If you read and quote the philosophers that I do - Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Derrida, Foucault, Nietzsche - you often get to use the word "ontological." Ontology is the study of "Being," which is a fancy way of saying that ontology studies the ground of things - the fundamental elements that allow us to be and act like we do in the first place, which is terribly fucking complicated as well as infinitely fascinating.
Usually ontology is thought of as being basically apolitical, or political only be extension - the way feminists say "The personal is political," meaning, I think, everything is political. What has occured to me over and over during the last few years is that economics is not a system that was placed over and against an already existant world; rather, the world I live in was always-already shaped by economics. Capitalism isn't simply an ecomonics - it is a mode of "Being," an ontology.
I heard today on the radio that 2/3 of economy is based off of me buying shit. It reminded me when Bush said after 9/11 to go buy stuff. He took a lot of flack for that, but in reality he was just letting a dirty secret out - that we are first and foremest consumers and if we forget that we have the potential to sink the economy.
I regularly reach for my wallet in a motion that is as natural as scratching an itch. Most of my social relationships during the day are financial in some respect - 3.09 gets me a large RedEye and about 2 minutes of banter every morning. Now the question at some level becomes what kind of people are being produced by this ontology.
The answer is not pretty. Every gas station has a speed isle full of energy drinks and ephedrine pills. It's clear as a people we're pretty fucking exhausted. We have to struggle to be healthy, as capitlism has little regard for me as an embodied human being. To be healthy in the environment I live in I have to do absurd things like ride a bike that goes nowhere. We have become like those birds on the beach that constantly move and thus must always eat - always moving, but somehow going nowhere.
I totally agree. Life used to be simple and seems even the smallest tasks are as complicated as brain surgery these days. Many years ago, if you were hungry, you killed an animal and ate it or harvested vegetables. Waste, for the most part, was unheard of. All parts of the animal were used. Durable items were used until they literally fell apart. It is sad that we live in such a disposable consumption-based world. Would be nice sometimes if we could get back to basics.
ReplyDeleteWell sort of. I mean I sort of love the networked world for all kinds of reasons - and honestly I'm glad I don't have to kill my own food. But I wish our economic system and social structures were designed to produce something other than Consumer.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting timing that right before reading this I impulsively purchased a new crank set for my bike. This purchase of course follows shortly after impulsively buying a new fork, tires and bar ends this past week. You don't have to know what all these parts are specifically, just that they are bunch of parts that make my bike slightly lighter, faster, cooler looking, etc.
ReplyDeleteWhat was wrong with my original parts? Not much. I began biking to work two months ago in an effort to save money. When I started researching how to make my bike more efficient I became obsessed. All of a sudden everything on my bike was inferior because it was stock. In an effort to cease the detail I'll say this- I didn't make these purchases because I absolutely needed them. I did it because I was bored. It rapidly spun into a hobby/compulsion.
If you're lucky enough to live the middle class of America, for whatever that means, you are pushed towards frivolous spending at times due to a lack of struggle and the extra means. Why not buy this shit if I can pay my credit card off in two months?
I can see how the good and bad effects of this economic system exist in a awkward harmony. I have the means, so buying stuff fills me with joy/fulfillment at times and vapidness/exhaustion at other times. It's the nature of living as an American in this modern world and I struggle with question of "How bad is it really?"
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDave, I was kind of disappointed when this ended. This was shaping up to be one of my all-time favourite pieces of your writing. Conceptually and stylistically just an absolute pleasure to read.
ReplyDeleteNow, I agree with you-- 'economics' is just a label used to the study of a particular subset of human behaviours, most of which [trade, investment, taxation and the concept of a representative currency, for instance] would exist whether they were identified as all being 'economic' phenomena or not.
I was trying to decide which direction to take this, and while I was following a line of thinking from 'Is capitalism the system of economics that is most compatible with and true to natural human inclinations?' I came up with, 'While the fundamentals of 'economic behaviours' [trade, investment, etc.] are hard-wired into human nature, is there a level of abstraction at which economic behaviours are 'un-natural'? Are humans hard-wired for mutual funds? How about derivatives? Is it possible that when an economic system becomes so complex that a majority of its participants are engaged in behaviours they can't comprehend without taking classes that, at last, something is being 'imposed' upon them?'
I find that a much more interesting question than the one I started with. Now, obviously, if something exists, then it is natural. However, it could very well be that it's not 'natural' for a majority of those it affects, as they are too busy keeping their kids from molesting the dog to learn what a bleeding 'credit default swap' is. John Q. Nobody is innately and instinctively cognizant of very little of what has come to comprise the 21st-century world economy, and, while I am by no means an economist, MY instincts tell me that the mathematical games that are played, multiple levels of abstraction above MY head-- let ALONE that of poor John Q. Nobody, but which somehow nonetheless dictate whether he and I can afford to fucking EAT today, are probably not good.
@Josh - yeah it ends quickly - most of these little essays do. I'll try to follow the thread on a later piece, see if I can follow some of these implications out in more depth.
ReplyDelete@Ben - I definitely understand the point you're making. All of a sudden the thing to save money starts costing money and it's not always clear if the money is for efficiency or status - though, those two aren't always opposed. I mean my Les Paul grants a certain status to me as a player as does my hand-made classical, but they're also incredibly well-made, useful instruments. And the question I usually come to is how do we not becoming totally seduced by marketing and status, while still appreciating the aesthetic dimension of objects. I mean I love guitars that look beautiful BECAUSE they look beautiful and I'll pay more for that. And I don't think that makes me a mindless consumer, at least not necessarily.
ReplyDelete