My notes: Michael Hardt, "On love [as political practice]"

The ways that love has been destroyed as a potentially powerful political concept:

1. The reduction of love to the space of the heterosexual family, that is, love as a closed social phenomenon, rather than an open, plural mode of pro-social being-in-the-world.
2.The identitarian ideas of love as love for the Same, or the creation of the Same through love: true love can be felt only for those who are essentially like us, or, alternatively, love as a hegemonizing force that transforms the object of love into the Same-as-Self. Rather than love being a kind of experiment with deep, lasting commitment to Other(s) without the presumptuous dissolution of difference and singularities.
3.The binarist division of eros/cupiditas vs. agape/caritas, or, what amounts to the same, the demotion of one pole vis-à-vis the other. That is, either caritas (charitable love for the holiness of the poor) is a side-product of libido; or, eros-libido must be "tamed" by the impulses of caritas.
4. The reduction of love to “charity,” specifically to the poor, which takes the Other as object, and not as subject. That is, a love whose terms and distribution are determined by those who are NOT poor, as opposed to a love defined and directed by the poor themselves, of which they are subject-agents, not passive thing-objects.
5. The trivialization of love as an involuntary passion or a sensation, not as a productive and incremental practice.