AUT: Re: Re: Re: The Limitations of "Open Marxism"

["cwright" <cwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hey Harald,

Without wanting to spoil the fun, John addresses ontological arguments
common in the po-mo scene, as well as directly treating Foucault and Negri.

Basically, as I understand it, John starts with a critique of
being/is-ness/ontology and the attempt to ascribe a positive basis for
communism, rather than a negative basis (John explains that at length, but
think Negative Dialectics here).  He critiques the dualism of much of this
thought and also some problems with Foucault's approach which effectively
negates development as self-development, rather than as externally pushed
develoment.

That's too sketchy, but its something I am going to go over more later since
I am reading Nietzsche in preparation for Foucault, Deleuze, Guattari, and
Althusser, so I am less focussed on it immediately outside of my notes for
the book review I wrote.

Cheers,
Chris
"In a world which really is topsy-turvy, the true is a moment of the
false." - Debord

>
> Chris, I guess that is the part that interests me the most. I am going
> to borrow the Holloway book from a friend of mine when he has finished
> reading it is, as my budget for buying is very restricted for the time
> being, but in the meanwhile, is it at all possible for you to
> communicate the main points of this particular critique?
>
> Harald
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
>




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