Re: AUT: Fwd: The Gathering Storm?

["cwright" <cwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ok, just to be clear, I did not mean that the article was 'marxiste', but
that the 'marxiste' infatuation with economic collapse as the key to "class
struggle", as if class struggle was only something which happened during a
crisis and in response to capital, is a typical attitude among many
so-called Marxists (my marxistes).  I was responding solely to
>Whatever the reason, I
>have copped an effective 20% pay cut, as I am paid in R$ converted to US$
>converted to Aus$. Does this make me feel like going out there and blowing
up
>banks? It certainly makes me feel somewhat resentful of people who would
>suggest the economic apocalypse is a good thing, whilst largely being
shielded
>from its effects.
Thiago, you said you were sick of these kind of people and I can only
heartily agree, but I am not sure that your point of view and Steve's are so
wholly incompatible, so much as the attitude is incompatible.

Rather, the issue is one of whether or not this piece does give us some
insight into the workings of money and finance on a global level.  I wrote
the following note to someone else:

>The politics have problems and the tendency is towards a kind of conspiracy
theory and conservative populism, but its worth reviewing nonetheless.  To
some degree, one could read it as partial confirmation of the thesis in
Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt's book that some degree of sovereignty has
moved from states to international organizations, or at least that a certain
degree of international coordination now comes from non-state bodies,
calling into question the traditional notion of imperialism and
inter-imperialist competition.

It is a bit catastrophic, but it also shows in some interesting ways how
capital has used credit and money mechanisms to so far avoid a 1929-32 type
crash.  What the piece does not show is how much personal credit expansion
has been part and parcel of this process, as a means of offloading public
debt.  The arrival of such sophisticated mechanisms are the product of class
struggle, of capital's attempt to overcome the power of labor.  In the
process, I suspect that fear of mass social upheval has been the core of the
ongoing crisis and the fear of 'resolving' it by letting the shit hit the
fan.  In a certain sense, the working class has been powerful not largely
through our articulation of positive struggles, but through the threat of
what we represent as potential, since capital remembers the frequent mass
struggles running from the 1930's to the early 1970's, from within the
workplace and within the totality of capitalist social relations.
Certainly, everything since the Zapatistas, including the incursion of the
anti-capitalist/anti-neo-liberalism movement into capital's home territory,
has them more nervous than ever.<

I then included Steve's comments below the article.

Cheers,
Chris
"In a world which really is topsy-turvy, the true is a moment of the
false." - Debord
----- Original Message -----
From: <topp8564@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: AUT: Fwd: The Gathering Storm?


> Well, I am sorry. The article isn't "marxiste"  - it's just stupid. Or are
you
> defending the idea there is something shocking about rich Englishmen, as
> opposed to rich Americans, owning your home? Guess what. It's already
happened.
>
> My take on it was that the only conceivable reason it was brought to our
> attention was that it demonstrated the world was falling apart.  Or was
there
> another reason? My point about this fascination with collapse and ruin is
that
> if we can't get people off the couch when things are running ok, don't
expect
> them to become committed revolutionaries when the Dow takes a nose dive.
>
> I don't object to attempts to understand the economy. I spend most of my
waking
> life and a disturbing amount of my dreaming time thinking about it. It's
hard
> to escape it, you now, with my home country being in ruins and all.  But
this
> article was really off on a rather nasty tangent. I agree with whoever it
was
> that said it is antisemitical in form, if not content.
>
>
> Thiago Oppermann





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