That's not what I was doing.Leyla Shen wrote:You can't compare a class-conscious proletarian with bourgeois capitalists. Apples and oranges.
Class Consciousness
Re: A contradiction in certain Marxist circles
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
Well, it can be inferred from this, I think:
Surely you weren't implying they are tools of wisdom in themselves?
Otherwise, to whom or what do you refer when you say "class consciousness and control over the means of production"?If it is ever implied that class consciousness and control over the means of production will lead, in a deeply meaningful sense, to a more thoughtful, intelligent, wiser, and conscious individual, I would say look at the capitalist class we have right now.
Surely you weren't implying they are tools of wisdom in themselves?
Between Suicides
Re: Class Consciousness
No, I was not; I was implying the exact opposite actually.Leyla Shen wrote:Well, it can be inferred from this, I think:
Otherwise, to whom or what do you refer when you say "class consciousness and control over the means of production"?If it is ever implied that class consciousness and control over the means of production will lead, in a deeply meaningful sense, to a more thoughtful, intelligent, wiser, and conscious individual, I would say look at the capitalist class we have right now.
Surely you weren't implying they are tools of wisdom in themselves?
I said this because it seems like the implication within certain "marxist-circles" is that class consciousness and control over the means of production by the proletariat will lead to an "enlightened society" of sorts. To counter this, I'm pointing to the capitalist class which happens to be very class conscious, and has great control over the means of production, but are far from what I would call enlightened.
Re: A contradiction in certain Marxist circles
In what sense can't you compare them?Leyla Shen wrote:You can't compare a class-conscious proletarian with bourgeois capitalists. Apples and oranges.
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
Yes, I know that's what you intended... :)No, I was not; I was implying the exact opposite actually.
To prove that, you would have to show that the bourgeoisie are, in fact, class conscious. I disagree that they are. On what grounds and precisely what definition do you assert this?I said this because it seems like the implication within certain "marxist-circles" is that class consciousness and control over the means of production by the proletariat will lead to an "enlightened society" of sorts. To counter this, I'm pointing to the capitalist class which happens to be very class conscious, and has great control over the means of production, but are far from what I would call enlightened.
If you eliminate that distinction, you eliminate communism altogether (at least in your own mind :)). You also disregard the historical basis upon which those distinctions were made.In what sense can't you compare [the class conscious proletarian with bourgeois capitalists]?
Marx held that consciousness is derived from material conditions. Since the material conditions of the bourgeois capitalist and the proletarian are distinctly different, so then is their consciousness. We are not, here, talking of a kind of consciousness abstracted from reality and existing in some sort of mental void, but a living, breathing consciousness derived from reality. It's all there in the excerpt I earlier quoted.
A history (and therefore present) of man and class struggle rather than a history (and therefore present) of god-ordained/transcendent rights and privileges.
Between Suicides
Re: Class Consciousness
I think that when you have direct control the means of production, and you see how the workers do not, you can't help but gain a sense of the class division/conflict. The capitalist may not call it this, and he may not want to see it like this, but ultimately his role directly arises out of the conflict itself. The capitalist knows he has control over things and he also knows he's not a worker. Not to mention he has greater access to what goes on behind the scenes as far as who gets paid what, what everyone does top to bottom, and where all the profit is going. So the capitalist, because of his circumstances, and almost by necessity, is essentially class conscious. Or like you pointed out, his material conditions are distinct from that of the worker, material conditions that I believe lead to a greater understanding of class division, inevitably leading to class consciousness.Leyla Shen wrote:To prove that, you would have to show that the bourgeoisie are, in fact, class conscious. I disagree that they are. On what grounds and precisely what definition do you assert this?I said this because it seems like the implication within certain "marxist-circles" is that class consciousness and control over the means of production by the proletariat will lead to an "enlightened society" of sorts. To counter this, I'm pointing to the capitalist class which happens to be very class conscious, and has great control over the means of production, but are far from what I would call enlightened.
In the case of the worker, although he doesn't directly control the means of production, he directly interacts with the means of production more so than the capitalist, which creates the illusion that he is more in control of things than he actually is under the current circumstances. And because his main role as a worker wouldn't change much in the absence of class division (he would still be performing the same tasks on a day to day basis, only difference being he would get paid more and would most likely have a vote along with his fellow workers about what to do with the means of production) it can't be said his main role is born out of the class division/conflict itself. All these things combined, along with many of the other things he is not exposed to that the capitalist is, make it much more difficult to see the division between himself and the capitalist.
