Tom, Why not? They are obviously writers that the NYTimes has used and
the NYTimes published their article as well as copyrighting it including the
title which states that they, the NYT, knows what the Protesters want.
REH
Tom Walker said on July 23, 2001 at 9:57 am Replying to CR
> I wouldn't take Negri and Hardt as official spokespersons for the NYTimes.
>
> At 03:28 PM 07/23/01 +0200, Christoph Reuss wrote:
> >As a follow-up to the recent FW thread on democracy and globalization,
> >I'm quoting an article from the NYT which shows that even the NYT now
> >admits what Keith seems to deny...
> >
> >Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >________http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/20/opinion/20HARDT.html________
> >
> >New York Times July 20, 2001
> >
> >
> >What the Protesters in Genoa Want
> >
> > By MICHAEL HARDT and ANTONIO NEGRI
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >The leaders, however, seem detached somehow from the transformations
> >around them, as though they are following the stage directions from a
> >dated play. We can see the photo already, though it has not yet been
> >taken: President George W. Bush as an unlikely king, bolstered by lesser
> >monarchs. This is not quite an image of the future. It resembles more an
> >archival photo, pre-1914, of superannuated royal potentates.
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >If it is not national but supranational powers that rule today's
> >globalization, however, we must recognize that this new order has no
> >democratic institutional mechanisms for representation, as nation-states
> >do: no elections, no public forum for debate.
> >
> >The rulers are effectively blind and deaf to the ruled. The protesters
> >take to the streets because this is the form of expression available to
> >them. The lack of other venues and social mechanisms is not their
> >creation.
> >
> >Antiglobalization is not an adequate characterization of the protesters
> >in Genoa (or G�teborg, Quebec, Prague, or Seattle). The globalization
> >debate will remain hopelessly confused, in fact, unless we insist on
> >qualifying the term globalization. The protesters are indeed united
> >against the present form of capitalist globalization, but the vast
> >majority of them are not against globalizing currents and forces as
> >such; they are not isolationist, separatist or even nationalist.
> >
> >The protests themselves have become global movements and one of their
> >clearest objectives is for the democratization of globalizing processes.
> >It should not be called an antiglobalization movement. It is
> >pro-globalization, or rather an alternative globalization movement - one
> >that seeks to eliminate inequalities between rich and poor and between
> >the powerful and the powerless, and to expand the possibilities of
> >self-determination.
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Tom Walker
> Bowen Island, BC
> 604 947 2213
>
