View this link:

http://larvalsubjects.wordpress.com/2009/01/15/of-assembly/

In response to my loosely thought-out comments and criticism on his notion of the “hegemonic fallacy,” Sinthome has this to say:

Of particular importance in this connection are Latour’s Principle and the Principle of Reality. The Hegemonic Fallacy doesn’t deny that some differences dominate and overdetermine other differences. Rather, it denies that all differences can be traced back to a single ground or origin that contains them “virtually” as Hegel’s category of Being already contains all the subsequent categorical determinations…

Latour’s Principle states that there is no transportation without translation. According to this principle, if we can speak of entities like capitalism or class, then we must be able to discuss how these entities are assembled or put together. How does class come to be an entity? How does capitalism come to be an entity? If this question emerges, then this is because capitalism and class must transport itself to other entities and this requires translation or labor. That is, the entities cannot simply be subsumed like so many variables in a mathematical function. Moreover, those entities that are enlisted or assembled by these “super-entities” often resist and have other ideas…

I’m not really sure I agree with Sinthome’s remarks on Hegel here, but what he has to say about translation and transportation (and, for that matter, the contrast between structures and assemblages) is definitely something that interests me and hopefully I can comment on it further in the near future. Also, I think Graham Harman’s blog overreacts to my comment, which was limited to Sinthome’s reading of Kant (and, to an extent, Lacan).

Anyhow, I have some other thoughts that are in the comments section of Sinthome’s post. If you’re curious, you can read them there.