New Economy rant

Charles Brown CharlesB at CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us
Tue Sep 26 11:49:30 PDT 2000



>>> cbcox at ilstu.edu 09/26/00 02:14PM >>>

Perhaps. But the kind of brands being discussed are seemingly bought with a quite conscious sense of them as being a way of connecting to other people. The relationship that commodity fetishism obscures is the relationship between the actual producer (the workers) and the eventual buyer of the product. On the other hand, both a peasant forced to bake for his/her lord and the lord are very clear that there is a relationship of consumer to producer involved. I think it to some extent trivializes one of Marx's most fundamental points to link it to mere brand preferences such as are being discussed here.

((((((((((((

CB: Carrol's comment is good critique for making thing more precise.

I'd say though the relationship between the actual producers ( some workers) and the eventual buyers of the product ( some other workers) includes not only the commodity in question , but the commodity that the other worker produces too, as well as all the commodities being produced by workers. To make a long story short, the relationship obscured by the commodity is not just one relationship between one producer and one buyer, but the relationships of all to each within a gigantic division of labor. The true network of relationships is the relationships of their many (different types of) labors to each other.

So, focussing on the thing ( in this case the brand name is sort of a superhyping of the thing) obscures not just one relationship, but many. Alienation is in part this disconnection from the real division of labor of society. The fact that the commodity is a basis for connecting to some people, as with a Nike gym shoe at a basketball game or a party where people are dressed hip, is not the people connection commodity fetishism is getting at. Commodity fetishism is getting at the unconsciousness of the complex web of the division of LABOR, not social events where people wear gym shoes or play stereos.

So, commodity fetishism doesn't just mean the purchaser of a stereo is unconscious of the one group of workers who made the stereo, but unconsciousness that one's wellbeing in modern society depends on the relationship of one's own labor to many other labors.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list