Thursday, June 11, 2015
Anthony Giddens: The Consequences of Modernity
Downsides of modernity
1. environmental destruction
2. Increased military power
3. Increased totalitarianism in form of transnational corporations
(having been long replaced the nation states)
4. Degrading work (think repetitive work and deskilling)
information society and information as such can not be divorced from the consumer context.
Do we not have enough information?
No, too much information is always the problem
We have 1000 trademark tools that do essentially the same jobs
Why put the format onto automatic and work it into the lower brain, basal ganglia,
when you can constantly exhaust limited high brain functioning getting used to hot, exciting new features!
New features that are scarcely an improvement on the good enough for government work features of yore.
Are postmodernism and postindustrialism same terms?
Lyotard coined the non-retarded term postmodernism
Here's an epistemology sandwich to start a jaunty morning
first came the bun on the bottom, Nature, holding the whole thing up (The Natural World with it's infinite psychedelic experiences)
Next came, the fake meat of God in the middle, the meat was necessary when nature died out and agriculture replaced the HG's.
(religion, that substitute for real experiences in the natural world, the spiritual sense is the lost immediacy of everyday survival
in the jaws of death, with a million fantastical experiences, ever-changing, ever-delighting)
On the top, the latest bun, is the bun of Technology
Yes, so all we are eating today is the top bun of tech. No more natural world, no more God. Just Google. Google and a Search.
As Nietzsche would say, "I guess some things come full circle, eh my friends?)
Modernity is a historical epoch that goes hand in glove with the historical epoch of capitalism. We can split the hairs all day long, but for all intents and P, the damn thing arises pert near 17th century, give or take some scholarly wheel-spinning.
PM is the feeling of being swept up in a world that we do not fully understand. Exempli Gratis: 1. I just ate a sandwich made in Japan. 2. I just switched on the lights!
PM is the experience of irony everywhere.
The rapidity of change under PM is flabbergasting. (While writing this, I just updated my software, and began squatting digitally in cyberspace)
Lately we seem to have lost our belief in progress (9)
Didn't Blake say it in the 18th century in "The Human Abstract" so beautifully.
Blake in one poem raised and answered the questions of so much data and scholarly tome.
Society is an ambiguous notion. Referring to some vague associations of people (12)
and suddenly this epiphany: "we can use hx to make hx!" (15)
Was not this/that the real eureka of Marx?
Along with the recipe for the ingredients of exploitation. Marx said and I paraphrase liberally here: "Making salsa in Spanish is the same as salsa in French" The names are different, but the ingredients, the essence will stay the same, be it plebian or some official workers"
If modernity began in conjunction with the mechanical clock, than the PM era begins when the cell phone becomes a much more effective
mechanical clock. Cell phones are clocks on steroids.
Here's one for an art installation
You or Me (but better you than me) in a prison with the name of your carrier on the walls
Now pray tell, how many bars is your 3G picking up, eh my friends?
Giddens says that under modernity and becoming worse under PM, locals become shaped by beliefs that come from far away.
"I live in Silicon Valley and I give two shits about what the NYT says is transpiring in NYC?"
HG's didn't care about distant events, but we are made to believe we should.
Nevertheless, dominant cultures colonize the lifeworld (Lieberwelt) of other cultures
Giddens fancy (I'm worth my salary!) term for this phenomenon is "phantasmagoric" (19)
This "phantasmagoric" tendency is a real thing and a real problem, but do we really need such a fancy word for it?
Thursday, May 14, 2015
LEX, M2 and V1 in Jonathan Franzen's The Corrections
Language expressions and metaphors mostly from The Corrections by Jonathan Franzen
"Two empty hours were a sinus in which infections bred" (3).
"It was difficult and pointless like trying to peel blueberries (5).
"It was a large, vaguely gubanatorial chair" (8).
"Chip was appaled by his parents' willingness to make themselves vectors of corporate advertising (16).
"The carousel coughed up some more luggage (18).
"Eager to swallow a long-hoarded Xanax"
"Been squirreling away a cache of Vicodins."
"Two nipples jutting phallic-like to the surface of the bra" (28).
The very definition of mental health is the ability to go full-throttle in the consumer economy (31).
A lack of desire to spend money b-c's ground for mental therapy (31)
"I fight the whole phallometric yardsticks of achievement in the male-dominated society." (33)
"Her hair had the cherry-wood color of new motor oil" (36).
"Chip reminded his class to sit up straight like active critics rather than passive consumers" (39).
"She was a vaguely chihuahua-like person" (40).
"He wondered how much of his depression had been the effect of a greasy diet" (46).
"He girded himself for the last stage up the ascent of mount tenure"
"Not being theatrical, he always felt disadvangaged around people who were" (47).
"swamped by loneliness" (51).
"to be dependent on a drug with no hedonic kick" (57).
"under the heavy weight of fresh shame" (60).
"the borderline feminine softness of freshly-leavened bread" (68).
"the automaticity in which she drove a corkscrew into a bottle of wine was disconcertingly admirable (73).
"Her parents took a wrong turn somewhere in her upbringing" (74).
