Re-Enchanting the World

Esta serie de ensayos de Silvia me parecieron muy claros, concisos e interesantes. La noción de los comunes vista desde varias perspectivas.

Una de las cosas que más me gustó es la recuperación de la reproducción de la vida cotidiana como eje central de la lucha política. A partir de ahí, la construcción de la organización social, política y económica partiendo de ello.

Otra noción relevante es la de los trabajos de cuidados. Me parece muy importante recuperar esa noción por lo desvalorizada que está. El trabajo de cuidados nos corresponde a todxs y es parte sustancial de nuestra capacidad de formar comunidad; pero comunidades que nos nutran física, emocional y espiritualmente. Un reto ahorita muy grande, pues el capitalismo ha desarticulado nuestras comunidades y nuestras conexiones y las ha capitalizado a través de las redes sociales privativas.

Mucho que seguir discutiendo. Estos ensayos son un buen punto de partida para charlar con nuestros amores.

I was rather excited to read this given how it discusses a lot of topics that I have a lot of interest in, especially given how much I liked the Wages Against Housework essay, but was left feeling rather disappointed. Federici makes a lot of broad claims which are left without any real backing or elaboration, especially when it comes to matters of what occurs internationally. I left this book with a vague sense of something going on between "Africa" and the World Bank, but not much past that. If someone were to ask me how the World Bank engages in enclosure, I am not at all confident I can explain that given what I've gotten from this book.

The essays keep retreading a lot of ground, but somehow the arguments still are really spread thin since what's getting repeated is the broad claims. The picture painted of a lot of the various societies and movements she cites seems rather one-sided/romanticized, but I don't want to harp on this too strongly since history is far from my strong-suit, so I really cannot testify to the accuracy of her claims one way or another.

But as I got on later into the book, the arguments started to get more specific and coherent, and I quite like that. As it stands though, I really do not feel like I can comfortably cite this without running the risk of basing my arguments on misinformation.