[Xmca-l] Re: As of 2020, the American Century is Over
Andy Blunden
andyb@marxists.org
Wed Apr 29 20:27:34 PDT 2020
"Alienation" originally meant just selling or gifting or
otherwise passing your product to someone else. Hegel saw
this as an essential step in the building of social ties,
and you can't argue with that, and capitalism is doing that
in a big way, tying us all up in a world market. But Hegel
thought that workers would find a form of recognition in
seeing their product circulating on the market with a social
value. That experience can be ambiguous though. Marx's claim
was that a worker's product was immediately the property of
an alien /class/, and as his daughter Eleanor said, "the
worker thus makes the rod for his own back." Derrida, for
example, takes Hegel's broader meaning and the modern
negative connotation to see "alienation" as inherent in the
very act of labour. Marx would not agree. So the
contradictory content of "alienation" can be overcome by the
workers as a class having control over the distribution of
their labour without cancelling the social bonds build by
the division of labour.
Of course we want to live in a world market and we don't
want to know everyone personally, we just want to have say
over own our part in it all. So I wouldn't disagree with
you, Martin.
Andy
------------------------------------------------------------
*Andy Blunden*
Hegel for Social Movements <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!VqEGaL64FmZV_I_um3Pz783eZ8pNEvPGYm5UvD5aGcMOmh6X_OhKzkBClkLYUt1af7ONOw$ >
Home Page <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!VqEGaL64FmZV_I_um3Pz783eZ8pNEvPGYm5UvD5aGcMOmh6X_OhKzkBClkLYUt3MKir5Cw$ >
On 30/04/2020 4:24 am, Martin Packer wrote:
> My point was about the problematic nature of the hegemony
> of exchange-based relations (i.e. the capitalist relation
> in which "what value can I get from you" - you might call
> it "The Art of the Deal"!). At the very least, might you
> agree that it is a problem if we see ALL human
> relationships in these terms?
>
> I don’t think it could ever happen, Greg. So I’m not going
> to worry about it.
>
> I do seem to be disagreeing with everyone on xmca these
> days! Perhaps it’s my way of coping. Perhaps it’s because
> I think that if there was ever a time for thinking things
> through carefully it is now.
>
> Surely impersonal anonymous kinds of interactions must
> have begun as soon as anything large enough to be called a
> city came into existence. I’m not a big fan of Dunbar’s
> number, but surely there are limits to the number of
> people with whom one can have an personal relationship,
> and those limits were exceeded at least 6,000 years ago.
>
> And is xmca a place of personal relationships? I have met
> in person less than 5 people on this list, I think. That’s
> to say, we make constant, fruitful and enjoyable use of
> impersonal relationships, including here. I for one
> wouldn’t wish to return to a time when everyone lived in
> villages of less than 150 people.
>
> And what I remember from Marx is that the original sin of
> capitalism is alienation of people not from one another
> but from their own labor. (Though the former may be one of
> the consequences of the latter.) Of course exploitation
> didn’t start with capitalism either, though wage labor
> under capitalism is a frighteningly efficient kind of
> exploitation. But if I had been born in feudal times I
> might have been laboring for the lord of the manor, who
> probably didn’t know me by name. If born in Roman times I
> might have been a slave, working for the lady of the villa.
>
> I appreciate that we are all experiencing a certain
> nostalgia for the good old days, of perhaps 4 months ago.
> And that those of us in lockdown are craving genuine
> personal interaction. But I’m not convinced that there
> ever was a golden age, a time when development was not
> distorted and people were not exploited. It is true that
> Pleistocene hunter-gatherers seem to have had a
> face-to-face kind of community in which collaboration and
> sharing were central. But even they practiced infanticide
> and left their old behind when they moved to a new camp. I
> don’t think I would have lasted then as long as I have now.
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>> On Apr 29, 2020, at 11:41 AM, Helena Worthen
>> <helenaworthen@gmail.com
>> <mailto:helenaworthen@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Greg, I think you are drawing attention to one of the
>> consequences of the distortion of human development under
>> capitalism. If that’s what you mean, then yes, the
>> phenomenon of relationships that dead-end when a
>> commodity exchange has taken place, rather than moving in
>> a circle of reciprocal contribution, would be an example.
>>
>> A small relatively new private music school near us
>> apparently has not been paying either its state
>> unemployment insurance payroll taxes or making its
>> equivalent contribution to a special fund set up for
>> non-profits. Now, with the lockdown, it is having to deal
>> with reimbursing the state for unemployment claims by its
>> laid-off teachers. If you draw the circle of reciprocal
>> contribution around this situation, look at what gets
>> linked up. Students, their families, teachers, the
>> management of the school, the enormous Employment
>> Development Department at the state level, the
>> legislature…the circle is gigantic, elements of it way
>> beyond the horizon of what most people linked up in it
>> imagine.