He smelled his couch hoping some hints of vaginal tang may be lingering weeks after the beautiful woman had sat there (74)
his work looked somewhat mentally unbalanced (80).
he'd written extensively about cuckolds (89).
marriage as a property right, and adultery as theft (90).
"I was struck afresh by ______________" (91).
her long cool pear tree limbs, her grapy smell and lecherous pliability (92?).
to "escape the nightmare of consumption" (97).
"The problem with money is the indignities of life w/o it" (105).
His new goal was simply to be a man w/ some dignity in the world
Her pussy was like a seasoned baseball glove" (104).
She "retreated to her birch-laminate desk" (107).
His responses to men fell into one of two categories: fear and resentment of their sucesses, or "flight from the contagion of their failures" (111).
"A teakwood salad bowl" (119).
she asked "half-beseechingly" (126).
a wedding is just a party with a purpose (119).
"sunflowers with their thick, meaty heads, heavy as a brownie" (136).
"interminably futile fights" (?)
in the "obliterative heartland heat" (138).
he expected a "modicum of cooperation from his wife: a mature willingness to consider the special circumstances" (147).
"his parents were cowed by authority of all kinds" (149).
"the pretty, pumpkin-yellow sunset unfolding" (153).
"He was afraid that if the idea that he was depressed gained currency, he would forfeit his right to his opinions" (159).
his mental markets--glycemic, endocrine, over-the-synapse were crashing (159).
"the twisted boogers of browning meats" (163).
Don't look too hard at your own house! If you do, you'll find "big, emboldened spiders"; "cricket husks"; "unfamiliar fungal and enteric smells"; "the sage of entropy" (page?)
When slowing down enough to finally stop and look at his house Chip's brother thinks: "We've got to sell this fucker right now, we can't lose another minute!" (172)
NTR: Certain liberties have been taken with this quote
"there are things in life that simply have to be endured" (173).
"I always feel so unpampered in the Midwest" (175).
"It's hostile to label people" (181).
MT: label jars not people. I think Gary said this in response to his wife Caroline.
he'd reached the "post-martini downslope" (?).
MT: One thing Franzen is really good at doing is coming up with creative observations for routine daily activities, like drinking martinis. Maybe Franzen dropped acid?
Maybe his wires just got mixed up at birth? In any case, he "makes it new."
She crossed the DMZ (demilitarized zone) of the mattress for amorous activities. (191)
MCM: Gary and Caroline are fighting over the question of returning to Christmas in St. Jude. Gary wants to return b/c he's oft promised his mother Enid a return, but failed to
make true of it. Caroline, the little city-slicker, refuses to travel w/ the fam. to St. Jude for X-mas, so she is boycotting by witholding "affection." At this point
in the story, her mind begins to play second fiddle to the needs of the body, thus proving that Descartes Cogito is still relevant today, despite the fMRI evidence.
it was hard to imagine them sharing a house amicably (?)
"Gary tore fresh tape from the fanged dispensor" (229).
"how the world seemed bent on torturing a man of virtue" (246).
MCM: I believe this was a flashback from Alfred's life, he was staying in a hotel earlier is his career and heard a girl is a motel room next door "gasping in her ululations."
Alfred--despite being from St. Jude, i.e. St. Louis--is no borderlander. His is a mindset informed by New Englander Puritan values combined with upper midwestern frames of
mind.
Schopenhauer: "Among the evils of a penal colony is the company of those imprisoned in it." (?)
the joys of the swingset are uterine memories (277).
old urologists never die, they just peter out (296)
faint view of a "sun-toasted shoulder" (292).
"perch-belly white" (359).
"smells like raw oyster in here" (362).
"I've got a real knack for timing" (364).
a nip of Seagrams
they talked about flavor the way Marxist's talked about revolution (377)
drawing on "reservoirs of libido" (380).
"You be a pathogen, I'll be a leukocyte" (386).
she was "avidly adventurous" (394).
"she had the metabolism of a hummingbird" (398).
"he trie to garden, but his shovel got chipped on all the petrified cat shit" (398).
"she was literally awash in desire" (411).
"an agreeable fizz that lingered from the night before (?)
she felt attractive, well-aerated, and alive. (?)
"a penitentially small living room" (427).
"flogging herself w/ Christmas prep" (460).
"elated by her second cup of coffee" (471).
the paucity of his home furnishings (472)
his glial cells purring w/ the first sweet lubrication of his first drink (?)
Monday, February 18, 2013
Reading: Bertrand Russell's "Freedom Versus Authority in Education" from Sceptical Essays
In the early 20th century Russell thought that what he called "regimentation" was the source of evil in education. Russell complained that education authorities were starting to look at children as raw "material for grandiose social schemes" (Russell 152). His concern was future "hands" in factories and future "bayonets" in wars. What Russell called "regimentation" is similar to the technocratic—i.e. reductive mentality that characterized the policies made under former Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. Spellings went around the country speaking about how children are our "future investments" and that we must "be able to keep tabs on how our portfolio's are performing." Whereas Russell was concerned about war, Spellings makes ready admission of a class war. Only something like 20% of the country has a substantial amount of money invested in stocks, so the reductive educational metaphorical model is not even sensical to approximately 4 out of 5 Americans. But so many of us want to believe that serious investing is right around the corner as a part of our dream, so we are not prepared to mentally and physically fight off the pestilential metaphor. To my way of thinking Spellings's metaphor—which became of course the foundation for the pernicious No Child Left Behind policies that characterized education in the United States in the first decade of the 21st century—is the same poison that Russell had in mind when he wrote about "grandiose schemes."
