> I can not for the life of me see why anyone not seriously brain damaged would want
> to be an individual. Wherever and whenever we find ourselves, we are always
> already implicated in a complex or ensemble of social relations apart from which
> we simply do not exist as human beings.
Carrol, I understand your point about the complex web of social relations of which we are all a part, but can't get my head around your assertion that 'individuality', as such, can't or doesn't exist. I think Gordon, in the following excerpt, gets at the heart of the matter - that individuality and sociability are mutually dependent on one another:
> The consciousness and self-consciousness of the individual are supported by a
> complex web of social relationships in which each individual is a unique and valued
> member. To the extent that one deprives individuals of their individuality one
> amputates their ability to form communities.
It is one's very consciousness of one's individuality that allows one to perceive his or her relation to the world at large - one's 'place' in the world. Indeed, in the absence of this awareness, it would be impossible to 'exist' in any meaningful way because there would be no basis on which one could see oneself in relation to others in the human community. I'm guessing you probably actually agree with this on some level but might not understand it as as individuality per se - perhaps in light of the dual role on the part of the community and the individual in shaping this relation. But it is a two-way street, and that's why I don't understand your assertion that a rock can be an individual but a human can't. The human has the means by which he or she can alter the relationship to the community, and therein lies the spark of individuality.
Gordon goes on to talk about people being deprived of their individuality and the resultant attraction - necessity! - of simulacra or 'ready-made' appropriations from media-generated sources. This, as I see it, has been the epidemic of our times. The absolute key to the whole issue is this: what are the specific means by which a human being living in a capitalist state loses to a significant extent the ability and/or the will to participate actively in the formation and maintenance/upkeep of his or her 'identity' and instead is compelled to relax this mechanism and turn over control to the monied interests and political hegemons. It seems to me that understanding this mechanism, how it works and how to break it, would be a prerequisite for any kind of revolutionary change in a place like the US of A.
--
/ dave /