Hardt & Negri "Empire"

 Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri’s Empire (2000) is a foundational text in contemporary political theory, offering a provocative rethinking of global sovereignty, power, and resistance in the age of globalization. Departing from classical Marxist paradigms, Empire argues that the current world order is no longer dominated by individual nation-states or imperialist hegemonies but by a decentered, deterritorialized network of control they call “Empire.” This network represents a new form of sovereignty that transcends traditional boundaries, incorporating elements of political, economic, and cultural power into a global apparatus. The book is both a critique of the new global order and a manifesto of resistance, centered on the revolutionary potential of what the authors call the "multitude."

At the heart of Empire lies a key historical argument: the transition from modern imperialism to postmodern Empire. In the era of imperialism, sovereign power was centered in individual nation-states which projected military, economic, and cultural influence over other territories. However, by the late twentieth century, the rise of globalization began dissolving these traditional centers of power. The authors assert that no single nation, including the United States, holds hegemonic control over the world order. Instead, sovereignty has become dispersed among supranational institutions (such as the IMF, WTO, and UN), multinational corporations, and transnational legal frameworks. These institutions work together to produce a global order that regulates not only economic production but also subjectivity and social life.

Empire, in this context, is not a conspiracy of global elites but a diffuse, hybrid form of sovereignty. It is characterized by its flexibility, mobility, and capacity for assimilation. The logic of Empire is immanent to globalization—it thrives not by conquering from without but by incorporating differences from within. Empire operates through a dynamic of inclusion and normalization, absorbing local identities, cultures, and resistances by transforming them into functions of global capital and governance.

One of the central innovations of Empire is the shift from the concept of “the people” or “the proletariat” to that of the “multitude.” Whereas traditional Marxism focuses on a unified working class struggling against the bourgeoisie, Hardt and Negri posit that the multitude is a heterogeneous and networked body of singularities—plural, diverse, and mobile. Unlike “the masses,” which implies an undifferentiated, unified subject, the multitude consists of differentiated individuals whose productive and creative powers are key to contemporary capitalism.

This distinction is especially important in the post-Fordist economic context, where the authors highlight a move away from industrial labor to what they term “immaterial labor.” In today’s knowledge economy, labor is no longer confined to the factory but is increasingly cognitive, affective, and communicative. Immaterial labor produces not just goods but relationships, meanings, and subjectivities. This form of labor is deeply social and relational, occurring in open networks of cooperation. The production of ideas, images, affects, and knowledge forms the basis of value in postmodern capitalism. Hence, the multitude, as the subject of this new form of labor, holds within it the capacity to resist and overturn Empire.

Yet Empire does not merely describe the mechanics of global capitalism—it is also deeply concerned with the politics of resistance. Hardt and Negri draw on a variety of traditions, from Spinoza’s ontology of immanence to Deleuze and Guattari’s theory of the rhizome, to propose a politics rooted in autonomy, creativity, and desire. They reject both nostalgic Marxism and liberal reformism, seeking instead a revolutionary potential inherent in the very structures of Empire. Because Empire integrates and absorbs difference, the site of resistance must be internal and immanent. The authors argue that the multitude, through acts of biopolitical production and networked cooperation, can create new forms of life that escape the control of Empire.

Biopolitics, a key term in Empire, refers to the regulation and production of life itself. Empire governs not just through institutions and armies but through the management of bodies, desires, and subjectivities. This follows from Michel Foucault’s notion of biopower, which describes how modern power functions not by repressing life but by shaping and organizing it. However, Hardt and Negri extend Foucault’s concept by emphasizing the productive capacities of the multitude. The multitude produces life, relationships, communication, and affects—hence it also possesses the capacity for biopolitical resistance. Resistance, then, is not a matter of seizing the state but of creating new forms of living, new commons, and new institutions that exist outside and beyond Empire’s logic.

While Empire offers a powerful conceptual apparatus, it has also generated considerable controversy and critique. Some scholars argue that the book underestimates the continued role of nation-states and military power. Others suggest that the notion of Empire is too abstract or utopian. Furthermore, the book’s faith in the revolutionary potential of the multitude has been questioned, especially given the fragmentation and precarity of contemporary labor. Critics also point out that Hardt and Negri’s emphasis on the immanence of power and resistance may blur the distinction between critique and affirmation, making it difficult to determine concrete strategies for political change.

Nonetheless, Empire remains a landmark intervention. Its originality lies in reframing global capitalism not as a new imperialism but as a new form of sovereignty altogether. Rather than relying on traditional leftist binaries (bourgeoisie vs. proletariat, state vs. civil society), the book maps a new terrain of struggle—one in which power is networked, mobile, and immanent, and in which resistance must also be networked, creative, and plural.

The work draws from an impressive range of thinkers and traditions, weaving together insights from Marx, Spinoza, Foucault, Deleuze, Gramsci, and postcolonial theory. It presents a deeply interdisciplinary vision that cuts across political science, philosophy, sociology, and cultural studies. The result is a theoretical synthesis that seeks to understand not just the structure of global power, but also the modes of subjectivity, labor, and life that emerge under its rule.

Importantly, Hardt and Negri do not conclude Empire with despair. Instead, they end with a hopeful vision of global democracy and liberation. They argue that the same networks that sustain Empire—communication technologies, global mobility, and collaborative labor—also provide the basis for resistance. The multitude can appropriate these networks for its own ends, creating new forms of democratic organization that challenge the sovereignty of Empire. In a world where control operates through flows and networks, resistance must do the same: through collective intelligence, decentralized organization, and the creation of new commons.