Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Poet who wrote (3237)	3/17/2002 11:12:17 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

I find that CSPAN rebroadcasts most things but they don't display their schedules very far in advance, no more than a day, so you have to keep going back and looking for rebroadcasts. I usually forget what it was I wanted to see or even that there was something that I wanted to see. The reason my TV was set to CSPAN was that I woke up at five something this morning, clicked through the channels, and ended up watching something really interesting, which I meant to post about but hadn't gotten around to it yet. This was the show: <<Michael Hardt discusses his book Empire, which he wrote with Italian scholar and revolutionary Antonio Negri, currently imprisoned in Rome. The book offers a new description of the international global order in which, they argue, capitalist imperialism has been replaced by something best described as "Empire." >> Anything would have been hard to watch at that hour of the morning. Even it I had seen it from the beginning. Even if the subject and presentation weren't very philosophical. Even if the speaker had talked rather than reading a very, very dense lecture. Still, it was interesting. It challenged a lot of fundamental ideas we have about democracy, the viability of nation states, war, etc.. and modern equivalents of monarchical and aristocratic entities. I have added the book to my list. I didn't get enough of what he was saying to know if I agreed or disagreed with any of it, but it was clearly challenging to conventional wisdom and I think it would be educational. It was also different from a lot of political books in that it had an intellectual, abstract, philosophical approach. Not a rant. I looked to see if there had been any discussion of the book on SI and found this brief one: Message 16450799 . I can see why it got the reaction that it did, but I think it was dismissed to easily. Karen