Dear Ana and everybody-
_____
From: Ana Marjanovic-Shane [mailto:anamshane@speakeasy.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 11:34 PM
To: Eugene Matusov
Subject: Re: Information + some more on false consciousness
Zhenya,
I agree that the so called "false consciousness" is always relational.
However, I think that the example with the guy selling you the Amway is not
a case of his or yours "false consciousness" -- but two different, however,
equally valid points of view -- or a case of being in two quite different
activity systems.
I think your disagreement illustrates my point which is that "false
consciousness" is a dialogic social construction. I agree that from your
ontological point of view - voicing your own being - there is not "false
consciousness" but just two valid points of view. However, from this guy's
ontological point of view - voicing his own being - my consciousness was
false, illusory, and self-destructing. In his eyes, I sacrificed my own's
and my family's well-being by committing myself to some abstract and very
suspicious (in his eyes) reasoning. Moreover, I chose to live on welfare
rather than on fair and legitimate earning from Amway. I even violated
Christian commandment of loving people next to me more than those who are
remote (it is funny that he mentioned that to me!).
Jay was very right exclaiming that everyone has only "true consciousness".
One's "true consciousness" becomes "false consciousness" only in eyes of
others. In my view, in order to show that "false consciousness" is a
relational notion, we need to focus not what "false consciousness" REALLY is
through its inner analysis of "the matter/issue at hand" but on social
relations among "observer" and "observed" and "the matter/issue at hand". It
is very difficult to do because observer's and observed's positions on "the
matter/issue at hand" are ontological - deeply rooted in the people's
being-in-the-world. The reason of why I constantly putting "false
consciousness" in quotation marks is exactly because this notion without
brackets implies that observing of "false consciousness" does not matter,
that "false consciousness" exists only in male working class Latinos voting
for Schwarzenegger or in Ana's friend guided in voting choice by charisma of
Bush or Reagan. It denies the fact that observers such as Mike and Ana
contribute in construction of the phenomenon.
The "false consciousness" phenomenon is born out of the following
exclamation (if not the cry) "I DO NOT understand how THEY can CONSCIOUSLY
act against their own interests to help their own oppressors!!!!" Until
"THEY" becomes "YOU", "false consciousness" is a very dangerous social
construction dividing US - the audience authoring and consuming the
statement - (e.g., "revolutionary smart vanguard") from THEM - stupid
oppressed who does not really know what is good for themselves and, thus,
need patronizing and speaking on the their behalf and educating - becoming
smart like we are (I'm talking out of my Soviet experience).
What do you think?
Eugene
PS Unfortunately, Ana has problems with xmca list (I alerted Bruce already)
so she can't get xmca messages. Please include her email in your replies.
What I think could be characterized as "false" consciousness is really a
lack of consciousness about the parts of the activity system you are in --
so you have a distorted view of what is actually going on. We all operate to
a certain degree in this way, because no one can possibly have a direct view
of the bigger picture or all the parts of complex activity systems in which
we live. What makes it "false" I think are subconscious (emotional)
connections made elsewhere (like in movies) that may prevail in those places
where the consciousness is weaker...
I don't know
Does it make sense?
Ana
Eugene Matusov wrote:
Dear Bruce-
Can you help Ana, please?
Thanks,
Eugene
_____
From: Ana Marjanovic-Shane [mailto:anamshane@speakeasy.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2003 8:40 PM
To: Eugene Matusov
Subject: Information
Zhenya,
For some reason, XMCA took me off the list. Apparently my e-mail account has
produced too many bounced messages. It looks like Speakeasy is blacklisted
at many ISPs.
I will not be able to get back on xmca until this gets resolved.
I hope that it does -- since I am really interested in all the messages.
Ana
--_____
Ana Marjanovic-Shane 267-334-2905 (cell) 215-843-2909 (home)
potpis
--
_____
Ana Marjanovic-Shane 267-334-2905 (cell) 215-843-2909 (home)
potpis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 01 2004 - 01:00:10 PST