So many folks continue to be led by the misconception that higher education is some sort of a testament to the work ethic of the person stamped with the arbitrary documentation that comes with tertiary education. Obviously, the majority of the people who succeed at higher education are by definition the most spoon-fed and the most babied, the most likely to have received all sorts of degrees of handouts, not from the state of course, but from their parents. This is a fact and a sort of open-secret, that almost nobody wants to acknowledge because of the unseemly and impolite nature of the conversation. Interestingly, Russell commented on this situation in the early 20th century and observed tht universities in England at the time were teeming with lazy, unmotivated rich kids who were there for no apparent reason. Russell opined that the young men seemed to be lacking in academic aptitude and had very little curiousity about the world. Russell writes, "The rich young men who now waste their time in college are demoralizing others and teaching theselves to be useless" (148). Russell continues, "If hard work were exacted as a condition of residence, universities would cease to be attractive to people with a distaste for intellectual pursuits" (148).
Russell also seemed to be aware of the competetive streak and arbitrary distinctions conferred upon educational value by the so-called quality of the institution. To paraphrase Russell, he said that professional men have a unique outlook on education for their own children. a professionals income derives from the fact that his/her own education was better than the average working class person's education. As society becomes increasingly competitive, it becomes dangerous to power and income if working class people start receiving quality educations, or at least educations that are deemed to be of the right level of quality. Russell writes, "What matters is not an education that is good in itself, but an educatin that is better than everybody elses" (144). It is interesting that he was able to perceive this increased competition early in the 20th century along with the arbitrary cache that is bestowed upon certain institutions.
Thoughout the essay, Russell comments about educational impulses and how children should be educated. One of the more interesting thoughts from this chapter is that "Every child learns to talk by its own effort" (146). In other words, he endorses, not so much a completely lawless or free-spirited education, but he does see the problem with forcing content upon people when their instincts or desires to learn the material are still dormant. His outlook is a little bit like the proverb about how you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. At some point the horse will drink and the pedagogue might have to do a little patient waiting.
Another interesting finding is that Russell completely embraced what we would call today tracking. He writes, "It is very undesirable to combine in one class children whose mental capacities are very different" (147). He goes on to term these "capicities" in the more concrete and non euphemistic or politically correct language of certain children who are bright and talented and certain children who are dumb. Whether right or wrong on this point, one might say that Russell had a prescient understanding of the Bell Curve model of students—he was after all a mathematician.
In the early 20th century Russell thought that what he called "regimentation" was the source of evil in education. Russell complained that education authorities were starting to look at children as raw "material for grandiose social schemes" (Russell 152). His concern was future "hands" in factories and future "bayonets" in wars. What Russell called "regimentation" is similar to the technocratic—i.e. reductive mentality that characterized the policies made under former Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. Spellings went around the country speaking about how children are our "future investments" and that we must "be able to keep tabs on how our portfolio's are performing." Whereas Russell was concerned about war, Spellings makes ready admission of a class war. Only something like 20% of the country has a substantial amount of money invested in stocks, so the reductive educational metaphorical model is not even sensical to approximately 4 out of 5 Americans. But so many of us want to believe that serious investing is right around the corner as a part of our dream, so we are not prepared to mentally and physically fight off the pestilential metaphor. To my way of thinking Spellings's metaphor—which became of course the foundation for the pernicious No Child Left Behind policies that characterized education in the United States in the first decade of the 21st century—is the same poison that Russell had in mind when he wrote about "grandiose schemes."
So many folks continue to be led by the misconception that higher education is some sort of a testament to the work ethic of the person stamped with the arbitrary documentation that comes with tertiary education. Obviously, the majority of the people who succeed at higher education are by definition the most spoon-fed and the most babied, the most likely to have received all sorts of degrees of handouts, not from the state of course, but from their parents. This is a fact and a sort of open-secret, that almost nobody wants to acknowledge because of the unseemly and impolite nature of the conversation. Interestingly, Russell commented on this situation in the early 20th century and observed tht universities in England at the time were teeming with lazy, unmotivated rich kids who were there for no apparent reason. Russell opined that the young men seemed to be lacking in academic aptitude and had very little curiousity about the world. Russell writes, "The rich young men who now waste their time in college are demoralizing others and teaching theselves to be useless" (148). Russell continues, "If hard work were exacted as a condition of residence, universities would cease to be attractive to people with a distaste for intellectual pursuits" (148).
