5 ms·

I suppose the name of the magazine implies this, but the amount of "concept terms" loaded into each sentence sounds so old timey, or something, to me. "Such a

I suppose the name of the magazine implies this, but the amount of "concept terms" loaded into each sentence sounds so old timey, or something, to me. "Such a relationship between the company and public goods like a high school is part of what it means to consider Amazon as “the major working-class space of suburban and exurban socialization.” The behemoth is here, producing not only profit but people, too. That entails corporate indoctrination, social estrangement, and profound alienation from one’s labor..." You kind of need to be steeped into the literary culture to "fluent." Reading it, it feels like I'm "looking up" the words in my memory to follow the meaning. I suppose it's not too different from the "tech talk" dialect we're more used to on HN: "disruptive potential of this novel user space paradigm" or whatnot.

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
Or maybe it's because the education system you were provided with has significant incentives to avoid getting you too familiar with these words and concepts? "Old timey" in this context might translate into "written by someone who is aware of a century or three's thinking and writing about the relationships between labor and capital and how they impact social and economic structure".
- dalbasal 5y ago
  My early education was, in fact, was quite steeped in such terms. I'm a apostate, not an infidel. Anyway, my point wasn't a criticism of the content, or anything really. Just pointing out that its clunky and verbose sounding, to my rusty old ears.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    Fair enough. But I haven't seen anyone describe these sorts of concepts in any other terms other than cloying cute folksy-funny stump speeches that tend to obfuscate things as much as they make them more accessible. The relationships between labor and capital are not obvious to the naked eye, and are subject to a lot of different kinds of analysis. Trying to describe them with language from outside the field can end up missing the critical points.
    - dalbasal 5y ago
      I'd say that this type of jargonized writing makes articles extremely unaccessible. It would be pretty hard to understand without some pretty substantial roots in marxist, or social science literature. Ironically, that means most people working at an amazon warehouse wouldn't understand what it's trying to say. Re: The relationships between labor and capital are not obvious. Parts of that relationship are pretty damn obvious: people work for the owners of companies. The only accessible part of this article quotes another article describing (in plain, un-jargonized english) about a local high school that teaches Amazon corporate culture, with financial sponsorship by amazon. Without that part, no one would have a hope of deciphering what the hell Amazon as “the major working-class space of suburban and exurban socialization,” whether or not I had spent my teenage years as a member of a red lace youth group. This style of writing tells you more about the author than the thing they're writing about, and its totally meaningless to the uninitiated. Once you get used to it, you see every particular as derivative of the greater, abstract truth with no space for novel or dissident interpretations. That's not my opinion, it's George Orwell's, a lifelong socialist. This isn't a criticism of Marx. It is a criticism of Marxism. 200 years ago, "alienation from the product of labour" meant something when he used it. It described a process that was taking place att. If you're "analysing" Amazon's influence on towns where they are the biggest employer, it means nothing. It certainly means nothing to workers.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
        what language would you use to describe the concept of "alienation from the product of labor" today, here in 2021, if the intended audience is the workforce of an amazon fulfillment center?
        dalbasal 5y ago
        I wouldn't. The idea wasn't abstract in the 1830s. It meant the difference between having a loom in your house and working at a mill. We could debate the importance of this, but we'd be starting by talking about an actual thing that is happening in the world. You could talk to a mill worker about it and it described their life. You can't think of relevant ways of describing alienation, because the thing you are trying to describe isn't happening now. It happened hundreds of years ago. All that's left is a psycho-economic abstraction and a history lesson. Say I coin a term to describe the digitisation of workplaces, WFH, and such. Call it "workplace etherealisation." We can use that in "analysis" of labour-capital dynamics. In 200 years, "workplace etherealisation" and our analysis probably won't mean anything anymore. Or rather, it will be a trivial, clunky way of describing the world from the perspective of past people. That was my initial point. This article isn't written to have meaning to amazon workers, or readers beyond a particular circle. It's written to have meaning "in-theory," deep inside abstract theories that the author is interested in for abstract treasons that have nothing to do with workers. It's mastabatory.
renewiltord 5y ago
It’s socialist intelligentsia lingo. For whatever reason, that field writes in a style that favors high-specificity jargon.
- dalbasal 5y ago
  I know what kind of lingo it is, just remarking on how much of it there is in every sentence. IDK if I'd call the jargon high-specificity though. I'd say that it tends to be broad and abstract. "Suburban and exurban socialization" isn't highly specific. As I mentioned though, it's not very different from the tech world jargon that's more common on HN. IE, when we talk about "disruptive," "democratizing," "platform" or somesuch. These are loaded terms too. I was just noting that with concepts like "alienation," it's hard to imagine explaining it to someone without referring to past centuries, artisan candlemakers or somesuch.
  - neolog 5y ago
    I think you're saying "alienation" means a specific historical technological transition about moving from hand-looms to industrial looms. I googled for it but I don't see that definition supported. In the sources I found it seems to be a broader concept than that. It seems still applicable today afaict, not hard to understand in modern context. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/alienation/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/alienation/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_alienation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_alienation

