Jim has it essentially right. For a non-Althusserian presentation see Gáspár Miklós Tamás: Telling the truth about class http://www.grundrisse.net/grundrisse22/tellingTheTruthAboutClass.htm
Tamás has a fine appreciation of Thompson even while rejecting Thompson's view of Marxism. I suppose in addition response to my suggestion depends on one's view of capitalism. I share Rosa Luxemburg's double view: On the one hand she sees capitalism as incompatible with organized human life; on the other hand she recognizes that we may never be able to abolish it, that barbarism (a deeper and ever growing barbarism) may be out future if we fail in our struggle. The point I made briefly and as mere assertion is developed more fully in Tamás's article and also in a number of the studies generically referred to as "The New Dialectics." Moishe Postone, Time, Labor and Social Domination: A Reinterpretation of Marxs Critical Theory. Tamás quotes from Postone: "Alienated labor constitutes a social structure of abstract domination, but such labour should not necessarily be equated with toil, oppression or exploitation. The labour of a serf, a portion of which belongs to the feudal lord, is, in and of itself, not alienated: the domination and exploitation of that labour is not intrinsic to the labour itself. It is precisely for this reason that expropriation in such a situation was and had to be based upon direct compulsion. Non-alienated labour in societies in which a surplus exists and is expropriated by non-labouring classes [castes in my sense, GMT] necessarily is bound to direct social domination. By contrast, exploitation and domination are integral moments of commodity-determined labour." I would only add that one need not be a Marxist, and arguing from the positions of Marx, Luxemburg, Tamás, & Postone to reach similar conclusions about capitalism and the necessity to abolish it. It is necessary, however, to reject the 19th-c bourgeois Idea of Progress, an ideology which disarms struggle by assuming that "History will do it for us." Hence the relevance of one of Mao's remarks: If you don't hit it, it won't fall. Carrol -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Devine Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 3:45 PM To: Pen-l Subject: [Pen-l] consciousness [was: The austerity debate] Raghu said: >>> Your [Carrol's] ideology may lead you to believe that the "working class" desires "the power to abolish itself as a working class and thereby abolish capitalism and capitalists". I'd argue that history and psychology shows that real, breathing human beings desire no such thing.<<< There are two different levels here. First, raghu is referring to the consciousness of individual workers in the real (empirical) world. On the other hand, when Carrol writes of the working class desiring "the power to abolish itself as a working class and thereby abolish capitalism and capitalists" the only way it makes sense to me is as a reference to the objective and collective goals of the working class as a whole. It's sort of like the debate between E.P. Thompson and the Althusserians: Thompson wrote of the British working class' actual viewpoints[*] and ideologies in the real world of the 19th century, while Althusserians wrote of the working class as a structural class position in the capitalist mode of production. The actually-existing working class has a set of interests at any point in time that differs from the collective (class) interest of the working class implied by its position in society. This distinction goes way back, to Rousseau's distinction between the (empirical) "will of all" and the (possible) "general will." Others write of individual interests (particularism) vs. the public interest.[**] In Marx's terms, it's between the working class "in itself" and the (theoretical possibility) of self-organized expression of the class position, i.e., the class "for itself." Ken Hanly writes: >> History and psychology show that the capitalist system is adept at creating false consciousness and modern technology and psychology has given the system the tools to continue to do so.<< raghu: > I agree with this, but with a quibble over your choice of words. The term "false consciousness" implies that there exists a "true consciousness", and that we know what it looks like. ... < I agree that we should reject the term "false consciousness." Among other things, it encourages paternalism toward workers ("we know better about what's good for you"). Also, it doesn't fit with Marx's mature theory of ideology, as represented by the fetishism of commodities: it's not the people are "fooled" and believe in "falsities" as much as that they see the world in a partial, incomplete way, seeing the trees but not the forest. It's not that the trees don't exist (and are thus "false") but rather that we also need to see the forest. But one way to think of "false consciousness" is as being the same as (some interpretations of) "economism," i.e., the case where a worker (or a working-class organization) is only looking out for number one, having totally absorbed and embraced the narrow-minded individualism that prevails under unfettered capitalism. (Craft unions fit this bill well.) On the other hand, "true consciousness" would involve consciousness of inter-dependencies and the existence of collective working-class interests and the need for solidarity. -- Jim Devine / "An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of support." -- John Buchan [*] Thompson, if I remember correctly, didn't see the "working class" as existing unless it was collectively organized (so that it had to be "made"). However, it's clear that he distinguished between different class categories so as to distinguish working-class people from other people. [**] Even economists distinguish between free-riding and the production of a public or collective good (even though such ideas as the "social welfare function" or the "public interest" seem rejected). _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