Russell also seemed to be aware of the competetive streak and arbitrary distinctions conferred upon educational value by the so-called quality of the institution. To paraphrase Russell, he said that professional men have a unique outlook on education for their own children. a professionals income derives from the fact that his/her own education was better than the average working class person's education. As society becomes increasingly competitive, it becomes dangerous to power and income if working class people start receiving quality educations, or at least educations that are deemed to be of the right level of quality. Russell writes, "What matters is not an education that is good in itself, but an educatin that is better than everybody elses" (144). It is interesting that he was able to perceive this increased competition early in the 20th century along with the arbitrary cache that is bestowed upon certain institutions.
Thoughout the essay, Russell comments about educational impulses and how children should be educated. One of the more interesting thoughts from this chapter is that "Every child learns to talk by its own effort" (146). In other words, he endorses, not so much a completely lawless or free-spirited education, but he does see the problem with forcing content upon people when their instincts or desires to learn the material are still dormant. His outlook is a little bit like the proverb about how you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. At some point the horse will drink and the pedagogue might have to do a little patient waiting.
Another interesting finding is that Russell completely embraced what we would call today tracking. He writes, "It is very undesirable to combine in one class children whose mental capacities are very different" (147). He goes on to term these "capicities" in the more concrete and non euphemistic or politically correct language of certain children who are bright and talented and certain children who are dumb. Whether right or wrong on this point, one might say that Russell had a prescient understanding of the Bell Curve model of students—he was after all a mathematician.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Tipping the Sacred Cow: Best of Lip
Madness and Mass Society (164-171)
Interview with Bruce E. Levine who thinks that many mental disorders are profit driven fabrications. The most extreme example is probably ODD (Oppositional Defiance Disorder). According to the DSM, this is a legitimate disease. ADD or ADHD is also a diagnosis that is easy to pick on. The first DSM came out in 1952 (166).
Levine thinks that the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) is a pseudo-science (165). Levine points out that a movie like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest would probably never come out today. Because so many people have "legitimate" mental disorders now, the whole issue is offensive, not to mention drug companies exercise a lot more political and legal power over society now.
Levine says that for 99% of human history people have been living in non-mass societies (168). He suggests that many mental disorders have their roots in the society arrangement instead of something that is defective with the individual. If so many individuals are being affected, should the individuals change to fit into the standardized order, or should the society change? Levine thinks that part of the problem is a dissolution of community and points out that if you take a name like Oakland, it is really a location and less of a community (168). In a functioning community, people decided what the problems are, generate solutions and do not hand these issues over to distant authorities (168). MT: Maybe this is how companies should be looked at, as being pro-community or anti-community. My guess is that the a company with a strong PR image reminding people all of the time that the company is pro-community, is really just compensating for a lack of community, possibly they are destroying the community in some way. This is also the main issue between the middle class and the working class. If you are working class, you really need your community, that is what you have to get through the tough times. If you are middle class, you don't really need community, if there is loneliness, there is always the possibility of relief. The middle class holds a powerful remote control and can change the channel whenever they please through things like travel and mini-vacations. Middle class people are always flitting around, "tasting the local flavors." If you are poor, you are the local flavor, there's nothing charming about it.
Levine says that the current atomized society is bad for many people. Specifically the lack of community and the breakdown of extended families are what he thinks are hurting people (171). He thinks a bigger part of the emotional and behavioral problems have to do with a very real sense of both being disconnected and powerless.
Common Uprisings: From the Great Mexican land Grab to the Reclaiming of Everything (87-95)
The Zapatista's rose up in Chipas on January 1, 1994, the night that NAFTA was scheduled to go into effect. Why were they so mad? Because the traditional campensino law that had protected the commons had been done away with when NAFTA was signed into law. NAFTA is evidence that traditional nation-states are no longer capable of satisfying the growth required to sate the machine of liberalism (92). Article 27 (the Ejido law) of the Mexican Constitution had been amended originally to allow for the commons resulting from Emiliano Zapata's Plan de Ayala in 1911. Article 27 had called for at least 1/2 of the land in Mexico to be placed outside of private hands. The land was to be outside of the marketplace altogether (88). Zapata had the notion of tierra y libertad —"the land is for the people who work it..." (88). With the stroke of the NAFTA pen, Mexico's century of agrarian reform ended. The system had not been perfect, it was at times corrupt and never was complete, but legally the land was protected (88).
Modern capitalism was a cluter of causes, but one contributing factor that led to its rise was the enclosure of the commons in England in the 16th century (91). Prior to that, people were not allowed to turn more cattle out to the common patures as they could stable in winter. This served as a check on overgrazing. One religious group, a group of freethinkers known as the Diggers were strongly opposed. The Diggers held that the earth was a common treasurey for all (90).
Interview with Bruce E. Levine who thinks that many mental disorders are profit driven fabrications. The most extreme example is probably ODD (Oppositional Defiance Disorder). According to the DSM, this is a legitimate disease. ADD or ADHD is also a diagnosis that is easy to pick on. The first DSM came out in 1952 (166).
Levine thinks that the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual) is a pseudo-science (165). Levine points out that a movie like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest would probably never come out today. Because so many people have "legitimate" mental disorders now, the whole issue is offensive, not to mention drug companies exercise a lot more political and legal power over society now.