>>
>> In this case, the “cut and run” took place at the point
>> where the Board of the school decided somehow to assume
>> they could risk taking on the obligation of paying
>> unemployment benefits rather than pay the payroll tax.
>> Easy to do — it’s a small non-profit and this is
>> something that gets easily overlooked by inexperienced
>> managers.
>>
>> Nevertheless, the distortion that I’m thinking of — the
>> fear, anger and resentment that pile up when laid-off
>> teachers apply for UI benefits— would be a consequence of
>> capitalism.
>>
>> Helena Worthen
>> h
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://helenaworthen.wordpress.com__;!!Mih3wA!WMiwIrj0aKh8kp3SGKwBvclBmZk6gTThyyIOzQAAzRfBK1CIpbBjMxzz4gUQ8soy9jBUxA$>elenaworthen@gmail.com
>> <mailto:elenaworthen@gmail.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 29, 2020, at 7:53 AM, Martin Packer
>>> <mpacker@cantab.net <mailto:mpacker@cantab.net>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Greg,
>>>
>>> Are you suggesting that you would like to be able to
>>> build a personal relationship with each and every one of
>>> your students? And with all your colleagues at the
>>> university.? And all the staff at the local supermarket?
>>> And all the people who work to send you packages from
>>> Amazon? And ….
>>>
>>> That’s to say, there are reasons why humans have added
>>> ‘anonymous’ interactions to the personal and
>>> interpersonal relationship that (as you acknowledge) we
>>> still build and maintain.
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 28, 2020, at 10:13 PM, Greg Thompson
>>>> <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Helena,
>>>>
>>>> It sounds like you are describing the commodity fetish.
>>>> The labor of the professor is no longer seen as their
>>>> own production. Instead it is seen that the professor
>>>> simply draws from some "body of knowledge" or a
>>>> credential that has a particular (monetary) value. As
>>>> with any good (i.e., bad) commodity relation, even the
>>>> exchange relations between buyer and seller (professor
>>>> and student) are hidden and the professor is merely a
>>>> conduit to that valuable knowledge or credential. What
>>>> theprofessor has to offer isMONETIZED, perhaps we might
>>>> say that the professor themself is monetized, even
>>>> BRANDED (take a look at the web pages of young faculty
>>>> and you'll see how important "brand yourself" has
>>>> become in the academy). The professor and her work
>>>> areunderstood in terms of market value, return on
>>>> investment, earning potential of students.
>>>>
>>>> Students today understand their task as being a good
>>>> consumer; to get at least equal value from professors
>>>> as they pay in tuition. (granted much of this is via a
>>>> credential, but the professors are a big part of what
>>>> stands behind the university's credential). You'll hear
>>>> students frequently complain (rightly so) about how
>>>> much they are paying for their education followed by
>>>> some specific complaint about a professor.
>>>>
>>>> This is all part of a larger system in which this is
>>>> understood as how the world works. You get what you pay
>>>> for. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. And so
>>>> on. Can we blame students for wanting to know what they
>>>> are going to "get" for the money that they pay for
>>>> college, and note that this gets even more intense
>>>> during hard economic times, of which we are deep into
>>>> right this moment(although the fear usually takes a
>>>> semester or two before people start fleeing the
>>>> humanities and the social sciences to business,
>>>> engineering, computer science, or pre-anything).
>>>>
>>>> (and Lave and Mcdermott's article on Estranged Labor
>>>> Learning might be worth revisiting in this regard?)
>>>>
>>>> In addition to Marx's commodity fetish, arelated and
>>>> interesting way to think of this is interms of Marcel
>>>> Mauss' notion of gift vs. exchange economy (if you'll
>>>> allow me to oversimplify a bit). The main difference is
>>>> that an exchange economy involves transactions that are
>>>> always calculated to be of exactly equal value. The $13
>>>> pair of shoes I buy at the store are worth EXACTLY $13.
>>>> Each party to the transaction gets their "money's
>>>> worth". Sounds great right? Fair, to be sure. Except it
>>>> means that there is no relationship established between
>>>> the parties. After the exchange, the parties no longer
>>>> have any meaningful relationship. In contrast, a
>>>> gifting relationship is not responded in kind (at least
>>>> not initially). As Mary Douglas says in her intro to
>>>> Mauss' book The Gift, "there are no free gifts". Note
>>>> that this is a very different statement from Milton
>>>> Friedman's "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch".
