>not "universalising tendency" perhaps, but certainly we continue to take a
>political cue from the form of abstract equivalence at work in capitalist
>production processes: abstract labour, money, etc.
I think Marx talks of a 'universalising tendency'. But whatever he says, I take seriously Capitalism's universalising tendency, and welcome it for the progressive contribution it is. In fact, I don't see how you can fault capitalism for creating inequality, without at the same time embracing the promise of equality. So when you write
> one wonders where
>people think anti-racist movements and concepts emerge from if not from
>capitalism
I agree with you, but less so when you continue
>; which also suggests that there are real limits to how we might
>conceive of racism (and how to fight it) in the first place, whether it be
>the principle of equality itself, since all notions of equality presuppose
>a table of comparability, a universal standard,
Which sounds to me like a good thing and not a bad thing. Or maybe I am misunderstanding you.
In message <v04220807b4914b780bc4@[166.84.250.86]>, Doug Henwood
<dhenwood at panix.com> writes
>Jim heartfield wrote:
>
>>Psychic income, what can you buy with that?
>
>Peace of mind, of a sort. As in, "I may have a crappy job and not a
>pot to piss in, but at least I'm not black!"
And this is supposed to be an advantage? -- Jim heartfield