Levine says that for 99% of human history people have been living in non-mass societies (168). He suggests that many mental disorders have their roots in the society arrangement instead of something that is defective with the individual. If so many individuals are being affected, should the individuals change to fit into the standardized order, or should the society change? Levine thinks that part of the problem is a dissolution of community and points out that if you take a name like Oakland, it is really a location and less of a community (168). In a functioning community, people decided what the problems are, generate solutions and do not hand these issues over to distant authorities (168). MT: Maybe this is how companies should be looked at, as being pro-community or anti-community. My guess is that the a company with a strong PR image reminding people all of the time that the company is pro-community, is really just compensating for a lack of community, possibly they are destroying the community in some way. This is also the main issue between the middle class and the working class. If you are working class, you really need your community, that is what you have to get through the tough times. If you are middle class, you don't really need community, if there is loneliness, there is always the possibility of relief. The middle class holds a powerful remote control and can change the channel whenever they please through things like travel and mini-vacations. Middle class people are always flitting around, "tasting the local flavors." If you are poor, you are the local flavor, there's nothing charming about it.
Levine says that the current atomized society is bad for many people. Specifically the lack of community and the breakdown of extended families are what he thinks are hurting people (171). He thinks a bigger part of the emotional and behavioral problems have to do with a very real sense of both being disconnected and powerless.
Common Uprisings: From the Great Mexican land Grab to the Reclaiming of Everything (87-95)
The Zapatista's rose up in Chipas on January 1, 1994, the night that NAFTA was scheduled to go into effect. Why were they so mad? Because the traditional campensino law that had protected the commons had been done away with when NAFTA was signed into law. NAFTA is evidence that traditional nation-states are no longer capable of satisfying the growth required to sate the machine of liberalism (92). Article 27 (the Ejido law) of the Mexican Constitution had been amended originally to allow for the commons resulting from Emiliano Zapata's Plan de Ayala in 1911. Article 27 had called for at least 1/2 of the land in Mexico to be placed outside of private hands. The land was to be outside of the marketplace altogether (88). Zapata had the notion of tierra y libertad —"the land is for the people who work it..." (88). With the stroke of the NAFTA pen, Mexico's century of agrarian reform ended. The system had not been perfect, it was at times corrupt and never was complete, but legally the land was protected (88).
Modern capitalism was a cluter of causes, but one contributing factor that led to its rise was the enclosure of the commons in England in the 16th century (91). Prior to that, people were not allowed to turn more cattle out to the common patures as they could stable in winter. This served as a check on overgrazing. One religious group, a group of freethinkers known as the Diggers were strongly opposed. The Diggers held that the earth was a common treasurey for all (90).
Thursday, June 23, 2011
The Uses of Haiti by Paul Farmer
The book has two fowards, one by Kozol and another by Chomsky. Basically they say that this book will challenge the accepted lies (11.). Haiti is described as the world's oldest black republic (11). A former priest, Jean Bertrand Aristride, was elected in 1990 and overthrown in September 1991 with the help of the USA. Apparently Aristide made it clear that he was not about to be a servile viceroy to US interests. The USA imposed an embargo, a form of economic blackmail, on the Haitians of 500 million. Economic funds had been channelled from the US to Haiti during the occupation starting under Wilson from 1915-1934. After that, the Papa and Baby Doc Duvalier dictatorship lasted from 1957-1986 (52).
Hispanolia, modern Haiti and Domican Republic, was regarded as a paradise. Today it is the very symbol of despair (17). Originally a Spanish colony, the French took over. In 1796 the slaves fomented against french rule and Toussaint Louverture took over (61). What the slaves had done in Haiti, made a lot of slave owners in U.S. very nervous. (64). Outside of Haiti, there was no other case of a slave nation rising up from within and overthrowing a colonial empire. It was both the earliest example of this and is still a shocking historical case. The U.S. refused to recogonize Haiti as a nation and refused diplomacy. In 1844 the Domican Republic declares independence from Haiti (69). The Marines invaded under Wilson in 1915. By the time they left Haiti was saddled with a 40 million dollar debt (89). Under the US occupation, North American companies either bought or leased an estimated 300,000 acres of land, getting into business with bananas, rubber, sugar, sisal and a number of other resources (82). Papa Doc Duvalier took over in the 1950's and like many other leaders, protected himself under anti-communist hysteria. He made communism illegal and any associations with it, punishible to the point of death in his Articles 1 and 2 (94). USAID during this time was directed in a way to turn Haiti into the Taiwan of the Carribean (21).
Hispanolia, modern Haiti and Domican Republic, was regarded as a paradise. Today it is the very symbol of despair (17). Originally a Spanish colony, the French took over. In 1796 the slaves fomented against french rule and Toussaint Louverture took over (61). What the slaves had done in Haiti, made a lot of slave owners in U.S. very nervous. (64). Outside of Haiti, there was no other case of a slave nation rising up from within and overthrowing a colonial empire. It was both the earliest example of this and is still a shocking historical case. The U.S. refused to recogonize Haiti as a nation and refused diplomacy. In 1844 the Domican Republic declares independence from Haiti (69). The Marines invaded under Wilson in 1915. By the time they left Haiti was saddled with a 40 million dollar debt (89). Under the US occupation, North American companies either bought or leased an estimated 300,000 acres of land, getting into business with bananas, rubber, sugar, sisal and a number of other resources (82). Papa Doc Duvalier took over in the 1950's and like many other leaders, protected himself under anti-communist hysteria. He made communism illegal and any associations with it, punishible to the point of death in his Articles 1 and 2 (94). USAID during this time was directed in a way to turn Haiti into the Taiwan of the Carribean (21).
