Regarding the advice from Marx to Ruge, perhaps a modern parallel to Marx's mention of critiquing the Estate system with the representational system would be a program with a plank for a constitutional amendment for a right to a job or income ( as Angela says). We have complete programs thoroughly critiquing the existing state of things 1999.
Back to working class consciousness, I think the current U.S. bourgeoisie have succeeded in making the average worker feel that changing the system through collective action is a longer shot than the risk of concentrating on better oneself individually. There is risk in the latter, but they calculate that that risk is less than being a troublemaker. Also, most people don't think of things seriously in terms of class in the complex sense. So, things do go on behind their backs in that sense, though they also avoid turning around and seeing what is behind their back.
When you say in reply to my saying:
Charles:
> However, we already know a big one: the acceptance of racism and jingoist
>nationalism by large sectors of the the working class. Then there is the
acceptance of the culture of individualism and self-reliance in coping with
capitalism. Also, I suggested that one aspect is the control of the media
and the educating institutions by the wealth.
Kelley: what's been missed here is not simply that burawoy shows how people acquiesce to their own oppression and exploitation, but rather, his work [and others'] shows that people actively participate in--are agents in a sense--in their own oppression and exploitation. the process is not just one in which people are overwhelmed and saturated and inundated by the ideologies of the ruling elite'. instead, burawoy shows how people actively resist these messages by engaging in practices that are actually critical of racism, sexism, oppression, exploitation, nationalism, and the various ideologies of work and so forth that we are speaking of here. [these practices are uncovered in the workplace in burawoy's _manufacturing consent_ and in 'civil society' broadly understood as social movements, labor unions, schooling, etc in his edited collection _ethnography unbound:
power and resistance in the modern metropolis_]:
((((((((((((((((
Charles: Perhaps you can elaborate on how people actively participate in their own oppression and exploitation.
It is evident that there have been and are enormous working class fightbacks, as in the 30's and 60's and in between, marches, strikes, urban rebellions, protests. laws changed, etc., etc. Yet, afterall all of this, somehow, the Movement today is very, very flat. The establishment is incredibly triumphant, given all the blood, sweat and tears of resistence ovr the years you and buraway mention. I don't say this happily, but in a spirit of self-critically and soberly facing the truth, so that we can turn it back around.
CB
>>> kelley <oudies at flash.net> 07/15/99 07:32PM >>>
Charles Brown wrote:
>I have no problem with your implied proposal of uncovering and
broadcasting the paradox and tricks by which the bourgeoisie get the
working class to willingly cooperate in its own exploitation.
actually, it's [burawoy's theoretical perspective] quite a bit more complex than what you've characterized wojtek as saying. the problem is that it's as if the ruling elite *imposes* the ideas, beliefs, cultural practices *on* workers. from such a perspective workers are dupes of a "system" that operates behind their backs.
"In the face of commodification through money and administration through power, everyday life loses its autonomy and shared purpose. But [the analyses in this volume] do no simply record this colonization, they also explore resistance to it in the forms of negotiated orders, alternative institutions, and social movements" [ethno. unbound].
now, it seems to me that this is important because it reveals a place for 'us' to insert some sort of critical wedge, some thread to pick up and unravel the complex tapestry of ideology. and, it also allows us to see workers in a bit more positive light than we sometimes do, particularly when, on this list at least, we express our sense of beleaguerment and despair about the state of working class political consciousness. in other words, it's there we just don't see it and perhaps we don't look for it in the right places.
to tie this into a thread of a couple of weeks ago about how 'we' are supposed to get workers to become more class conscious: studies like this are helpful in revealing this critical fractures, fissures, and gaps in the ideological superstructure that reveal themselves in the practices that people engage in everyday of their lives. these fractures are what need to be exploited. this is why i quoted, a couple of month's ago, marx's letter to arnold ruge in which he argues that critical theory and practices should engage in "the self-clarification [critical philosophy (theory)] of the struggles and wishes of the age". it seems to me that here, were people are already engaged or, at least, where they are already demonstrating some sort of critical consciousness--whether of the media, workplace practices, politics as usual, etc, where we ought to begin. in other words, maybe we can't expect to get folks to start knocking on doors getting signatures for petitions and the like. but we can start from where folks already do other kinds of critical work, as unimportant as that might seem to 'us'.
so, i'll quote marx to ruge again:
For even though the question "where from" presents no problems, the question "where to?" is a rich source of confusion....If we have no business with the construction of the future or with organizing it...there can still be no doubt about the task confronting us at present: the ruthless criticism of the existing order...
[W]e wish to influence our contemporaries [earlier he notes the importance of recognizing particular historical exigencies within each country that critical theory must attend to and take seriously]...The problem is how best to achieve this. In this context there are two incontestable facts. Both religion and politics are matters of the first importance in contemporary Germany. Our task must be to latch onto these as they are and not to oppose them with any ready-made system such as the _Voyage en Icarie_. [...] Just as religion [by which marx means theory, philosophy] is the table of contents of the theoretical struggles of mankind, so the political state enumerates its practical struggles. Thus the particular form and nature of the political state contains all social struggles, needs and truths within itself. It is therefore anything but beneath its dignity to make even the most specialized political problem--such as the distinction between the representative system and the Estates system--into an object of its criticism. For this problem only expresses at the political level the distinction between the rule of man and the rule of private property. Hence the critic must concern himself with these political questions [which the crude socialists find beneath their dignity]. By demonstrating the superiority of the representative system over the Estates system he will interest a great party in practice. By raising the representative system from its political form to a general one...he will force this party to transcend itself--for its victory is also its defeat.
Nothing prevents us...from taking sides in politics, i.e. from entering into real struggles and identifying ourselves with them. This does not mean that we shall confront the world with new doctrinaire principles and proclaim: Here is the truth, on your knees before it...We shall not say: Abandon your struggles, they are mere folly; let us provide you with the true campaign-slogans. Instead we shall show the world why it is struggling.... [...] Our programme must be: the reform of consciousness not through dogmas but by analyzing mystical consciousness obscure to itself, whether it appear in religious or political form. It will then become plain that the world has long since dreamed of something of which it needs only to become conscious for it to possess it in reality. It will then become plain that our task is not to draw a sharp mental line between past and future but to complete the thought of the past. Lastly, it will become plain that mankind will not begin any new work, but will consciously bring about the completion of its old work.
from Letters from the Franco-German Yearbooks--a reply to Ruge's claims about the futility of engaging in actually existing political struggles.
kelley