Soul, the disneyfication

sufi

lala
there is already a long and illustrious history of exploitation of soul by capital anyway isnt it?
 

entertainment

Well-known member
I said nobody knows what it is it's just a word that stands in for 'the way things are'

that's right i guess, which is probably suspendedreason's point rigth? that it's become a vision entrapped by itself in the sense that socialism has become a vision that's still free.

my instinct says it's probably a bad thing, and that's why I get annoyed by people pretending to talk about economic theory or something when what's really driving their arguments is a kind of sentimental attachment to another vision of life.

i mean at least with the old communist artists like Pasolini or someone you got the honesty about politics being aesthetic.
 
  • Love
Reactions: sus

sus

Moderator
I do want to apologize, I was inappropriately posting on this forum while sober. That's been rectified, and I'm sure it'll help "clear the air" to know: the air over here is just hazy.
 

linebaugh

Well-known member
Banks were frequently state-run in Ye Olde Days; "branches" has been used as a metaphor for a thousand kinds of human organization from the military to government; "stream" is a tech term that predates a marketable Internet; and the Soviet frickin Union stole the color red too.

Language is built on metaphors: our entire digital world is built on metaphors (because it's new and unfamiliar, we must make sense of it through analogy to the familiar). Documents, copy-paste, mice, server, desktops, clouds. None of this has anything to do with that persistent scapegoat "capitalism" (or its brother-concept "neoliberalism").
theres something to be said for the primacy of the associations though. the same metaphors are all tossed around but where does the mind go first when presented with them out of context? capitalism or whatever you'd like isnt excluded from loading our signifiers and in some areas its share of signification could probably be called 'colonization' with a little aesthetic liberty
 
Last edited:

luka

Well-known member
He knows Limburger, he's just being obtuse because he's decided to be Dissensus capitalism defender.
 

woops

is not like other people
i actually don't know what the direct referent of the question is so i'm trying to respond to the discussion in general
 

sufi

lala
from today's msm grauniad

‘A metaphor is all this really is,” David Graeber wrote. He means consumption, which was once the name for a wasting disease, and is now the word anthropologists use for almost everything we do outside of work – eating, shopping, reading, listening to music. Consume, he notes, is from the Latin consumere, meaning “to seize or take over completely”. A person might consume food or be consumed by rage. In its earliest usage, consumption always implied destruction.
 

luka

Well-known member
why do you have this mad idea that every interaction has a winner and a loser? It's bizarre. I made an elementary point which you decided to pretend not to understand for whatever reason. And that was the end. There wasn't a prize on offer.
 
Top