Kid of the Black Hole
01-07-2010, 07:26 PM

but ideology doesn't come in a vacuum, but rather comes packaged with the circumstances that breed it. Its a helluva lot easier to identify with the owners when you have a comfortable existence and envision yourself "getting ahead".

I think where the "force of nature" factor comes into play is when the scales come off but you STILL can't imagine any alternative..its that entrenched, that overbearing.

Kid of the Black Hole
01-07-2010, 07:42 PM

so hopefully she will stop by this thread

PinkoCommie
01-07-2010, 07:51 PM

Alright, alright. I couldn't resist.

I'm always around and will be following this as always. Busier than ever with the offline world tho, including again working to help parachute someone headed over the cliff to homelessness. Not much time fer the web at the moment...


edit - blame the misspells on the PDA. They call THIS a keyboard?!

anaxarchos
01-07-2010, 08:21 PM

People are, of course, aware of the intercourse... but it is as common as breathing so that it rarely enters our consciousness. The fetishes are what is at center stage. Thus, young stock brokers on Wall Street want money, gold, big paydays... which is rarely translated into the desire to command the labor of others, though that is precisely what is "desired". The objects acquire the attributes of their objectifiers. Of course, the whole is constantly revealed, but it is also continuously plowed back under...

Remember this cartoon? The worker knows it, as does the capitalist, but neither is often aware of it, or views this most fundamental of all social connections as the basis of any, much lesser, phenomena. In truth, the answer to "Why do you get the proceeds of my labor?" is exactly the same as that given by the Feudal lord: "By force of arms." Part of the meaning of developing "proletarian consciousness" or "self-consciousness" is in bringing to the fore and keeping there, that which is normally obscured by a thousand layers of "prices", "markets", "laws", "property" and the rest. We are describing a trade in people, conducted by other people, and not some crazy equivalent to the forces of nature which stands apart from us. All of it exists "by choice".... or, more accurately, by "force of arms".

starry messenger
01-07-2010, 10:10 PM

I remember when blindpig posted that at DU because I saved it. I never thought very deeply about capitalism until I saw this image. I read the threads here on capital and when I get in over my head I refer back to this cartoon.

Kid of the Black Hole
01-07-2010, 10:58 PM

its a good way of keeping things straight

blindpig
01-08-2010, 06:05 AM

Yeah, this this wanna-be eco-anarchist has 'evolved' a bit....

meganmonkey
01-08-2010, 07:21 AM

Haven't gotten caught up yet, but I'm around, so don't hold off on my account. I'll try to do some reading today or over the weekend.

My job is really crazy, has been taking all my time and energy for a couple months now, it's wearing me down a bit. But things should mellow out again shortly. Sorry I've been so scarce.


I'll check in at socindy too Mike...

Kid of the Black Hole
01-12-2010, 06:28 PM

I've been reading over the previous material linked to..amazing how much more significant it strikes me now, heh

http://www.thebellforum.net/Bell2/www.t ... -9634.html

Few quick, possibly tangential, questions:

1. Dhalgren wasn’t sold on fetishism pre-dating capitalism. Does Marx address whether it’s unique to the capitalist mode of production or not?

2. Anaxarchos only mentions “alienation” once in passing. I don’t mean to over simplify into a sound bite, but is it fair to see alienation as the feelings of the producer of a commodity and fetishism as the feelings of consumer of a commodity.

3. I get value, surplus, use, etc in relation to Marx’s time. I’m having trouble making sense of it in context of the world we live in now—gig economy, intellectual property, etc.