Re: [ox-en] word social forum/stallman/patents
- From: John Norem <johnnor mindspring.com>
- Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 16:24:37 -0700
Kermit Snelson wrote:
... But now that you mention it, I do in fact believe that it
is impossible to base truly radical theory and practice on metaphysical
premises. I think many (but certainly not most) of today's progressive
movements have lost effectiveness by adopting them. But that's a topic for
another list, oder?
Could you provide an example of what you mean by 'truly radical theory
and practice'? If this is too OT, please respond off list.
Since everyone keeps mentioning him, guess I'll have to
read some Negri (I know nothing about him). Can you
recommend any particular work to give me some idea?
The most accessible work is: Hardt, Michael and Negri, Antonio, Empire,
Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press; 2000 (ISBN:0674006712). In my
none-too-popular opinion, that book represents the state of the art in how
to cloak reactionary metaphysics in a progressive disguise.
Also, maybe you could specify in what way Hardt and Negri's work is
based on a reactionary metaphysics? Could you define reactionary