4 ms·
You are correct. Jean Baudrillard wrote a book about this called Impossible Exchange, that I recommend. The issue I find with capitalism is that it attempts to
by voidhorse 9y ago
You are correct. Jean Baudrillard wrote a book about this called Impossible Exchange, that I recommend.
The issue I find with capitalism is that it attempts to swallow all other systems. For instance, consider another system religion--it is not uncommon for this system to have, overlaying it, a role in the capitalist system--the capitalist system's operation and the religious system's willingness to participate becomes prerequisite to the religious systems being able to operate or function at in the first place--just as the earthworms continual existence is secured only in so far as the dirt isn't suddenly translatable into economic value and consumed for profit. It's like capitalism is an unconscious dogmatism that everyone participates in because...and that why remains fuzzy.
I just don't appreciate the way capitalism, when interfacing with other domains, effaces all their values and meaning--though I suppose you could levy such criticism against any system, i.e. a closed religious system presumably wouldn't read any meaning into your available capital (ah, but so many of them do!), just as capitalism wouldn't read any value or meaning into your practiced religion. Though of course these things are not clearly demarcated and manipulate each other.
Thanks for pointing this out. It has helped me consider this further--as always, surprise surprise, things are more complicated than I'd first thought.
- Florin_Andrei 9y ago> The issue I find with capitalism is that it attempts to swallow all other systems. Don't mean to be "that guy", but that's also pretty common with most automata, including living organisms. Run the code till the wheels fall off, and then either find a different thing to consume, or adapt to the new situation, or die. > It's like capitalism is an unconscious dogmatism that everyone participates in because... Because it's the current dominant paradigm. Back in the day, the dominant paradigm was pharaohs ruling the realm from giant stone palaces, and armies of slaves raising monuments for the glory of the god-emperor. Everyone participated in it, like it or not, because there was no real choice. Same now. You could play within the system, or you could go off dancing with wolves. Or you could try to change it, but that in reality is orders of magnitude harder than it seems - unless you happen to be the unwitting or semi-witting agent of the great currents of history.
- vageli 9y ago> Same now. You could play within the system, or you could go off dancing with wolves. That's the issue, though. You can't decide to opt-out of society without first playing into it. In ancient Egypt, with fewer people and more natural resources, maybe it was possible to leave your local village and go out into the wilderness. That doesn't seem possible today, both because "wilderness" is largely owned by private individuals or government.
- qubex 9y agoRegarding the effect Capitalism has on all the other systems it encounters, I'd like to suggest you read Capitalist Realism by Mark Fisher (2009).[1] [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_Realism:_Is_there_no_alternative%3F?wprov=sfti1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_Realism:_Is_there...