Re: new immanence

Interesting.  What I see in 'the multitude' is just a return to the
Hobbesian state of nature.  That is to say, the people ceasing to be a
crowd, and regaining, if only momentarily, their original sovereignty.
This situation (insofar as it is actually happening) cannot be an
equilibrium, however.

Diego

On Sun, 16 Feb 2003, Jozsef Borocz wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Feb 2003, Threehegemons@aol.com wrote:
>
> |What is the difference between 'the multitude' and 'the working class'?
> |And what is the difference between 'a new plane of immanence' and 'socialist
> |consciousness'? Seriously--I'm curious about how language changes and why.
>
> IMHO, Hardt & Negri's concept of the 'multitude' allows west EUropean and
> north American subjectivity to continue to play a dominant role in the way in
> which putatively global "left" conversation addresses (the possibility of)
> global change, without having to face some tough questions regarding issues
> of privilege and global class location, complicity in invisible exclusion,
> the abandonment of the requirement of a deep, racially undivided, radical
> sense of solidarity, and concealing a host of tacit, neverthe less all too
> real, personal stakes in a politics of the status quo. 'Multitude' allows the
> west European and north American "left" identity location to cover up its
> material investment in the maintenance of the global order. It is
> "solidarity" on white, northern, privileged "left" terms. In this sense, it
> is an old hat, the oldest in fact.
>
> József Böröcz
>
>