>>>> Douglas means that the gift creates a sense of
>>>> obligation and thus a relationship. As much as we might
>>>> understand this in intimate spaces, as Americans in
>>>> public spaces all we know are exchange relationships
>>>> (people reject healthcare for all b.c. "why should I
>>>> have to pay for healthcare for someone else", ditto for
>>>> education (yes, there is a movement in the US to get
>>>> rid of public education!)). This is the logic behind
>>>> the out-of-hand rejection of socialism - it does not
>>>> make sense in the logic of exchange. And, of course,
>>>> taxes are justified only in as much as you "get"
>>>> something for it (roads, police, fire department,
>>>> public transport, etc.) and increasingly tax dollars
>>>> are getting hyper-localized so that you get precisely
>>>> what you pay for and don't pay a dime more (e.g., gated
>>>> communities with private police force, fire dept, etc).
>>>>
>>>> Interestingly I just today was privilege to hear a
>>>> colleague present about his work in Papua New Guinea
>>>> (the island of Missima, in the Massim region - the site
>>>> of the Kula ring made famous to Westerners by
>>>> Malinowski - and yes, the Kula ring still operates
>>>> today). He noted that Missimans can't understand why
>>>> Americans (and other Westerners) are so interested in
>>>> engaging in exchanges that cut ties (e.g., buying
>>>> things from them and then running off). And when
>>>> Missimans do try to engage in gifting relationships
>>>> with Americans, they are struck by how quickly the
>>>> Americans run off, never to return (what idiots those
>>>> Americans are!). It is absolutely baffling to them
>>>> since they spend their days building relationships with
>>>> others. Why would someone not want relationships with
>>>> others?
>>>>
>>>> Can we perhaps understand their bafflement?
>>>>
>>>> And what, then, is human development within a world
>>>> where relations of exchange are everything? (and
>>>> thankfully, it isn't total, we Americans still view kin
>>>> relations as something more than an exchange relation).
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, that's at least two times two cents too much.
>>>> And terribly inchoate. Far too "off the cuff". Apologies.
>>>>
>>>> -greg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 11:19 AM Helena Worthen
>>>> <helenaworthen@gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:helenaworthen@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Helena Worthen
>>>> helenaworthen.wordpress.com
>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://helenaworthen.wordpress.com__;!!Mih3wA!UVu0FyqJVuJenyvV_scJ3MWPEkVsnH0IzNgN9NaOMBtflAfvMwpBsESRDItyh51rXR3z3Q$>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 27, 2020, at 7:48 PM, Andy Blunden
>>>>> <andyb@marxists.org <mailto:andyb@marxists.org>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> How about this Helena?:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Time is the room of human development. A man
>>>>> who has no free time to dispose of, whose
>>>>> whole lifetime, apart from the mere physical
>>>>> interruptions by sleep, meals, and so forth,
>>>>> is absorbed by his labour for the capitalist,
>>>>> is less than a beast of burden. He is a mere
>>>>> machine for producing Foreign Wealth, broken
>>>>> in body and brutalized in mind. Yet the whole
>>>>> history of modern industry shows that capital,
>>>>> if not checked, will recklessly and ruthlessly
>>>>> work to cast down the whole working class to
>>>>> this utmost state of degradation."
>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1865/value-price-profit/ch03.htm__;!!Mih3wA!VqEGaL64FmZV_I_um3Pz783eZ8pNEvPGYm5UvD5aGcMOmh6X_OhKzkBClkLYUt0pOSGjXw$
>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1865/value-price-profit/ch03.htm__;!!Mih3wA!U0ZIjNUqNnItiZjyJjIUnKMWddqAJiWLdB_L-G5Wb6DNQLTG7uZz_Seq6oZRbIPgrIdiUQ$>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>> Hegel for Social Movements
>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!U0ZIjNUqNnItiZjyJjIUnKMWddqAJiWLdB_L-G5Wb6DNQLTG7uZz_Seq6oZRbIM88h444g$>
>>>>> Home Page
>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!U0ZIjNUqNnItiZjyJjIUnKMWddqAJiWLdB_L-G5Wb6DNQLTG7uZz_Seq6oZRbIOjmsOLvw$>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28/04/2020 5:23 am, Helena Worthen wrote:
>>>>>> Andy’s paper has basically 4 parts. One a flyby
>>>>>> overview of the history of the US — this is where
>>>>>> the majority of criticisms by people I know are
>>>>>> showing up because people have different versions
>>>>>> of that history. Then the argument that with the
>>>>>> US going down as one of the poles of global
>>>>>> leadership. My friends and family agree with this
>>>>>> and are all, as Americans, offering examples of
>>>>>> how they have experienced this. Andy notes that
>>>>>> there is an empty spot at the top that hasn’t
>>>>>> been taken yet. Then comes his COVID-19 point,
>>>>>> that this is a global moment in which the whole
>>>>>> world is participating. Most of the xmca
>>>>>> discussion has been about that so far, if I’m not
>>>>>> mistaken. And finally a challenge to foresee what
>>>>>> we will learn from this experience.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, now trying to forsee what we can learn is
>>>>>> what I’m doing. So here is my question,
>>>>>> appropriate for this list since we are all
>>>>>> interested in education. I found myself writing
>>>>>> the following, as part of describing the way a
>>>>>> workforce can be intentionally divided into
>>>>>> feuding packs of enemies so that we can’t take
>>>>>> action in solidarity. We’re referring to “the
>>>>>> distortions of human development under
>>>>>> capitalism” and say that “we see this in its
>>>>>> sharpest form in the for-profit part of the
>>>>>> higher education industry. We have to look past
>>>>>> the distortion to find the original, human
>>>>>> connection….”
