Occupy: 'struggles for the common or an 'anti-politics of dignity? Reflections on Hardt and Negri and John Holloway

Harrison, O ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7869-671X, 2016. Occupy: 'struggles for the common or an 'anti-politics of dignity? Reflections on Hardt and Negri and John Holloway. Capital & Class, 40 (3), pp. 495-510. ISSN 0309-8168

Preview

Text PubSub5661_Harrison.pdf - Pre-print Download (216kB) | Preview

Abstract

This article provides a critical examination of Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri’s and John Holloway’s theory of revolutionary subjectivity, and does so by applying their theories to the Occupy movement of 2011. Its central argument is that one should avoid collapsing ‘autonomist’ and ‘open’ Marxism, for whilst both approaches share Tronti’s (1979) insistence on the constituent role of class struggle, and also share an emphasis on a prefigurative politics which engages a non-hierarchical and highly participatory politics, there nevertheless remain some significant differences between their approaches. Ultimately, when applied to Occupy Movement whilst their theory isn’t entirely unproblematic, I will argue that Hardt and Negri’s ‘autonomist’ approach offers the stronger interpretation, due mainly to their revised historical materialism.

Item Type:	Journal article
Publication Title:	Capital & Class
Creators:	Harrison, O.
Publisher:	SAGE for the Conference of Socialist Economists Ltd
Date:	1 October 2016
Volume:	40
Number:	3
ISSN:	0309-8168
Identifiers:	Number Type 10.1177/0309816816653877 DOI
Divisions:	Schools > School of Social Sciences
Record created by:	Jill Tomkinson
Date Added:	13 Jul 2016 15:36
Last Modified:	19 Oct 2017 15:08
URI:	https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/28138

Actions (login required)

Edit View

Statistics

Views

Downloads