And if the capitalist is not class conscious, yet his consciousness is distinctly different from that of the worker; then what is the difference in their consciousness?
Re: Class Consciousness
Nick, can you give me some concrete examples of employment positions/professions, from the real world, that fall within these "capitalist" and "worker" categories. E.g. CEO, manager, subcontractor, small business owner, public servant, factory worker etc, and tell me which category they fall within and why.
Re: Class Consciousness
Capitalists make their money directly from the profit produced by the capital they own or are invested in, e.g. corporations, commodities, resources, and infrastructure. Workers don't actually own anything, so they must sell their labor to the capitalist for a wage, salary, or some other form of compensation.
A classic example of a capitalist would be an individual who owns his own business. He gets paid based on how much profit the company produces, i.e. taking a large slice of the fruit of those who labor.
A classic example of a worker would be an individual operating a cash register at a fast food joint. He gets paid based on the market value of his labor and where the government sets the minimum wage.
A classic example of a capitalist would be an individual who owns his own business. He gets paid based on how much profit the company produces, i.e. taking a large slice of the fruit of those who labor.
A classic example of a worker would be an individual operating a cash register at a fast food joint. He gets paid based on the market value of his labor and where the government sets the minimum wage.
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
:)
The distinction I'm (unsuccessfully) trying to draw to your attention is the developmental, the material, difference between proletarian "class consciousness" and that of the capitalists. If there were no difference here, there would be no struggle; no conflict.
I'm exhausted and trying to get away with as succinct a reply as I can muster. I'll flesh this out later, if need be.
The distinction I'm (unsuccessfully) trying to draw to your attention is the developmental, the material, difference between proletarian "class consciousness" and that of the capitalists. If there were no difference here, there would be no struggle; no conflict.
I'm exhausted and trying to get away with as succinct a reply as I can muster. I'll flesh this out later, if need be.
Between Suicides
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
PS: If you correctly discern the difference I'm speaking of above, you will also have discerned the difference between socialism and communism.
Between Suicides
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
Nick, I thought you might appreciate this rather brilliant exposition. :)
Consumerism and its Discontents
Consumerism and its Discontents
Between Suicides
Re: Class Consciousness
See that any lady that's watching, Leyla is a sex bomb!
Re: Class Consciousness
These excerpts from it resonated the most with me.Leyla Shen wrote:Nick, I thought you might appreciate this rather brilliant exposition. :)
Thanks for that, Leyla."whose [the policeman] job it is to ensure that a given product of human labor remains a commodity, with the magical property of having to be paid for, instead of becoming a mere refrigerator or rifle - a passive, inanimate object, subject to anyone who comes along to make use of it".
"Shoplifting is a refusal of the exchange economy. It is a denial that people deserve to eat, live, and die based on how effectively they are able to exchange their labor and capital with others. It is a denial that a monetary value can be ascribed to everything, that having a piece of delicious chocolate in your mouth is worth exactly fifty cents or that an hour of one person's life can really be worth ten dollars more than that of another person. It is a refusal to accept the capitalist system, in which workers have to buy back the products of their own labor at a profit to the owners of capital".
Re: Class Consciousness
These excerpts from it resonated the most with me.Leyla Shen wrote:Nick, I thought you might appreciate this rather brilliant exposition.
Thanks for that, Leyla."What is a policeman? He is the active servant of the commodity, the man in complete submission to the commodity, whose job it is to ensure that a given product of human labor remains a commodity, with the magical property of having to be paid for, instead of becoming a mere refrigerator or rifle - a passive, inanimate object, subject to anyone who comes along to make use of it".
"Shoplifting is a refusal of the exchange economy. It is a denial that people deserve to eat, live, and die based on how effectively they are able to exchange their labor and capital with others. It is a denial that a monetary value can be ascribed to everything, that having a piece of delicious chocolate in your mouth is worth exactly fifty cents or that an hour of one person's life can really be worth ten dollars more than that of another person. It is a refusal to accept the capitalist system, in which workers have to buy back the products of their own labor at a profit to the owners of capital".