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One of our readers asks where this concept came
>>>>>> from. I don’t remember!! It makes sense, though,
>>>>>> doesn’t? Anyone have any idea where it came from?
>>>>>> So far I’m saying,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The concept of “distortions of human development
>>>>>> under capitalism” depends on looking at human
>>>>>> development as occurring within a social,
>>>>>> historical and cultural framework – not just the
>>>>>> development of individuals on their own or within
>>>>>> a family or even a school, but within a society.
>>>>>> Specifically we mean psychological and cognitive
>>>>>> disabilities ranging from lack of empathy, envy,
>>>>>> despair, alienation and bullying to obesity,
>>>>>> eating disorders and stress-related auto-immune
>>>>>> illness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks — H
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Helena Worthen
>>>>>> h
>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://helenaworthen.wordpress.com__;!!Mih3wA!UcGlX0bri43EmtmpvW-FJpbJfMb7jPTAosJ6QpYDWeFiy_BNZhBTLSo7yel8Mfwas-BdIg$>elenaworthen@gmail.com
>>>>>> <mailto:elenaworthen@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 27, 2020, at 9:29 AM, Helena Worthen
>>>>>>> <helenaworthen@gmail.com
>>>>>>> <mailto:helenaworthen@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have been circulating Andy’s paper among close
>>>>>>> friends and family to generate discussion. What
>>>>>>> is mostly coming back is confirmation of the
>>>>>>> general arc, with examples from personal
>>>>>>> experience, but some disagreement about cause.
>>>>>>> These are “inside” views — meaning, people who
>>>>>>> are US citizens talking about us, so these are
>>>>>>> experiences of the passing of an era and what
>>>>>>> they look like from inside.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> About a year ago I realized that, for better or
>>>>>>> worse, I identify as “an American.” And I don’t
>>>>>>> mean North American.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chris Appy’s book, /American Reckoning/, is a
>>>>>>> pretty good history that takes us from the 1940s
>>>>>>> up to Obama and tracks the hole we fell into
>>>>>>> with the Vietnam War. For people of my
>>>>>>> generation (BA 1965 — and I mention that date
>>>>>>> rather than when I was born because 1965
>>>>>>> connects to the draft, the lottery, the anti-war
>>>>>>> demonstrations, the asssinations, etc etc) the
>>>>>>> story told with the Vietnam War in the
>>>>>>> foreground connects very tightly to lived
>>>>>>> experience.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Helena Worthen
>>>>>>> helenaworthen.wordpress.com
>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://helenaworthen.wordpress.com/__;!!Mih3wA!UcGlX0bri43EmtmpvW-FJpbJfMb7jPTAosJ6QpYDWeFiy_BNZhBTLSo7yel8MfzvtKpTMQ$>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Apr 22, 2020, at 4:30 AM, Andy Blunden
>>>>>>>> <andyb@marxists.org
>>>>>>>> <mailto:andyb@marxists.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/American-Century.pdf__;!!Mih3wA!VqEGaL64FmZV_I_um3Pz783eZ8pNEvPGYm5UvD5aGcMOmh6X_OhKzkBClkLYUt1O-_KPrQ$
>>>>>>>> [ethicalpolitics.org]
>>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/American-Century.pdf__;!!Mih3wA!RX_kT308fV5J979vU0HnZwn3N_ILxa76WV811I3K7Q1lByCHw_H-2IpA6g71m_ZdQvTjgA$>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>>>>>>> Hegel for Social Movements [brill.com]
>>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!RX_kT308fV5J979vU0HnZwn3N_ILxa76WV811I3K7Q1lByCHw_H-2IpA6g71m_bmjhN_kw$>
>>>>>>>> Home Page [ethicalpolitics.org]
>>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!RX_kT308fV5J979vU0HnZwn3N_ILxa76WV811I3K7Q1lByCHw_H-2IpA6g71m_aKuyy5Zw$>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20200430/75dd0946/attachment.html
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list