tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post8668882566701868329..comments2024-03-27T09:14:27.496+00:00Comments on All That Is Solid ...: Altermodernity and the CommonPhilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-34029287062805684572017-10-19T19:31:57.497+01:002017-10-19T19:31:57.497+01:00And Lenin also talked about how Russia wasn't ...And Lenin also talked about how Russia wasn't a socialist state but variously a workers' state with bureaucratic deformations and state capitalism. Likewise, Marx and Engels advocated state ownership but did not equate that with socialism, in much the same way anarchists (presumably) advocate wage rises without pretending that's one and the same thing as abolishing waged labour.Philhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06298147857234479278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-83606289481693875522017-10-19T15:42:49.756+01:002017-10-19T15:42:49.756+01:00"While Marx and Engels, and arguably Lenin di..."While Marx and Engels, and arguably Lenin did not identify socialism with state ownership, Labourism certainly has."<br /><br />Seriously? Have you not read "The Manifesto of the Communist Party" and a many other text which in Marx and Engels clearly DO identify socialism with state ownership? As for Lenin, he was discussing how the Post Office was the model for his socialist State in 1917... as for his practice, yes, he replaced capitalists with State bureaucrats (with one-man management armed with "dictatorial" powers against the workers).<br /><br />The main socialist tendency which placed workers' self-management and self-organisation of production at its core has been anarchism -- from Proudhon onwards. Marxists have, in general, been for State ownership and centralised planning. Those who have not -- like the council communists -- were denounced by Lenin as being anarchists...<br /><br />Iain<br /><a href="http://www.anarchistfaq.org" rel="nofollow">An Anarchist FAQ</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-67121984258383835842017-10-17T11:21:26.488+01:002017-10-17T11:21:26.488+01:00I am dubious about Hardt & Negri's concept...I am dubious about Hardt & Negri's concept of altermodernity (do we really need any more qualifiers of "modernity"?). While their work does contain useful insights about the here and now, they share a common [sic] failing with other gropers after the postcapitalist sublime in that it too often spins off into transcendent mysticism. I fear that their contribution to "translating the experiences of movements into concepts that demystify the social world" remains patchy at best.David Timoneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03568348438980023320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4486641877026778105.post-78356663909262794502017-10-17T08:37:11.173+01:002017-10-17T08:37:11.173+01:00Given that capitalism has confounded previous pred...Given that capitalism has confounded previous predictions of its demise do you have any suggestions of how it might do so with these ideas?<br /><br />It occurs to me that the Internet will be critical for these new commons. The attempts by US cable companies to remove net neutrality might be a hint.<br /><br />Infrastructure vital to us all and even public spaces are now largely in private hands. Is there really a better option for these things than common ownership through government agencies in a democracy?SimonBnoreply@blogger.com