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
No worries. :)
I just want to throw this totally irrelevant vid in for the simple reason that I love it so much! Fastest Vehicle in the Airport
I just want to throw this totally irrelevant vid in for the simple reason that I love it so much! Fastest Vehicle in the Airport
Between Suicides
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
"What need is there for responsibility? I believe that the horrifying deterioration in the ethical conduct of people today stems from the mechanisation and dehumanisation of our lives. A disastrous by-product of the development of the scientific and technical mentality. We are guilty. Man grows cold faster then the planet he inhabits." ~ Albert Einstein
Thought this was an interesting quote in how it relates to dialectical materialism and the shaping of people's minds.
"A human being is a part of a whole, called by us 'universe', a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty." ~ Albert Einstein
Another good quote I thought I'd toss in.
Thought this was an interesting quote in how it relates to dialectical materialism and the shaping of people's minds.
"A human being is a part of a whole, called by us 'universe', a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty." ~ Albert Einstein
Another good quote I thought I'd toss in.
- Kelly Jones
- Posts: 2665
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: Class Consciousness
The technical or scientific mentality isn't itself restrictive, and certainly doesn't stop a human being from perceiving his true existence - but one needs to be a genius before being a scientist. Einstein clearly wasn't.
Re: Class Consciousness
Interesting quotes, Nick. I've researched Einstein in the past, but had never seen those particular quotes before, so thank you for posting those.Nick Treklis wrote:"What need is there for responsibility? I believe that the horrifying deterioration in the ethical conduct of people today stems from the mechanisation and dehumanisation of our lives. A disastrous by-product of the development of the scientific and technical mentality. We are guilty. Man grows cold faster then the planet he inhabits." ~ Albert Einstein
Thought this was an interesting quote in how it relates to dialectical materialism and the shaping of people's minds.
"A human being is a part of a whole, called by us 'universe', a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty." ~ Albert Einstein
Another good quote I thought I'd toss in.
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
I think there's a rather obviously discernible difference in the notion that the "horrifying deterioration in the ethical conduct of people today stems form the mechanisation and dehumanisation of our lives. A disastrous by-product of the development of the scientific and technical mentality," and "The technical or scientific mentality is itself restrictive and stops a human being from perceiving his true existence."Kelly Jones wrote:The technical or scientific mentality isn't itself restrictive, and certainly doesn't stop a human being from perceiving his true existence - but one needs to be a genius before being a scientist. Einstein clearly wasn't.
Between Suicides
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
- Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Re: Class Consciousness
Einstein: "disastrous by-products of the development of the scientific and technical mentality".
It would be more insightful to at least reverse this and state that science and technology came out of the disasters of mechanization and dehumanization, way, way back in the depths of our psyche.
Because one could just as easily call science and technology a by-product of being conscious, and we could conclude that mechanization and dehumanization is a consequence of self-consciousness and other-consciousness. The ability to separate anything at all. Then again, so is love (unification and peace-making), which is a by-product of separation...
But this doesn't lead us anywhere beyond superficial concerns and tiny shivers of philosophical insight and could easily lead toward increased passivity and acceptance of the philosophical dilemma.
The real great disaster is any belief that actual reality is being discovered, established, measured, handled or addressed by religious imagery, scientific theory or measurement, recording or description. It's a form of getting away with murder. A murder which is committed out of our psychological desire to exist, to have reality at the expense of the real, which is not. The crime is not a by-product, but more a disease, an "alien virus" that sometimes is called "delusion" or to worship idols, with an idol being anything eclipsing reality. It's nothing but a parasitic idea than needs to be dropped one time or another.
Einstein: "He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. "
It's not an illusion, the experience of seperation is this very consciousness. But with a bit of greater effort this too can be realized, hence: self-realization.
Einstein: "Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."
This is where the atomic bomb came in handy, I suppose. The greatest embrace has always been called death.
It would be more insightful to at least reverse this and state that science and technology came out of the disasters of mechanization and dehumanization, way, way back in the depths of our psyche.
Because one could just as easily call science and technology a by-product of being conscious, and we could conclude that mechanization and dehumanization is a consequence of self-consciousness and other-consciousness. The ability to separate anything at all. Then again, so is love (unification and peace-making), which is a by-product of separation...
But this doesn't lead us anywhere beyond superficial concerns and tiny shivers of philosophical insight and could easily lead toward increased passivity and acceptance of the philosophical dilemma.
