Re: AUT: Re: Imperialism (Explications of The Savage Anomaly)

["alessandro coricelli" <alessandro.coricelli@xxxxxxx>]

----------
>From: cwright <cwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>



>  It is
> therefore suprising that Negri could say that imperialism once applied and
> does not now.  What notion of imperialism?  Lenin's?  Luxemburg's?

Negri's? Or, more appropriately,  the analysis of "reality"(always as a
result of the behavior of the "class" and the evolution of its
"composition". Two facets that are always seen as "one" in the traditional
approach of operaism. That's probably the reason why you are unable to see
the "role" of class struggle in Negri's theory. When you'll do that you'll
see that the only theoretical reference of Negri is Marx. "We are only
Marx's readers", he would say ) contained in "Crisis of the Planner-State:
Communism and Revolutionary Organization" (Translation obtainable from
"Revolution Retrieved", 1988. While the original had been written in 1971).

sorry if I'm inverting the order of your post:

> In a way I feel that Negri has a kind of Luxemburgian stance in relation to
> imperialism.  The idea of Empire as a state of perpetual crisis is
> homologous in some ways to Luxemburg's prediction that with the end of an
> 'outisde'-'inside' relationship would result in 'barbarism', in decadence
> and collapse.

of course, "we" can use Luxemburg's Accumulation of Capital like the "frame"
of the picture we are confronted with (a simple example: how do we explain
the impotence  of the "old" capitalist tools in solving Japan's crisis?) . I
don't think, however, that that's Negri's starting point.

ciao,
alessandro




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