The Inefficiency of Capitalism: An Anarchist View by Brian Oliver Shepphard
Summary:
Sheppard points out that it has become automatic to think of capitalism as being efficient because this is what is oft repeated. Sheppard uses a neat list to dispell the accepted view and believes that the system is actually inefficient.
10 Inefficiencies of capitalism
1. Product duplication
2. Systematic Unemployment
3. Cost Shifting
4. Waste of Unsold Goods
5. The inefficiency of Hierarchies
6. Planned Obsolescence
7. Price Gouging
8. Creation of False Desires
9. Parasitic Jobs
10. Inefficient Distribution Patters
Notes on the Hx of Capitalism
The system developed out of feudalism after the fiefdoms and lords began to disappear (8). It is thought that serfs worked no more than an average of four hours a day. By modern standards, serfs were extremely lazy. As agricultural workers, there were long winter seasons without work to be done. The newly independent serfs found themselves needing to rent themselves out to people in order to buy their own food, pay new housing costs etc. People started moving around a lot more, seeking the most comfortable living conditions possible. Other contributions to capitalism were the rise of Protestantism, mercantilism and the Enclosure Acts that abolished the Commons (in England) (8).
Working Definitions
Capitalism - system by which there is private ownership of the means of production
Efficiency - this is a loaded term that absolutely cannot be read as being something that is automatically positive. What is efficient for a business, may be bad for society or the environment. "Efficiency" and "convenience" as applied to our modern consumer society are words used to indicate that there is about to be less service, the consumer will do the work, or pay a fee. For example, automatic checkout lines at grocery stores, fast food restaurants and ATM's are all referred to as being fast and convenient. Companies find ways to get unthinking consumers to do labor and slyly redesignate the labor as "fast" and "fun."
Inefficiency #1 Product Duplication
Classic example would be breakfast cereals and bars of soap. It appears that people are making important decisions, but all of the products are remarkably similar, overpriced, and shoddy. For example, a person could buy unbranded whole oats for 5% of the cost of the processed oats and have a much healthier breakfast, getting more fiber, less sugar in the diet etc. (14).
Inefficiency #2 Systematic Unemployment
Capitalism would not work if everybody had full time employment. "Work" meaning it would decrease profits, until the system collapsed. Economists have looked under the microscope and discovered that there is something that, like gravity, exists, and this is called the Natural Rate of Unemployment (NRU) (18). There is some debate, but economists believe the NRU is between 4-9%. When the economy dips below the NRU, the economy becomes inflationary, as workers can begin demanding better wages and there is no competition for jobs. Because one must always remember, without competition, this divine system would cease functioning.
Inefficiency #3 Cost Shifting
Private interests seek to lower costs by pushing them onto the public sector. The military industrial complex in US serves heavily as a subsidy to technological firms. Another example would be how the auto and oil industry profits enormously from public infrastructure.
Inefficiency #6 Planned Obsolescence
Vance Packard's classic 1957 book The Waste Makers discussed limited life spans of products (23). In the 1930's a GE engineer proposed increasing sales by making lamp bulbs that lasted for the duration of only one battery cycle. Many products tell consumers when a product needs to be replaced using things like indicator strips. Many of these indicators tell consumers the products wear out when in reality, the products are still useful.
Inefficiency #7 Price Gouging
Decreased supply supposedly with increase demand, so limited editions and things like that are released. Video game consoles are released gradually. A classic example is the Cabbage Patch Kids dolls in the 1980's (24).
Sources/References
Beaud, Michel. The History of Capitalism 1500-2000.
Sheppard points out that it has become automatic to think of capitalism as being efficient because this is what is oft repeated. Sheppard uses a neat list to dispell the accepted view and believes that the system is actually inefficient.
10 Inefficiencies of capitalism
1. Product duplication
2. Systematic Unemployment
3. Cost Shifting
4. Waste of Unsold Goods
5. The inefficiency of Hierarchies
6. Planned Obsolescence
7. Price Gouging
8. Creation of False Desires
9. Parasitic Jobs
10. Inefficient Distribution Patters
Notes on the Hx of Capitalism
The system developed out of feudalism after the fiefdoms and lords began to disappear (8). It is thought that serfs worked no more than an average of four hours a day. By modern standards, serfs were extremely lazy. As agricultural workers, there were long winter seasons without work to be done. The newly independent serfs found themselves needing to rent themselves out to people in order to buy their own food, pay new housing costs etc. People started moving around a lot more, seeking the most comfortable living conditions possible. Other contributions to capitalism were the rise of Protestantism, mercantilism and the Enclosure Acts that abolished the Commons (in England) (8).
