autonomist in=20
general- we must criticise the antagonist lecture based=20
on&nbsp;Spinoza's&nbsp;interpretation.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><STRONG><FONT size=3D3>Dialectic vs=20
antagonism</FONT></STRONG>. That's the really&nbsp;discussion. Not =
other. I=20
don`t think that Negri has a positive capitalism lecture. If you see him =
with=20
<EM>dialectics </EM>glasses may be. But if you see him with =
<EM>antagonistic=20
</EM>glasses, then Negri's lecture his entirely negative. But in this =
case is a=20
negative non dialectical lecture. What Negri&nbsp; offers us is=20
the&nbsp;constituent power of the social worker after the diffusion of =
the=20
social factory. Until that moment Negri`s analysis is&nbsp;a dialectical =
one`s,=20
Then he will reject the dialectic and will replace it by =
an&nbsp;antagonistic=20
analysis.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You&nbsp;can't think in dialectical =
terms if you=20
are an spinozian follower. You must see the&nbsp;social worker and =
capital as=20
completely antagonic. Spinozian thought&nbsp;removes any possibility of=20
synthesis. The resolution of the antagonism&nbsp;means the dead of the =
other,=20
its disparition without any synthesis. Negri leaves the&nbsp; dialectic =
after=20
the struggles on 68 when the working class accumulated power facing up =
the=20
capital. In the dialectis perspective the working class's positive =
proyect comes=20
after the negation of capital. It comes in a future time promised as the =
result=20
of the negative dialectic. In the antagonist proyect the working class =
proyect=20
begins with an afirmation. It comes close the practice cooperation and =
desires=20
of the working class, which are developing with their =
own&nbsp;struggles.In that=20
perspective the real tendency is for here and now. In the dialectic =
perspective=20
the synthesis is looking as a miracle&nbsp;of resurrection&nbsp;that =
contains=20
something of what it tries&nbsp;to displace. It lives after his own =
suppression.=20
The non dialectic negation&nbsp;implies&nbsp;the death of the=20
other.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Just enough&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Cheers&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>&nbsp;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Cesar Altamira<BR><A=20
href=3D"mailto:caltamira@xxxxxxxxxxxx";>caltamira@xxxxxxxxxxxx</A></FONT><=
/DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0224_01C0A0C2.A766B6C0--



     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
[ Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]