Marx seems to understand the world under capitalism as reducing more and more people to a base level of subsistence as they labor in a society that depends on them. If this was true, then these workers would obviously revolt against the class system which has no real force on them. The result of the revolution would be to return to a state that all people are on the same level.
I imagine Marx's post-capitalist world to be like a primordial ooze of undifferentiated human matter. Without the environmental pressures of the capitalism, the people would be reduce to the sophistication a clump of single cell organisms who subsist in the same area without accomplishing anything for one another. It is not by lack of motivation or freedom that the post-capitalist would have nothing to say for himself but rather the lack dependence relations which organized individuals without conscious design to produce something remarkable.
As capitalism becomes more sophisticated, the worker is not brought down to subsistence of the lowest of goods but to a dependence on everything produced in the society. Workers are expected to have one or more of every good the system has required of them to perpetuate itself. Books for summer reading, cable television channels, cellphones are all examples of things every citizen of capitalism participates in at some point in their life and in each case there is a willful dependency on the these goods.
This leads me to imagine capitalism as more of a multi-cellular species capable of doing more sophisticated things on a level above its individual components which can persist despite the death of individuals who originally compose it.
Like the cells of the human body which depend on each other for survival without consciousness thereof, so does each person in capitalism. For example, one person makes the product for another to package for another to ship so that another can unpackage and put on a shelf for yet another person to consume. In this whole complicated process just so one individual can consume one product, each individual relies on the person to come before and their is no need for anyone involved to know one another because they are doing their tasks to the pied piper of green. Even the employers need not know what any individual is doing in the process towards consumption as long as in the big picture profit is being made.
I only made this analogy because I think is goes further than merely distinguishing characteristics between the humanistic community of communism and alienating regime of capitalism. I think my analogy points at the future evolution of economical systems, that like multi-cellular life, we will be seeing much more of capitalism, and like bacteria pallets, communism will persist but without the higher functionality granted to a society organized under capitalism.
I imagine Marx's post-capitalist world to be like a primordial ooze of undifferentiated human matter. Without the environmental pressures of the capitalism, the people would be reduce to the sophistication a clump of single cell organisms who subsist in the same area without accomplishing anything for one another. It is not by lack of motivation or freedom that the post-capitalist would have nothing to say for himself but rather the lack dependence relations which organized individuals without conscious design to produce something remarkable.
As capitalism becomes more sophisticated, the worker is not brought down to subsistence of the lowest of goods but to a dependence on everything produced in the society. Workers are expected to have one or more of every good the system has required of them to perpetuate itself. Books for summer reading, cable television channels, cellphones are all examples of things every citizen of capitalism participates in at some point in their life and in each case there is a willful dependency on the these goods.
This leads me to imagine capitalism as more of a multi-cellular species capable of doing more sophisticated things on a level above its individual components which can persist despite the death of individuals who originally compose it.
Like the cells of the human body which depend on each other for survival without consciousness thereof, so does each person in capitalism. For example, one person makes the product for another to package for another to ship so that another can unpackage and put on a shelf for yet another person to consume. In this whole complicated process just so one individual can consume one product, each individual relies on the person to come before and their is no need for anyone involved to know one another because they are doing their tasks to the pied piper of green. Even the employers need not know what any individual is doing in the process towards consumption as long as in the big picture profit is being made.
I only made this analogy because I think is goes further than merely distinguishing characteristics between the humanistic community of communism and alienating regime of capitalism. I think my analogy points at the future evolution of economical systems, that like multi-cellular life, we will be seeing much more of capitalism, and like bacteria pallets, communism will persist but without the higher functionality granted to a society organized under capitalism.
Eric,
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting way to depict the differences between communism and capitalism, and I very much enjoy the questions it is raising for me.
If we take Marx’s claim that the purpose of capitalism is to obtain surplus profit, then I do not think we could say that capitalism is more sophisticated. I think Marx would claim that inherent in your view are the values of capitalism, and these values are less sophisticated that communist values simply because of their differences with respect to the treatment, recognition, and fulfillment of humanity.
The point of view in your argument assumes sophistication in a capitalist light. It assumes that material gains and practical devices are needed, but I think they are only needed insofar as capitalism directs us to believe them to be so. In this sense, capitalism perpetuates itself by instilling these values in a manner such that humanity believes them to be necessary or useful or practical. It defines what is practical and makes us participate in it.
Material gains and odd, but capitalism-practical, capitalism-useful devices are simply byproducts in the pursuit of surplus profit regardless. There is no guarantee that the byproduct will truly benefit humanity. Ipod, Imac, Iphone, Ichat; I can do all of these things without making eye-contact (referencing a poem by Marshal Jones that takes a look at how technology has removed us from our humanity, linked here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAx845QaOck). So though these objects and the system of Capitalism may be more complex, I do not agree that they possess a higher level of sophistication.
I am not meaning so say level of technology is sophistication but rather that humanity is different in capitalism than it is in communism. I was wondering what a communism and capitalism do at the society level that is different and a drew blanks on what a pure human species being would be up to. This reminded me of just primordial ooze because of how kind of bland and undifferentiated it was. I thought that maybe is it is what divides us in capitalism from what we are doing which allows for sophistication at the expense of the individual to flourish on the societal level. This kind of sophistication is merely that of complexity of function, not a statement of how advanced they are or a value judgment.
DeleteAs for the removing us from our humanity, I don't think there is much point in griping about it. Whatever we are is what we are. A particular form of humanity has no more value than another under this kind of analysis, which tries to see things from above society. You could claim such a view from above is impossible, but that is what approximation and guess work is for. I am trying to get an idea of what these two system of human group functionality would be like in comparision to what kind of activities they can perform as a whole.
I find this analogy intriguing. I find I agree with Pierce in that this seems to take a very capitalist viewpoint to analyze the differences in my opinion. It appears that you are arguing that what differentiates people is their place in society and in the capitalist system, that these are the only things that separate us as distinct humans. I would argue that these do separate us as distinct people but in very artificial ways. Even in a communist system people would be distinguished by their interests, relations, and role in society. I also feel like many workers are brought to levels of the lowest good, it is just difficult to see as white, middle class Americans and not examining the factory workers in Asia or even the children starving in the U.S. The system pressures them to buy other things that may not be helpful or fruitful to their lives.
ReplyDelete