7 ms·

I actually disagree with the idea that alienation is a feature of capitalism—I think it’s a feature of an industrial mode of production that is not necessarily

I actually disagree with the idea that alienation is a feature of capitalism—I think it’s a feature of an industrial mode of production that is not necessarily linked to capitalism. Suppose there is a creative designer who develops a widget with a specific purpose, and then this widget is mass produced by humans on an assembly line who might not even get to see or understand the completed product, since they are just performing a repetitive chore on an assembly line. One observation is that the assembly-line workers are more alienated than the designer, who understands the purpose of the widget and who produced the blueprint. However the designer is still somewhat alienated, since they don’t get to see the final product. Another observation is that it is possible to have a capitalist society in which there is no alienation at all—a designer develops the concept of a widget, and then manually builds a small amount of the widgets by themselves (see for example Etsy). Also, I would contend that assembly-line workers in a communist society suffer the exact same amount of alienation as those in a capitalist one.

euroderf 4y ago
Is this the source of the contemporary obsession with "mission statements" - a lame attempt to push "values" downward and generate "motivation" that is meant to work in opposition to alienation ?
- Dr_Birdbrain 4y ago
  That’s an interesting idea. Maybe.
anothernewdude 4y ago
Distinction without a difference.
runarberg 4y ago
Alienation looks the same from a worker’s perspective regardless of if it is the state or the wealthy class that exploits their labor. In the case of the Soviet Union, the workers were never empowered to own their own means of production, their bosses were simply replaced by the state. So from a workers perspective this is a distinction without a difference. The main issue with alienation isn’t about the worker’s understanding of the purpose of the work, but how they are exploited for the work. In capitalist society both the designer and the assembly workers are exploited if their work will ultimately benefit the shareholders of the company they work for. The exploitation through the stock market is something the workers have no control over. So they are alienated from their profits.
eternalban 4y ago
> Another observation is that it is possible to have a capitalist society in which there is no alienation at all—a designer develops the concept of a widget, and then manually builds a small amount of the widgets by themselves (see for example Etsy). That's not capitalism. That's how artisans before capitalism earned a livelihood, and your designer is an artisan (part of the Etsy market/guild). Capitalism requires continual growth, as the fundamental goal is the increase of capital and not meeting (steady-state) needs. Optimizing production (for growth) as necessitated by capitalism (such as due to debt service) strongly implies specialization and compartmentalization. Alienation is built in to capitalism. Capitalism is not about humans and human needs. (Note: private property; right to produce and engage in commerce; competitive markets; none of these are unique to a capitalist system. All these made their appearance long before capitalism.) p.s. I find it thought provoking that there are no natural analogues to a capitalist system. In nature, unimpeded, continual growth is typically a malady. Ecosystems, species, and even individual biological units at most experience a growth spurt to bring the system to a viable state for steady-state continuity.
- science4sail 4y ago
  > I find it thought provoking that there are no natural analogues to a capitalist system. In nature, unimpeded, continual growth is typically a malady. Ecosystems, species, and even individual biological units at most experience a growth spurt to bring the system to a viable state for steady-state continuity. My impression was that constant growth is the normal state of nature, not a malady. Biological systems don't stop growing because they think that they've reached a maintainable steady state; they stop growing because they run into resource constraints. For example, the balance between predator and prey populations is maintained via a feedback loop, not via assessments of "sustainability": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equatio...
  - eternalban 4y ago
    Biological systems are not considered failures if they stop growing and adjust to live in harmony with others. > For example, the balance between predator and prey populations is maintained via a feedback loop, not via assessments of "sustainability": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equatio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equatio... That's a straw man. I did not suggest that organisms do "sustainability" analysis. Obviously, we were discussing nature and natural processes.

euroderf 4y ago

Is this the source of the contemporary obsession with "mission statements" - a lame attempt to push "values" downward and generate "motivation" that is meant to work in opposition to alienation ?

Dr_Birdbrain 4y ago
That’s an interesting idea. Maybe.

anothernewdude 4y ago

Distinction without a difference.

runarberg 4y ago

Alienation looks the same from a worker’s perspective regardless of if it is the state or the wealthy class that exploits their labor. In the case of the Soviet Union, the workers were never empowered to own their own means of production, their bosses were simply replaced by the state. So from a workers perspective this is a distinction without a difference. The main issue with alienation isn’t about the worker’s understanding of the purpose of the work, but how they are exploited for the work. In capitalist society both the designer and the assembly workers are exploited if their work will ultimately benefit the shareholders of the company they work for. The exploitation through the stock market is something the workers have no control over. So they are alienated from their profits.

eternalban 4y ago

> Another observation is that it is possible to have a capitalist society in which there is no alienation at all—a designer develops the concept of a widget, and then manually builds a small amount of the widgets by themselves (see for example Etsy). That's not capitalism. That's how artisans before capitalism earned a livelihood, and your designer is an artisan (part of the Etsy market/guild). Capitalism requires continual growth, as the fundamental goal is the increase of capital and not meeting (steady-state) needs. Optimizing production (for growth) as necessitated by capitalism (such as due to debt service) strongly implies specialization and compartmentalization. Alienation is built in to capitalism. Capitalism is not about humans and human needs. (Note: private property; right to produce and engage in commerce; competitive markets; none of these are unique to a capitalist system. All these made their appearance long before capitalism.) p.s. I find it thought provoking that there are no natural analogues to a capitalist system. In nature, unimpeded, continual growth is typically a malady. Ecosystems, species, and even individual biological units at most experience a growth spurt to bring the system to a viable state for steady-state continuity.

science4sail 4y ago
> I find it thought provoking that there are no natural analogues to a capitalist system. In nature, unimpeded, continual growth is typically a malady. Ecosystems, species, and even individual biological units at most experience a growth spurt to bring the system to a viable state for steady-state continuity. My impression was that constant growth is the normal state of nature, not a malady. Biological systems don't stop growing because they think that they've reached a maintainable steady state; they stop growing because they run into resource constraints. For example, the balance between predator and prey populations is maintained via a feedback loop, not via assessments of "sustainability": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equatio...
- eternalban 4y ago
  Biological systems are not considered failures if they stop growing and adjust to live in harmony with others. > For example, the balance between predator and prey populations is maintained via a feedback loop, not via assessments of "sustainability": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equatio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotka%E2%80%93Volterra_equatio... That's a straw man. I did not suggest that organisms do "sustainability" analysis. Obviously, we were discussing nature and natural processes.