Working Definitions
Capitalism - system by which there is private ownership of the means of production
Efficiency - this is a loaded term that absolutely cannot be read as being something that is automatically positive. What is efficient for a business, may be bad for society or the environment. "Efficiency" and "convenience" as applied to our modern consumer society are words used to indicate that there is about to be less service, the consumer will do the work, or pay a fee. For example, automatic checkout lines at grocery stores, fast food restaurants and ATM's are all referred to as being fast and convenient. Companies find ways to get unthinking consumers to do labor and slyly redesignate the labor as "fast" and "fun."
Inefficiency #1 Product Duplication
Classic example would be breakfast cereals and bars of soap. It appears that people are making important decisions, but all of the products are remarkably similar, overpriced, and shoddy. For example, a person could buy unbranded whole oats for 5% of the cost of the processed oats and have a much healthier breakfast, getting more fiber, less sugar in the diet etc. (14).
Inefficiency #2 Systematic Unemployment
Capitalism would not work if everybody had full time employment. "Work" meaning it would decrease profits, until the system collapsed. Economists have looked under the microscope and discovered that there is something that, like gravity, exists, and this is called the Natural Rate of Unemployment (NRU) (18). There is some debate, but economists believe the NRU is between 4-9%. When the economy dips below the NRU, the economy becomes inflationary, as workers can begin demanding better wages and there is no competition for jobs. Because one must always remember, without competition, this divine system would cease functioning.
Inefficiency #3 Cost Shifting
Private interests seek to lower costs by pushing them onto the public sector. The military industrial complex in US serves heavily as a subsidy to technological firms. Another example would be how the auto and oil industry profits enormously from public infrastructure.
Inefficiency #6 Planned Obsolescence
Vance Packard's classic 1957 book The Waste Makers discussed limited life spans of products (23). In the 1930's a GE engineer proposed increasing sales by making lamp bulbs that lasted for the duration of only one battery cycle. Many products tell consumers when a product needs to be replaced using things like indicator strips. Many of these indicators tell consumers the products wear out when in reality, the products are still useful.
Inefficiency #7 Price Gouging
Decreased supply supposedly with increase demand, so limited editions and things like that are released. Video game consoles are released gradually. A classic example is the Cabbage Patch Kids dolls in the 1980's (24).
Sources/References
Beaud, Michel. The History of Capitalism 1500-2000.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
George Lakoff's Whose Freedom?
Summary:
Lakaoff, ever the interested scholar of language—having previously tackled the metaphorical nature of thought in Metaphors We Live By—herein submits that a loaded word like freedom, cannot pass by without being analyzed. Both conservative and leftist politicians use the word freedom, but the word takes opposite meanings.
Definitions and Questions for Freedom
Basically there is a "freedom to" and a "freedom from." (78)
For example, FDR gave a speech, famously called the Four Freedoms Speech and he defined freedom as being freedom from necessity, want, hunger and fear. (7) FDR also said that freedom does not exist in the absence of opportunity (76).
The USA is committed to spreading freedom. But what kind of freedom? For who? (17)
Linguistic threats to Lakoff's type of leftist freedom
These fall into general categories that I would best describe as
•overuse - the word freedom simply gets used too much and loses all meaning, like how revolution, once a technical meaning, is now used by Verizon and many other companies to describe weekend sales "A price revolution...this weekend at select stores"
Vagueness - words tend to mean different things to different people. Certain words are loaded. Even specific words like "over" are subject to many different meanings.
Overuse
Repetition is a great way to evacuate dangerous words of any type of subversive or intelligible meaning.
Case in point. Consider the name Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. (6)
MT: The name Operation Enduring Freedom recursively gets Lakoff's point across about how freedom means different things to different political persuasions. With a name like that it is easy to ask, "Is freedom something that will endure," or "Is freedom something that must be endured?"
Vagueness
Words mean things and that is the problem. They tend to mean too much. A simple word like "over" has over 100 distinct meanings. (22). MT/MQ: So imagine how many meanings freedom has. This reminds me of Toni Morrison who said that nobody knows what anybody means when they talk about love because to some it means lust, to others it means something that looks awfully like abuse.
Take a word like art. Everybody knows what art is right? Lakoff suggests that to even begin, first you have to categorize art in some way. So you could use traditional categories like Dada, realism etc. For example if you show a realist painter canned shit like Piero Manzoni did. The artist shit into little cans, tinned them and sold them to investors as "Freshly canned shit of the artist." People gobbled them up. Of course the artist had really smart reasons and directed social criticism toward buyers, but many were not capable of understanding. Likewise if you tell a realist that Manzoni's work is art, a more traditional artist would disagree and not be able to recognize it as art. Likewise, if you tell a conservative what you mean by freedom, they don't even really understand.
A right wing view of freedom focuses on individual freedom (25). In other words, interference with individual liberty— usually by the government— is a crimp in the great hose of freedom. It actually would make sense that if you can afford to do whatever you want, that lax tax laws would benefit you.
