Nancy Fraser: Cannibal Capitalism

[@Larimerst]

Really solving the world's problems here.

[@charlieb4455]

I mean she sets out the task of critical theory right at the begining - the "self-clarification of the struggles and wishes of the age" (Marx). Critical theory never claims it will resolve the problems, nor does it claim to satisfy the wishes, but rather to clarify them. Why don't we look at a different case of theory. If we look at what is happening in journal discussions on pure mathematics, those papers, in and of themselves will never solve any problems nor do anything for the world. They only can when someone decides it is worth taking what they have to say into consideration, creating applied theories of mathematics which in some way connect with their more abstract counterparts and then someone else in turn implements those theoretical resources into their action. If one math paper has not yet been put into practice, do we say it was useless and should never have been written? That does not seem wise. Similar logic applies here - yes, we are in crisis, and this theory on it's own will not resolve the crisis. But theorizing is always easier than actually going out and doing the thing, so it makes sense that it often happens first, and it can give us important conceptual tools when we ultimately get around to acting (which by the way there are ongoing actions, though of course not at the revolutionary scale she thinks we need). So it again seems naive to say that it is worthless just because we haven't solved the problems yet - that will always be the case (i.e. there will always be unresolved problems). Do you say we should not think about those problems in a rigorous way? Because that is precisely what she is doing here, and it seems pretty important to me - though of course, and as you rightly point out, far from sufficient.

[@JerrylynShoup]

You thought a KZbin video could solve the world's problems? I'm sorry you're disappointed but have some common sense

[@Gunni1972]

Capitalism cannibalizes the work force, as it is forced/coerced to compete with eachother, even within a company. So that company can compete with other companies. That again compete for resources, creating a lousy work environment for all involved. Competition is a "Regulated form of WAR". Now all you need to do, to become an "economic criminal", is to "soften up" those regulations. As the Traders do compete with each other, The "price" for goods goes down (For the Market at least) While the "value" of the goods stays the same. (Still need to Harvest/mine the material, and ship it to a processing factory etc). So it cuts into the Profit of "producers".

[@user-ej5gx7ph7q]

Something in the economic system causes all this, because economics defined values, including the value of stratified races. The problem is inequality, capitalism is the latest manifestation. Population density compounds the violence of structural inequality, unlike any time in our human past. Seeing the privileged discuss it from the lofty perspective, working not to upset the system too much, is very telling of how dire our situation is

[@davidthomas3513]

You use the language of formal critique, yet criticise this critique for being a professional (i.e. informed) critique. How does that work?

[@SapphicTwist]

Excellent. However, two things. 1. Anybody who starts off saying she has only recently taken up the subject of capitalism clearly has spent her professional career surrounded by liberals and postmodernists. Not a solid foundation for the upgrading of socialism that we need now? 2. I think cannibalism is the wrong metaphor, because it is binary and doesn't allow for dialectical thinking. I like parasitism better, as a refinement of the idea of subsistence and the production of labor power. For instance, capitalism doesn't so much cannibalize care, as it depletes it while still keeping it partially alive. I think people can relate to that experience more than a binary like cannibalism...the cannibal leaves no life behind.

[@xzyeee]

Hummmm very interesting analysis....it is possible, within the human sphere of existence, to be alive without having a life?

[@JerrylynShoup]

Your criticisms are 1. "I feel like she's a lib 🫣" And 2. "I prefer the word parasite to cannibal" Why did you need so many words for such simple criticisms?

[@JerrylynShoup]

Stop tone policing people

[@ruby_love23]

There is ecofeminist criticisms in her theory.

[@marxxthespot]

🎯

[@ebmr1479]

Shoygu

[@richardford9321]

No matter the problem State control of production will do nothing but collapse production and remove individual freedom in the process.

[@davidthomas3513]

Fraser isn’t advocating state control of capitalism though.

[@daviddobarganes9115]

Production controls the state

[@Gunni1972]

Yeah, China is just about to "collapse" on you. 🤣🤣🤣 Actually, a state-run company can grow way beyond what a Private one can. Because it gets "preferential access" to resources. While the Private company has to make due with what it can buy/afford capacities for. And since you, as a worker pay taxes, the state run company KNOWS how much you need to live, and can adjust your salary according to that. For People who don't earn enough (Private companies blame the wages to cut into profits) to make a living, there are two choices, a legal side job, or an Illegal one. Guess who can afford Illegal resources? The "Economy of scale" does not apply on wages. A more expensive CEO won't make a company more productive. (Structural changes in organisation, still need to happen, and those usually end up being called layoffs). If that extra money can be spent on a CEO, it usually makes the company more Profit, to hire/buy more capacity in production. (Does not apply, if the market is saturated, but that's also not changing with a new CEO, or marketing campaign).

[@badomaji]

@@daviddobarganes9115Fascism

[@SeedsofJoy]

April 2023 and people are still wearing masks, really?

[@mandys1505]

yikes!

[@andrewnelson3681]

Neurotics. A skewed mindset. A prerequisite for believing this tripe.

[@fixxxer3456]

Some people are immunocompromised or want to wear one to prevent getting COVID. It's still around, it hasn't gone away

[@daviddobarganes9115]

Try to stay on topic Timmy

[@JerrylynShoup]

I bet you never wore your mask properly to begin with

[@richardford9321]

Democracy and unfettered economic systems are near synonymous. The power of our money and what we do with it virtually guarantees individual hegemony. Without it and you depend on the good graces of a third party ergo the path to wealth creation must remain free and obtainable by our own actions both individually and collectively. I have heard this argument proposed countless times and it remains the biggest crock of BS out there. You want to ensure democracy? Then promote free markets and call bullshit on these academics who sit in their ivory towers with their detachment from real work and market participation.

[@davidthomas3513]

Global financial capital has hollowed out democracy. All that’s left is the edifice of democracy and a performative gesture every five years. All governments are subject to global financial capital; not their constituents.

[@dinnerwithfranklin2451]

Bollocks. That is about the most appropriate response I can make I think

[@richardford9321]

@@dinnerwithfranklin2451 I have rarely witnessed some one who used more words and had less meaning than Nancy Fraser's diatribe Very typical though, alluding to one phony crisis after another and the great deprivation of the masses. I guess we just need to hand it all over to hoards of bureaucrats. They will certainly tell us what we need so we don't need to concern ourselves with what we want.

[@daviddobarganes9115]

"Individual hegemony," i.e. you can select from 14 different brands of peanut butter, but your vote is worth nothing

[@dinnerwithfranklin2451]

@@daviddobarganes9115 Well said.