Order the summer edition here

Communism as entrepreneurship

A revolution today must be about the oppressed having to take power in a new way, not about private property rights and national identity.

This article was translated by Google and R.E.

Da Michael Hardt and Antonio Negris Empire appeared in 2000, it caused a veritable earthquake. Of course, there had been countless critical analyzes of historical development following the fall of the Berlin Wall, but none of them had effectively managed to challenge neoliberalism, which Perry Anderson called "the most successful ideology of world history" that year. 1989 had never been the release many Marxists had hoped for. The fall of the wall and the subsequent collapse of the Soviet Union was not an opening, but an end. Instead of rethinking and updating Marx's critique of capitalist economics and communism's revolutionary project, the 1990s stood in the sign of capitalist globalization.

Fukuyama's description of the West's liberal market democracy as "the end of history" was just one expression of the period's excessive confidence in capital's ability to self-reform. The abandoning of Stalinist historian Eric Hobsbawm The Age of Extremes was another. Then Empire appeared and not only presented an analysis of this new globalized world as a capitalist empire, but also argued for the emergence of a new, collective, and heterogeneous revolutionary subject that threatened it. . .

Dear reader.
To continue reading, create a new free reader account with your email,
or logg inn if you have done it before. (click on forgotten password if you have not received it by email already).
Select if necessary Subscription (69kr)

avatar photos
Mikkel Bolt
Professor of political aesthetics at the University of Copenhagen.

You may also like