| This question <115|99> overall <118|120> MichaelM: <610|152>. |
| Question 233: Which evidence prompts Marx to say, at the beginning of the Commodity Fetishism section, that the commodity is “complicated” or “mysterious”? |
| [119] MichaelM: Is the commodity "mysterious" still? The evidence that prompts Marx to say that the commodity is “complicated” or “mysterious” are the different “social relations” within the commodities themselves that Marx could see that are not generally understood by one side or the other of this relationship. |
| I do not think that these “social relations” within commodities were much different when Marx was alive than the ones happening today. However, I do think that during his time these “social relations” within commodities were more “mysterious” and “complicated” than they are today. |
| Because information is so easily accessible today, these “social relations” within commodities are easier to recognize and understand. For example, I can research a particular commodity online and within a few minutes find out more about who and where the commodity was made. This then allows me a better understanding of the “social relations” related to that commodity. In Marx's time, my guess is that this information was more difficult to come by and so made the “social relations” within the commodity more difficult to not only understand, but even to notice. |
| Hans: You are too modest with your requirements of social involvement. Knowing who and where the commodities are made is simply not enough. We all know who is delivering our electricity, it is Rocky Mountains Power for 80 percent of Utahns. It is also known where this electricity was generated: about 90 percent from coal fired power plants. We know that the greenhouse gasses from these plants destroy our climate, yet you do not see much hurry in switching to renewable energy, or even promoting energy conservation. Instead, lots of foot-dragging and evasiveness. Something is wrong with the social relations governing production. |
| Computer information technology has made a difference in one branch of production: the free software movement. This is a fertile network of direct co-operation of consumers and producers of the software. Other paradigms are possible than private production for profit. |
|
|
|||||