Additional
Summary:
Lakaoff, ever the interested scholar of language—having previously tackled the metaphorical nature of thought in Metaphors We Live By—herein submits that a loaded word like freedom, cannot pass by without being analyzed. Both conservative and leftist politicians use the word freedom, but the word takes opposite meanings.
Definitions and Questions for Freedom
Basically there is a "freedom to" and a "freedom from." (78)
For example, FDR gave a speech, famously called the Four Freedoms Speech and he defined freedom as being freedom from necessity, want, hunger and fear. (7) FDR also said that freedom does not exist in the absence of opportunity (76).
The USA is committed to spreading freedom. But what kind of freedom? For who? (17)
Linguistic threats to Lakoff's type of leftist freedom
These fall into general categories that I would best describe as
•overuse - the word freedom simply gets used too much and loses all meaning, like how revolution, once a technical meaning, is now used by Verizon and many other companies to describe weekend sales "A price revolution...this weekend at select stores"
Vagueness - words tend to mean different things to different people. Certain words are loaded. Even specific words like "over" are subject to many different meanings.
Overuse
Repetition is a great way to evacuate dangerous words of any type of subversive or intelligible meaning.
Case in point. Consider the name Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. (6)
MT: The name Operation Enduring Freedom recursively gets Lakoff's point across about how freedom means different things to different political persuasions. With a name like that it is easy to ask, "Is freedom something that will endure," or "Is freedom something that must be endured?"
Vagueness
Words mean things and that is the problem. They tend to mean too much. A simple word like "over" has over 100 distinct meanings. (22). MT/MQ: So imagine how many meanings freedom has. This reminds me of Toni Morrison who said that nobody knows what anybody means when they talk about love because to some it means lust, to others it means something that looks awfully like abuse.
Take a word like art. Everybody knows what art is right? Lakoff suggests that to even begin, first you have to categorize art in some way. So you could use traditional categories like Dada, realism etc. For example if you show a realist painter canned shit like Piero Manzoni did. The artist shit into little cans, tinned them and sold them to investors as "Freshly canned shit of the artist." People gobbled them up. Of course the artist had really smart reasons and directed social criticism toward buyers, but many were not capable of understanding. Likewise if you tell a realist that Manzoni's work is art, a more traditional artist would disagree and not be able to recognize it as art. Likewise, if you tell a conservative what you mean by freedom, they don't even really understand.
A right wing view of freedom focuses on individual freedom (25). In other words, interference with individual liberty— usually by the government— is a crimp in the great hose of freedom. It actually would make sense that if you can afford to do whatever you want, that lax tax laws would benefit you.
Additional
Roussau and the Social Contract
Social contract is a metaphor where absolute freedom is traded for security. For example airplane searches are like a part of the social contract. You give up a little personal space in order to bring about greater safety. So there is a give and take. Rousseau thought that humans exchanged absolute freedom for freedom within the social order. (49)
Taxation pays to build and maintain the commonwealth (81).
Civil Disobedience
Like the social contract, civil disobedience is invoked frequently by progressives. The main idea is that, within social systems, following long periods after revolutions or chaotic events, the guardians of states tend to become corrupt (50). It then becomes necessary to disobey. Disobedience takes a number of forms, but can be divided into two main forms: Violent/Nonviolent. MLK was an advocate of the latter, whereas somebody like Angela Davis advocates the former. Davis thought that periodic, loud bursts of violents were necessary to expiate and to cleanse the guardians.
Why freedom, whatever it means to you, is important
Unhappy and unfulfilled people tend to not want others to be happy, so they bring people who are moving along nicely down, or try to bring them down to their level (75). To be empathetic it requires that people are able to feel fulfilled at some level (75). It's interesting that in America, basically the economic engine is greased through greed and coveting. God said, don't covet your neighbors wife, so people kept doing that and started coveting things like jet skis and homes that can safely house a small airplane inside of them. So to be happy, this might be another case of, it's important to have freedom from something. In this case freedom from the desire to always "upgrade." It is easier to get rid of this desire by removing from sight the images and sensory harmonics that cause desire.
Lakoff sees empathy as the basis of the progressive worldview (85). He describes Buddhism and Taoism as being major religions of empathy (86). Lakoff thinks that the companion of empathy is responsibility (86). Under a feudal society, lords had a paternal relationship to their workers. As states started to form, Kings still had a vestige of paternal care, but one who is father to all, is father to none. States at some point grow too big for empathy to check excess. States with a lot of ethnic and cultural homogeneity like Sweden and Norway seem to have effective state systems. Other states that have opened the doors to migration and neoliberal trade policies have always found it hard to pass genuinely empathetic legislation. As transnational companies have been able to set up shop in other countries, should we really be suprised that they pollute those environments and extract resources at the cheapest possible cost? Being commited to a certain land and people is absolutely a precursor for empathetic action.
Taxation
Hurrican Katrina was interesting because the social contract part of the state, FEMA, was defunded by tax breaks for the wealthy and also diverted to pay for war. So it raised the question, "what are we paying taxes for? (83).
Low income workers uphold the lifestyles of nearly 3/4 of the American population.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)