Somebody was nice enough to post this in the comments here a while back. it’s Negri’s take on the U.S. elections. I think it’s worth reading. Negri’s right about three important points. 1. Obama’s election is good in terms of race (it could be put to bad use as a denial of structural racism, we should expect this, but a black president is a blow to white supremacy to some extent). 2. War and the financial crisis are major problems. 3. Obama’s election is the result of a long history of struggles.
Here’s what confusing or wrong.
50 years ago this struggle begun in the United States, and now it has arrived to express itself. Behind this victory there is the great multitudinarian struggle, or more precisely, the sum of three struggles, at least: the class struggle, the gender struggle and the “race” struggle.
(…)
An epochal transformation in which the protagonists are the millions of people who have brought this result. In this sense, the rise of Obama has many times been paralleled to the New Deal, to the force through which the New Deal opened class conflicts, around the theme of welfare and keynesianism. What kind of points of contact and above all, what kind of differences are there today?
We all know what New Deal has been. A ruling class which, in the middle of an economic crisis determined by a capitalist development of over-production and by a falsification of al
working class which had been exploited and marginalized by grand mechanisms of development. This new deal had profoundly democratic characteristics: the re-opening of class struggle meant for Roosevelt to put the U.S. Constitution in action again and therefore also an utopian and ideal proposal for the whole world. A world which was infected by fascism - it is necessary to remember that the new deal arrives in the historical moment where class struggle was fundamental in order to strike down fascism, even the bourgeoisie understood this.l the facts of real economy, managed to invent the re-opening of class struggle. It was the reconstruction of consumption inside a
Today the differences are enormous, because now the struggles are multitudinarian; in fact, they take place and they develop on the entire terrain of society: there’s not only class struggle, there’s also the race struggle and the gender struggle. At least these three elements represent struggles which advance to construct common realities through which it becomes possible to overcome the uncertainty, fear, misery and poverty which capitalism determines with its development.
First off, I think Obama’s election is a product of struggles, but I don’t like the language ‘expression’ of struggle, if that’s meant to imply that Obama’s election represents the interests of these struggles. That may be trivial. Likewise possibly trivial, second, I don’t like the characterization of the New Deal as opening up conflicts. What does Negri think was happening in the 10s and 20s? And there’s little recognition here of the New Deal as channeling and shaping struggles as much as it facilitated them. Third, and I think more important, I don’t like the distinction of class vs race vs gender. It’s inaccurate for past struggles (such that if class+race+gender is an index of multitude-ness then there’s been multitude-ness for a long time running, not just in the new epoch Negri sees), and I think it’s overly neat for the present: these are important divisions in the present working class not in the exact same way but in similar ways to they were division in the working class in the prior epoch Negri thinks has ended. That is, bad on the prior epoch, bad on divisions within the working class in the present.
“First off, I think Obama’s election is a product of struggles, but I don’t like the language ‘expression’ of struggle, if that’s meant to imply that Obama’s election represents the interests of these struggles.”
I read this sentence several times, with puzzlement. As far as I can tell, you and Negri are in agreement–your use of words is what’s misleading. My opinion is that for Negri the words expression and productive, or “product”, are important technically. I don’t think he would use productive or product with regard to the election of Obama until we see how Obama actually deals with the financial and international(peace-war) crises. In using the word expression instead of production, I think Negri is honoring the symbolic victory of a “dirty nigger” becoming President, without commiting himself to believing Obama will usher in revolutionary changes, or even anything new. I think the distinction is important, and it has been bothering me. I also want to honor the symbolic importance of Obama’s victory, but without mistaking it for a revolutionary change in itself. There’s some difficulty here I can’t put my finger on. Your point about Obama’s victory leading to the denial of structural racism was helpful. If I recall correctly, we differ on the nature of change. I think capitalism allows change, but it is managed change. The very existence of change itself is not necessarily productive.
Comment by Yusef — December 8, 2008 @ 3:46 pm
Hi Yusef,
Perhaps I should have said byproduct or effect. What I mean is, and I’m sure Negri would agree, is that the election of an African American to the presidency of the US was made possible by a long history of struggles by social movements. I’m convinced, and I know Negri and some points earlier in his career would have agreed and I think would agree now, that something being made possible by struggles does not make that thing into a positive change, in the sense of a gain for the working class. What I can’t tell is to what degree, if any, Negri is saying the Obama election was a gain. Is that clearer?
I agree with you 100% about change being possible under capitalism and about change being managed. Not all changes are gains, and there are definitely gains possible under capitalism.
take care,
Nate
Comment by Nate — December 8, 2008 @ 8:14 pm
What I can’t tell is to what degree, if any, Negri is saying the Obama election was a gain. Is that clearer?
My reading of Negri: 1)The novelty of Obama’s election is not in doubt;2) The power imparted by this novelty is in doubt;3) The power imparted by the novelty will be evaluated by the way Obama deals with the economic crisis and peace; 4) “The direction which Obama will take in solving these two big problems will make us understand to what extent we are not finding ourselves in front of a umpteenth media spectacle but in front of a real historical and epochal transformation.” 5) By saying we may be merely “finding ourselves in front of a umpteenth media spectacle” indicates to me Negri considers a possibility that the Obama election was no gain at all—that the power imparted by the novelty of his victory may turn out to be zero.6) My opinion is that whether Obama is a dud or not will be determined by how effectively he can be pushed by the masses. How the hell the masses can find a way to effectively push Obama is the only serious question for me, and for insights into how, the only reason for reading Negri.
Comment by Yusef — December 9, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
“What I can’t tell is to what degree, if any, Negri is saying the Obama election was a gain. Is that clearer?”
My reading of Negri: 1)The novelty of Obama’s election is not in doubt;2) The power imparted by this novelty is in doubt;3) The power imparted by the novelty will be evaluated by the way Obama deals with the economic crisis and peace; 4) “The direction which Obama will take in solving these two big problems will make us understand to what extent we are not finding ourselves in front of a umpteenth media spectacle but in front of a real historical and epochal transformation.” 5) By saying we may be merely “finding ourselves in front of a umpteenth media spectacle” indicates to me Negri considers a possibility that the Obama election was no gain at all—that the power imparted by the novelty of his victory may turn out to be zero.6) My opinion is that whether Obama is a dud or not will be determined by how effectively he can be pushed by the masses. How the hell the masses can find a way to effectively push Obama is the only serious question for me, and for insights into how, the only reason for reading Negri.
Comment by Yusef — December 9, 2008 @ 1:53 pm