aut-op-sy
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value
- Subject: Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value
- From: "FoofighterPilot" <cwright@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 22:28:02 -0500
Hey Keir,
Yeah, I have been over this on the list as much as can be done and I don't
have anything too different to say. So small notes.
I think that the split is not one for the party, but the contradiction point
from which labor is able to go beyond being merely for-capital. I wouldn't
want to rewrite Theorie Communiste's excellent piece which raises the
question of how the working class, as a class reproducing capital, can
overthrow capital. They find the key in exploitation and IMO rightly so.
It is a dividing line IMO between 'imposition of work' and 'exploitation'
which focusses the break between autonomist Marxism and tendencies like TC,
Aufheben, Wildcat and one-offs such as myself.
I don't see a great difference theoretically between the post-Situ/Comments
'integrated spectacle' and 'total subsumption.' I do not at all disagree
with the negative impact of post-SI situ theory, starting with Debord's own
critique of the SI in 72(?).
As for your final comments, I simply am unsure what these things mean on
some level. Labor that is about influencing social cooperation formally may
or may not say something. I honestly don't know and Negri has not convinced
me so far. That does not render the idea un-evocative.
As for total subsumption, a friend of mine would say that recourse to any
kind of personal experience is a sign of weakness theoretically and would
reject it tout court, but I find that my boss understands very clearly that
there is a line, a real line, between labor time and non-labor time because
he tries to get all of us to work as much as possible, and any contractor
who refuses to say, keep the cell phone on 24/7 or answer pages on weekends
or off hours, isn't going to get hired. Why not? Because there is a space
of non-labor there. Dunno if that is what Negri means, but then I am not
sure whether he has any interest in the empirical validity of his
categories.
Cheers,
Chris
--- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
- Thread context:
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value, (continued)
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
Harry M. Cleaver Sun 28 Mar 2004, 11:35 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
Tom Messmer Sun 28 Mar 2004, 17:29 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
chris wright Mon 29 Mar 2004, 02:16 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
keir Mon 29 Mar 2004, 10:24 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
FoofighterPilot Tue 30 Mar 2004, 03:28 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
Harry M. Cleaver Tue 30 Mar 2004, 13:59 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
Tahir Wood Tue 30 Mar 2004, 14:24 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
Harry M. Cleaver Tue 30 Mar 2004, 14:26 GMT
- Re: AUT: Re: Immeasurable value,
Harry M. Cleaver Tue 30 Mar 2004, 14:37 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]