Talk:Empire (book)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
Contents |
[edit] Request for expansion
I have tagged this article to request expansion. Empire counts as a major text in globalization studies, particularly for scholars in the humanities, and as such deserves more attention. The current version of the article (3 Dec. 2006) notably omits any discussion of labor and production—and Hardt and Negri's discussion of immaterial labor is among the most important aspects of the book.
I suggest expanding this article wholesale, perhaps using section headings corresponding to the numbered parts of the book. Job L 22:49, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Question
The statement: the Empire is constituted by a monarchy (the United States and the G8, and international organizations such as NATO, the IMF or the WTO), an oligarchy (the multinational corporations and other nation-states) and a democracy (the various NGOs and the United Nations). Seems at best misleading or even a falsification of Negri's concept of Empire.
Empire is neither localized, nor fixed in a given geographic area. He claimed it is decentralized. this is found within the first pages of the book. So claimed that Empire is constitued by a monarch (the United States) infers that the united States is Empire, and Negri says this is hardly the case. The US however occupies a priviledge position within Empire. So, I think this needs to be cleaned up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.150.41.123 (talk) 16:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC).
The statement is actually a quote from the book (chapter 3.5) and thus very relevant towards explaining the main concept behind the book
- In addition, I would point out that the inclusion not just of the US but also of the G8, the IMF, NATO, etc. preclude the reading that the US "is Empire"--Empire as a whole is not localizable and has no single center, but its multiple and diffuse centers (in the plural) of control are geographically localizable. Job L 16:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Name
Title should be changed to [[Empire (2000 book)]], so as not to be confused with the 2006 Orson Scott Card novel of the same name. --Anon.
- Sure? Currently the other novels (not just by OSC) have disambiguations of "(DATE novel)", not "(book)". As this Empire is not a novel, it seems accurate to me. --Gwern (contribs) 17:15 1 December 2006 (GMT)
[edit] Specific movement
Changed "Marxist" to "Autonomist Marxist" as Hardt and Negri's political theory is properly categorized and widely held. --jonnylocks
- Reverted. Autonomous Marxism is a specific movement, to which Negri took part in, but Empire was written in 2000... It's not the 1970s anymore. --Lapaz 01:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Generated a different page for Motyl's theory
Being this an ecyclopedic article about the concept of an empire, I think that an entire section dedicated to the theory of one author on the subject, wich was also mistitled "imperial systems", violates both intent of neutrality and universal view. As such, I have created a different page that encompasses the author's views on the matter; Motyl's Theory of the Empire.--T.S.Boncompte 15:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
