Re: AUT: Putting Negri to the Test

["commie00" <commie00@xxxxxxxxx>]

> > the first assumption here is that the state is somehow
> > distinct from the ruling class in any meaningful way
> > (which clearly obliterates marx's notion that the
> > state is the general council of the ruling class).
> > another problem is that this assumes a seperation
> > between economics and politcs.
>
> This is quite messed up.  The identification of the state and the ruling
> class as immediately equivalent is a very big problem.  Does that mean
that
> every CEO and major stockholder not employed in the state apparatus is not
a
> capitalist?  Does this mean that every low-level state bureaucrat is a
> capitalist?

i think you're taking my phrasing as me trying to set up some kind of "pure"
model. on the contrary, my understanding of marx's use of this formulation
(which i think i first found in the grundrisse, but i'm not sure... feeling
a little rusty) is this: the state functions as the general council of the
ruling class in the sense that it is the place were the ruling class must
meet and compromise, etc. (and "anti-statist" capitalists seem to be those
who don't like to compromise with other sections of the ruling class and the
working class). and what i mean about the state not being distinct from the
ruling class is not that you must be part of the state mechanism to be a
capitalist, but that the state functions by and for the ruling class, in its
interests as a collective whole.

uhg... i'm tired. i hope this makes sense.

> > like i said, i'm not very interested in defending
> > negri... but the concept of "multitude" (sans negri)
> > is an interesting one... if it is understood to mean:
> > the working class is a multitude with a multitude of
> > interests and desires.
> >
> > i agree that negri's use of it seems to border on the
> > leninist / social democratic / liberal side of things,
> > but this does not mean that the word itself cannot be
> > useful in understanding class composition.
>
> I wish Negri meant it this way, but I see it as a replacement for the
> working class, for the capital-labor relation.  And the more I see him
> employ it, the stronger that feeling gets.

yeah, sometimes i feel this way. but then sometimes i wonder. i think i
recently saw an interview where he said straight up that "'multitude' is
just a way of formulating and understanding the working class as a positive
subject" or some such. tho i can't remember where... so sleepie.

right. bed.



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