is the difference between the labour of the subjected human and the labour of “What the liberated human… or rather the human in struggle?” () This is perhaps the central question that leads Negri from to his later work with Hardt on the Marx Beyond Marx Empire trilogy. Basing themselves on the published and posthumous work of Foucault on biopolitics as well as on Deleuze’s critical engagement with it, in and Empire, Multitude, Negri and Hardt further expand the biopolitical reading of the in Commonwealth Grundrisse order to identify a dialectical tendency in biopower: labor is the fundamental human “Living faculty: the ability to engage the world actively and create social life. Living labor can be corralled by capital…. [but] our innovative and creative capacities are always greater than our productive labor productive, that is, of capital. At this point we can recognize that this – biopolitical production is on the one hand because it cannot be quantified in immeasurable, fixed units of time, and, on the other hand, always with respect to the value that excessive capital can extract from it because capital can never capture all of life” (). The more capital increases its real subsumption of living labor, the more does this labor resist its domination by becoming or labour. As Negri says, immaterial labour is “immaterial” “intellectual” “a becoming-intellectual of labour: in other words, a labour which is mobile in space, flexible in terms of time, often independent in terms of how and where it is carried out” (). The idea of labour” in Negri is closely connected to his interpretation of “immaterial the so-called on machines” of the where Marx famously yet obscurely Grundrisse “chapter gave an argument for his of capital,” that is, the tendency for the rate of profit to “law decrease with the increase in productivity of labour due to technological innovation. Marx’s basic idea is that the more machines take on the less will workers be needed in the “work,” process of production. However, this decrease in living labour also entails that capital’s power to reduce necessary labour time, and thus to increase disposable labour time which is the source of surplus value itself, itself decreases at a rate that is higher than the increase in
“What is the difference between the labour of the subjected human and the labour of the liberated human… or rather the human in struggle?” () This is perhaps the central question that leads Negri from Marx Beyond Marx to his later work with Hardt on the Empire trilogy. Basing themselves on the published and posthumous work of Foucault on biopolitics as well as on Deleuze’s critical engagement with it, in Empire, Multitude, and Commonwealth Negri and Hardt further expand the biopolitical reading of the Grundrisse in order to identify a dialectical tendency in biopower: “Living labor is the fundamental human faculty: the ability to engage the world actively and create social life. Living labor can be corralled by capital…. [but] our innovative and creative capacities are always greater than our productive labor – productive, that is, of capital. At this point we can recognize that this biopolitical production is on the one hand immeasurable, because it cannot be quantified in fixed units of time, and, on the other hand, always excessive with respect to the value that capital can extract from it because capital can never capture all of life” (). The more capital increases its real subsumption of living labor, the more does this labor resist its domination by becoming “immaterial” or “intellectual” labour. As Negri says, immaterial labour is “a becoming-intellectual of labour: in other words, a labour which is mobile in space, flexible in terms of time, often independent in terms of how and where it is carried out” (). The idea of “immaterial labour” in Negri is closely connected to his interpretation of the so-called “chapter on machines” of the Grundrisse where Marx famously yet obscurely gave an argument for his “law of capital,” that is, the tendency for the rate of profit to decrease with the increase in productivity of labour due to technological innovation. Marx’s basic idea is that the more machines take on “work,” the less will workers be needed in the process of production. However, this decrease in living labour also entails that capital’s power to reduce necessary labour time, and thus to increase disposable labour time which is the source of surplus value itself, itself decreases at a rate that is higher than the increase in
vatter_community_and_subjectivity_in_italian_biopolitics_5.docx