>>> furuhashi.1 at osu.edu 03/21/01 08:02PM >>>
>>I haven't read the above paper & intend to do so later, but could you
>>tell me when you think intentional-functional explanations are useful
>>& when you think they aren't?
>>
>>It seems to me that intentional-functional explanations aren't useful
>>for explaining the origins & transformations of ruling-class &
>>working-class racisms, for instance. Intentional-functional
>>explanations don't seem useful for explaining imperialism either.
>>
>>Yoshie
>
>I don't think there is an a priori rule as to when
>intentional-functional explanations are useful. For example, there
>is no question but that racist ideologies were intentionally
>promulgated by US, British, and South African elites in the 19th and
>early 20th centuries, in part with the idea of fighting communism.
>You can see this, e.g., in some Thomas Nast cartoons. Whether such
>an explanation is useful depends on the facts of the case, no? --jks
_Once racism arose_, it could & has sometimes been employed intentionally by the governing elite & their lackeys (e.g., Willie Horton ads). In such cases, intentional-functional explanations are obviously useful. They cover, however, only a small part of what is to be explained, I think. For instance, what of the very origin of racism? It doesn't make sense to argue that the ruling class intentionally created racism in order to enslave Africans for racism is functional to slavery under capitalism.
((((((((
CB: The origin of racism was first as an excuse to pretend that the Indigenous Americans were savages who had no right to land and also it was as part of the process of consolidating African slavery. It makes great sense to say that race was invented by the colonialist/slavemaster bourgeois ruling sector to rationalize a split between the slaves and the white workers. Why else was race invented ?
((((((((
What of the differences between ruling-class & working-class racisms? I doubt that intentional-functional explanations help to illuminate them.
((((((((
CB: The ruling class's own racism is very intentional and very functional for the ruling class. Working class chauvinism is not class conscious, and dysfunctional, on balance, for white workers ( see BK Identity thread).
((((((
What of contradictory themes within racism (e.g., Mammy versus Jezebel, Uncle Tom versus Criminals)? And laws, customs, & institutions that produce racist outcomes but are not intended for such a purpose, which I believe accounts for much of post-Civil Rights racism?
(((((((
CB: There is a dialectic to the thing race, certainly. It is highly contradictory.
(((((((
Most importantly, what's functional for capitalism as a mode of production isn't necessarily good for individual capitalists or capitalist factions, & vice versa. Imperialism is functional for capitalism, but it isn't necessarily good for individual capitalists. I think intentional-functional explanations have difficulties accounting for these important phenomena (unless you attribute intention to the World Capitalist Spirit or something like that in a Hegelian fashion). For instance, intentional-functional explanations of ruling-class racism are subject to criticism from those who think like Gary Becker.
((((((((
CB: What you term intentional-functional explanations are necessary , but not sufficient. The larger theoretical concept would be capitalism = wage-labor x oppressed labor, such that race is derived from major forms of oppressed labor in the actual history of capitalism, including in all around colonialism as well as slavery and segregation systems. In this regard, race and racism does exhibit some emergent characteristics from class struggle, but it is not entirely independent of class struggle.
At 5:05 PM -0500 3/21/01, Charles Brown wrote:
>CB: Oppressing ruling classes are elite minorities and must be more
>conscious than the classes they oppress to rule them. The
>consciousness means that many ruling class practices are intentional
>on the part of at least the ruling class "central committees".
>"Functional" has a lot of baggage in social scientific literature,
>but these intentional practices preserve the ruling class as
>oppressing ruling class, and preserve the relations of production
>and private property.
>
>Racism does not spontaneously persist in the U.S. It must be
>continuously promoted and adapted to new circumstances. The ruling
>class knows this and they foster and reinvent it.
>
>Tautology is not foreign to fundamental theory.
>
>On teleology, the end or purpose of capitalist society _is_ more and
>continuing capitalism from the capitalists' point of view. They
>consciously act toward that end.
When the ruling class rule directly (e.g., by making investment decisions), they do so without an intention of reproducing capitalism as a mode of production;
((((((((((
CB: A main investment they make in ruling directly is the gigantic system of bribery of the politicians , generals, admirals and officials, campaign financing and more. This quite consciously has the intent of reproducing the capitalist mode of production and the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. The dictatorship of the bourgeoisie has some finesse , but it ain't that cute, or unintentionally run. There is some specialization within the ruling class in looking after these matters. But also, in more directly financial/commercial investments , most of them must stay within certain limits not contradicting reproduction of the mode even if not affirmatively reproducing the mode, that is to the extent that that can be done given the inherent contradictions of the capitalists' mode of activity against itself, as described by Marx at length.
((((((((((
otherwise, the ruling class rule only indirectly, via the governing elite, lobbyists, think-tank intellectuals, the mass media, etc., and it's the job of the latter, not the former, to consider what's good for capitalism as a mode of production, if & when they consider it at all.
Only a small minority of capitalists actually become members of the governing elite.
((((((((((
CB: I beg to differ. The dictatorship of the bourgeoisie involves the mass of capitalists coordinated and conscious of their class interests. The ruling class AS A WHOLE is highly class conscious, especially as compared with the working class. This is the ancient sine qua non for minority elite ruling classes: much higher class consciousness than the classes they oppress and exploit
I small minority of the ruling class could bankroll the revolution. There is rigorous ruling class discipline on critical class struggle issues.
On another issue, we lefts should be raising the slogan "Bring back welfare" jobs or income for all ! Repeal Clinton/Reaganism. "