The real great disaster is any belief that actual reality is being discovered, established, measured, handled or addressed by religious imagery, scientific theory or measurement, recording or description. It's a form of getting away with murder. A murder which is committed out of our psychological desire to exist, to have reality at the expense of the real, which is not. The crime is not a by-product, but more a disease, an "alien virus" that sometimes is called "delusion" or to worship idols, with an idol being anything eclipsing reality. It's nothing but a parasitic idea than needs to be dropped one time or another.
Einstein: "He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. "
It's not an illusion, the experience of seperation is this very consciousness. But with a bit of greater effort this too can be realized, hence: self-realization.
Einstein: "Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."
This is where the atomic bomb came in handy, I suppose. The greatest embrace has always been called death.
-
- Posts: 1395
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:26 am
- Location: Garment District
Re: Class Consciousness
So drop it already.The real great disaster is any belief that actual reality is being discovered, established, measured, handled or addressed by religious imagery, scientific theory or measurement, recording or description. It's a form of getting away with murder. A murder which is committed out of our psychological desire to exist, to have reality at the expense of the real, which is not. The crime is not a by-product, but more a disease, an "alien virus" that sometimes is called "delusion" or to worship idols, with an idol being anything eclipsing reality. It's nothing but a parasitic idea than needs to be dropped one time or another.
Sometimes the greatest embrace is called love.Einstein: "Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."
Diebert: This is where the atomic bomb came in handy, I suppose. The greatest embrace has always been called death.
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
Diebert...! I shall have to re-read your post more thoroughly, but my immediate thoughts are that you are sounding much too Kantian for my liking! There is much of Kant that I appreciate, but I could never reconcile the way in which he grasped an objective "truth" in noumena and phenomena. Bollocks, in my view! But perhaps when you refer to "the real" you are speaking more in terms of Lacan's (psychological) Real?
I'll get back to you ASAP.
Nice to see you again. :)
I'll get back to you ASAP.
Nice to see you again. :)
Between Suicides
-
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Class Consciousness
Diebert:
Why would I reverse it?
The ultimate conceptual/psychological form of total material alienation. :)
Well, that doesn't make any sense to me since mechanisation empirically and by definition requires at least some part of the scientific mindset in order to exist. It is the material (real) condition for the posited dehumanisation.It would be more insightful to at least reverse this and state that science and technology came out of the disasters of mechanization and dehumanization, way, way back in the depths of our psyche.
Why would I reverse it?
Only if one posits consciousness as a kind of first cause, or primary material condition from which the material itself springs rather than the other way round. I'd like to see any reasonable suggestion you may have for the latter position. :) Certainly, the conception "science and technology" is such a by-product.Because one could just as easily call science and technology a by-product of being conscious,
Right.and we could conclude that mechanization and dehumanization is a consequence of self-consciousness and other-consciousness. The ability to separate anything at all. Then again, so is love (unification and peace-making), which is a by-product of separation...
But this doesn't lead us anywhere beyond superficial concerns and tiny shivers of philosophical insight and could easily lead toward increased passivity and acceptance of the philosophical dilemma.
Actual reality is necessarily inclusive of all these things, including cognitive human limitations, by definition. I am convinced, here, you are positing a noumenal reality rather than something in accord with the notion of emptiness. In this case, you might as well subscribe to the school of absolute nihilism and not do anything at all! But you can't help yourself, can you? You must at least argue..... :)The real great disaster is any belief that actual reality is being discovered, established, measured, handled or addressed by religious imagery, scientific theory or measurement, recording or description. It's a form of getting away with murder. A murder which is committed out of our psychological desire to exist, to have reality at the expense of the real, which is not. The crime is not a by-product, but more a disease, an "alien virus" that sometimes is called "delusion" or to worship idols, with an idol being anything eclipsing reality. It's nothing but a parasitic idea than needs to be dropped one time or another.
He said "delusion" not illusion. (Reminds me here of Lacan's Mirror Stage.) It is deluded to consider oneself, one's thoughts and feelings, as separated from the rest, unless you're an idealist who believes in an immortal soul (some noumenal reality) separated from some material (phenomenal) reality.It's not an illusion, the experience of seperation is this very consciousness. But with a bit of greater effort this too can be realized, hence: self-realization.
And in that sleep what dreams may come...This is where the atomic bomb came in handy, I suppose. The greatest embrace has always been called death.
The ultimate conceptual/psychological form of total material alienation. :)
Between Suicides