Hardt & Negri’s Empire and EU Advocacy

[Monty Cantsin]

Though the EU constitution is getting knocked back throughout the continent it is advocated by Negri as a way to progrees internationalism and the unity of humanity.

Also the set back of the European Union’s constitution and the second Iraq war contradict the theory of empire(as far as I understand it-no access to the full text) which is pose to be a homogenise world order where the nation state is a weaker force then ever before in history.

What do you think of the theory of empire?

what do you think of radical leftist advocacy of the EU consitution? is it progressive? Negri and Hardt seem to think that developments (at least up onto the prublishing empire) in the world order are progressive, thus are they really revolutionary communists or conservative capitalists?

[redstar2000]

The idea of the EU may be progressive; the proposed EU constitution is as reactionary as anything since the days of Thatcher.

In fact, it's the kind of document that Thatcher herself might have written -- an EU entirely at the mercy of corporate greed.

I simply have no idea what Negri is thinking when he supports this crap as "progressive".

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[SonofRage]

It would be helpful is someone who has actually read Empire could comment on it, or at least if someone can provide us with a summary of the views put forth in the book. I have not yet gotten a chance to read it myself.

It is available for free as a PDF if anyone is interested: http://www.infoshop.org/texts/empire.pdf

[anonymous red]

i read excerpts of the book for my marxism class i took senior year of uni. i might still have notes from my professor on the book that i could scrounge around for if anyone is interested. one of my favorite parts of the book (and honestly i don't remember too much of it) was the critique of postmodernism & pluralism. i'll see if i can't find my notes on this in the next day or two.

[romanm]

The book is very poorly written and lacks any material analysis. Hardt and Negri find time to look up the most obscure literary facts can't don't seem capable of looking up statistics on wages or basic facts about the core and periphey etc.

I haven't read the book in ages... but..

They say that "Empire" is replacing neo-colonialism. That a transnational capitalist class is arising along with transnational institutions of power, ie: UN, NGOS, etc These institutions are displacing the nationstate.

They also say that a transnational multitude is arising not distinguished by borders or nation.

They see these two as headed for conflict on a global scale.

They are rejecting Lenin's Theory of Imperiallism for a kind of Kautskyian theory, ie: imperialism is merely a transatory phase of capitalism, not the last stage.

We are having a good discussion of this on the It's Right To Rebel Maoist forums marxleninmao.proboards43.com. You are welcome to join. The thread is called "Lenin's theory of imperialism" in the theory area.

Ps. It is also interesting to see how they have become Kautskyian in other areas, ie: on the EU and the war.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 01:36 PM
They say that "Empire" is replacing neo-colonialism. That a transnational capitalist class is arising along with transnational institutions of power, ie: UN, NGOS, etc These institutions are displacing the nationstate.
....
They are rejecting Lenin's Theory of Imperiallism for a kind of Kautskyian theory, ie: imperialism is merely a transatory phase of capitalism, not the last stage.
Yeah, exactly. This "trans-national" and "post-national" stuff that's fashionable nowadays is a pure retread of Kautsky's "ultra-imperialism" theory.

All these "transnational" corporations are in fact dominated by capitalists of one or another nation; all these "transnational" institutions are arenas for the rivalry of national governments. Whose armies remain the ultimate court of appeal in all these disputes.