George Floyd

vimothy

yurp
I don't think we actually disagree. capital is using wokeism to legitimise itself. if some other ideology served the same purpose it might use that instead. at the same time, bc it's the ideological justification for its activities, it fervently believes in it, to the point of alienating potential markets by loudly proclaiming its commitment to apparently decisive positions
 
  • Like
Reactions: you

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
bc it's the ideological justification for its activities, it fervently believes in it, to the point of alienating potential markets by loudly proclaiming its commitment to apparently decisive positions
that's interesting - what I would question is the fervency of that belief. the only thing I think business truly fervently believes in is good business.

I'd agree that the proclamations of belief, commitment, seem fervent - that's what the social context of the moment demands.

but I still think it's ultimately good business - the trade-off isn't between social justice and profit

the trade-off is between which markets to seek to capture and which to alienate

if it's going to be - one assumes - very difficult to capture the racist and antiracist market at the same time, why not pick the latter
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
but I agree that we basically I agree

I can see how there's a self-propelling logic in it - how having been driven to a social position by market demand one may as well believe in it
 

Linebaugh

Well-known member
As much as woke capitalism particularly chaps the ass here on dissensus, were forgetting that anti woke capitalism is also wildly profitable.

Its not by being woke that capital legitimizes itself. The legitimacy comes by completely subsuming all ideological activity. Participating in the market is the only conceivable way to embody and support ideological positions. Woke capitalism is just the boiling point of this trend.
 

vimothy

yurp
right, there are "markets in everything" - being woke, being anti-woke and all points between. but the woke capital discussion is about capital's ideology. why is it that eg google or goldman sachs support nominally radical causes like black lives matter despite being integral participants in surveillance and finance capitalism?
 

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
Staff member
I am saying that at any hard decision point, the bottom line will win out over a commitment to social justice
I think companies with a meaningful commitment to social justice don't need suicide nets under the windows of the factories where their products are made, or deliberately design their products to have built-in obsolescence.
 

Linebaugh

Well-known member
right, there are "markets in everything" - being woke, being anti-woke and all points between. but the woke capital discussion is about capital's ideology. why is it that eg google or goldman sachs support nominally radical causes like black lives matter despite being integral participants in surveillance and finance capitalism?
What im getting at isn't that there are markets in everything but that markets are becoming the thing. All the woke gestures done by google and sachs look like basic marketing practice, and most overtly woke ad campaigns are clearly counting on the anti woke outrage to be just as useful as the woke support. Capital has always aligned itself with the moral good as defined by whatever political circumstance dictates, so what appears to be different about woke capitalism is the increased influence it has on the parameters for ideological discourse. Thats what will remain after we move past wokeness and onto the next thing (unless your just using 'woke capitalism' to mean this new position, then we agree. Im just not entirely convinced that the primary legitimizing effect of woke capital is that it makes capital look like a necessary moral agent)
 
Last edited:

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
why is it that eg google or goldman sachs support nominally radical causes like black lives matter despite being integral participants in surveillance and finance capitalism?
because they can, because they're both good business decisions and in business terms there is no contradiction. no great mystery.

res ipsa loquitur
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
what appears to be different about woke capitalism is the increased influence it has on the parameters for ideological discourse
what is unique about woke capitalism in this regard tho?

so companies are marketing their own wokeness, or anti-wokeness, or both in their respective appropriate contexts

how is that different from companies marketing any other moral position defined by the context of a particular historical moment?

how does it influence the parameters for ideological discourse in a way those instances did not?

markets don't have to become anything, they've always been the thing
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
that it's the "boiling point" of a trend, absolutely - the capture of new market space, or recapture of abandoned market space

but that's been aggressively going since the 80s, and I don't see how this different beyond being a new, different market space to capture
 

vimothy

yurp
because they can, because they're both good business decisions and in business terms there is no contradiction. no great mystery.

res ipsa loquitur
maybe in "business terms" no contradiction exists, but in ethical, or socio-historical, or even simple logical terms such things plainly appear contradictory - how is it that emancipatory politics becomes marshalled in support of its functional opposite? perhaps it's not functionally opposite, or perhaps it's the old problem of "patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel". in either case there definitely seems to be something worth explaining here
 
Top