i like cleaver. arguably the best anglophone autonomist writer. the introduction to RCP is a great first dip into autonomism. so much better than the dodgy liberal overtones of Katsiaficas, for example. my main criticism of him (although it is a criticism of autonomism in general) is that he overemphasises production as a metaphor for the capitalist organisation of society. i think it is more complex than he makes out. sure, the 'non-productive' spaces and times of our everyday lives are organised in such a way that encourages greater capital accumulation for bosses and greater disciplinary power for the state, but i think the modes of that inducement aren't as simplistic as 'X is a factory', 'Y is a factory', as autonomist rhetoric and slogans suggest.

anglophone: good word. Much appreciated, have you by chance read Aufheben's critique of RCP?

hey fellow worker, I'll totally read and discuss that book with you but not at Libcom. How about an email list - googlegroups or something? (By the way, I think Aufheben's response to the book is embarassingly bad.)

i've not read the Aufheben critique. maybe we can just discuss it here. ncwob - i scan-read the stuff you posted on libcom. i will make some more constructive contributions forthwith...

Libcom finally got to you Nate? I mean, entirely understandable. Anyway, I've had and incredibly busy week and have been lax in reading and posting, but I'd like to finish up one more chapter by the week's end and I'll post up my thoughts this very thread. Looking forward to our discussion...

There were Wobs who, before 1917, saw a flaw in Marx's reasoning, but they were too shy to push for a population control policy.

In the 1930s Keynes showed how to circumvent the internal contradiction in Capitalism described by Marx. Unfortunately there are stupid politicians and economists who have failed to understand what is going on, misused Keynes' remedies and destroyed their efficacy. That misuse of Keynes theories destroys Earth's ability to support Life.

Few people today realise the scale of the changes that are coming. Few try to change the climate of opinion. Those that do, like the Global Commons Institute, are ignored. The worst is happening.

It will be interesting to see whether this book has any relevance when you have finished reading it. Has the writer come up with something like the Dialectical Synthesis of Marx and Malthus?

Fellow worker Ilyan, I respectfully request that you start a new thread for that topic as it's not discussed in the book and so is off-topic for this discussion.

Nate-

Some Fellow Workers choose to stand on Marx's shoulders and look back to see where he went wrong. Some Fellow workers will have nothing to do with Marx. Some are dogmatic Marxists. Some talk of Scientific Marxism. Wobblies are a representative bunch.

It is rather pointless to read a book that does not look back to see where Marx went wrong. Without a clear understanding of that it would be madness to use Marxism to map out a path for the future.

Marx gives a brilliant analysis of Capitalism. That is a good tool for Wobs to have, but we do not intend to build a Capitalist society, embedding their thinking in our psyche is not a good way forward.

Does this book lead to a sterile academic wilderness? Those who are reading it need to know what signs to look for. With luck they will soon tell us about it.

First let me apologize for not posting up as I said I would. We got a half-way decent discussion going at Libcom, but online discussion groups are surprisingly tough to keep up...

 Anyway, Ilyan, to answer your question (I think), Cleaver's title pretty much describes what he intended to do with the book: to present Capital as a political document, i.e. to view it a tool to not only understanding the functioning of capitalism, but how to use that understanding to effectively oppose capitalism. While it's certainly not a flawless document, Cleaver is an autonomous Marxist and has an interpretation of Marx that is particuarily attractive to those who consider themselves of the libertarian left.