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago

Or maybe it's because the education system you were provided with has significant incentives to avoid getting you too familiar with these words and concepts? "Old timey" in this context might translate into "written by someone who is aware of a century or three's thinking and writing about the relationships between labor and capital and how they impact social and economic structure".

dalbasal 5y ago
My early education was, in fact, was quite steeped in such terms. I'm a apostate, not an infidel. Anyway, my point wasn't a criticism of the content, or anything really. Just pointing out that its clunky and verbose sounding, to my rusty old ears.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  Fair enough. But I haven't seen anyone describe these sorts of concepts in any other terms other than cloying cute folksy-funny stump speeches that tend to obfuscate things as much as they make them more accessible. The relationships between labor and capital are not obvious to the naked eye, and are subject to a lot of different kinds of analysis. Trying to describe them with language from outside the field can end up missing the critical points.
  - dalbasal 5y ago
    I'd say that this type of jargonized writing makes articles extremely unaccessible. It would be pretty hard to understand without some pretty substantial roots in marxist, or social science literature. Ironically, that means most people working at an amazon warehouse wouldn't understand what it's trying to say. Re: The relationships between labor and capital are not obvious. Parts of that relationship are pretty damn obvious: people work for the owners of companies. The only accessible part of this article quotes another article describing (in plain, un-jargonized english) about a local high school that teaches Amazon corporate culture, with financial sponsorship by amazon. Without that part, no one would have a hope of deciphering what the hell Amazon as “the major working-class space of suburban and exurban socialization,” whether or not I had spent my teenage years as a member of a red lace youth group. This style of writing tells you more about the author than the thing they're writing about, and its totally meaningless to the uninitiated. Once you get used to it, you see every particular as derivative of the greater, abstract truth with no space for novel or dissident interpretations. That's not my opinion, it's George Orwell's, a lifelong socialist. This isn't a criticism of Marx. It is a criticism of Marxism. 200 years ago, "alienation from the product of labour" meant something when he used it. It described a process that was taking place att. If you're "analysing" Amazon's influence on towns where they are the biggest employer, it means nothing. It certainly means nothing to workers.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
      what language would you use to describe the concept of "alienation from the product of labor" today, here in 2021, if the intended audience is the workforce of an amazon fulfillment center?
      - dalbasal 5y ago
        I wouldn't. The idea wasn't abstract in the 1830s. It meant the difference between having a loom in your house and working at a mill. We could debate the importance of this, but we'd be starting by talking about an actual thing that is happening in the world. You could talk to a mill worker about it and it described their life. You can't think of relevant ways of describing alienation, because the thing you are trying to describe isn't happening now. It happened hundreds of years ago. All that's left is a psycho-economic abstraction and a history lesson. Say I coin a term to describe the digitisation of workplaces, WFH, and such. Call it "workplace etherealisation." We can use that in "analysis" of labour-capital dynamics. In 200 years, "workplace etherealisation" and our analysis probably won't mean anything anymore. Or rather, it will be a trivial, clunky way of describing the world from the perspective of past people. That was my initial point. This article isn't written to have meaning to amazon workers, or readers beyond a particular circle. It's written to have meaning "in-theory," deep inside abstract theories that the author is interested in for abstract treasons that have nothing to do with workers. It's mastabatory.

renewiltord 5y ago

It’s socialist intelligentsia lingo. For whatever reason, that field writes in a style that favors high-specificity jargon.

dalbasal 5y ago
I know what kind of lingo it is, just remarking on how much of it there is in every sentence. IDK if I'd call the jargon high-specificity though. I'd say that it tends to be broad and abstract. "Suburban and exurban socialization" isn't highly specific. As I mentioned though, it's not very different from the tech world jargon that's more common on HN. IE, when we talk about "disruptive," "democratizing," "platform" or somesuch. These are loaded terms too. I was just noting that with concepts like "alienation," it's hard to imagine explaining it to someone without referring to past centuries, artisan candlemakers or somesuch.
- neolog 5y ago
  I think you're saying "alienation" means a specific historical technological transition about moving from hand-looms to industrial looms. I googled for it but I don't see that definition supported. In the sources I found it seems to be a broader concept than that. It seems still applicable today afaict, not hard to understand in modern context. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/alienation/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/alienation/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_alienation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx%27s_theory_of_alienation