Slashdot Mirror
'The Language of Capitalism Isn't Just Annoying, It's Dangerous' (theoutline.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: When General Motors laid off more than 6,000 workers days after Thanksgiving, John Patrick Leary, the author of the new book Keywords: The New Language of Capitalism, tweeted out part of GM CEO Mary Barra's statement. "The actions we are taking today continue our transformation to be highly agile, resilient, and profitable, while giving us the flexibility to invest in the future," she said. Leary added a line of commentary to of Barra's statement: "Language was pronounced dead at the scene." Why should we pay attention to the particular words used to describe, and justify, the regularly scheduled "disruptions" of late capitalism? Published this month by Haymarket Books, Leary's Keywords explores the regime of late-capitalist language: a set of ubiquitous modern terms, drawn from the corporate world and the business press, that he argues promulgate values friendly to corporations (hierarchy, competitiveness, the unquestioning embrace of new technologies) over those friendly to human beings (democracy, solidarity, and scrutiny of new technologies' impact on people and the planet).
These words narrow our conceptual horizons -- they "manacle our imagination," Leary writes -- making it more difficult to conceive alternative ways of organizing our economy and society. We are encouraged by powerful "thought leaders" and corporate executives to accept it as the language of common sense or "normal reality." When we understand and deploy such language to describe our own lives, we're seen as good workers; when we fail to do so, we're implicitly threatened with economic obsolescence. After all, if you're not conversant in "innovation" or "collaboration," how can you expect to thrive in this brave new economy? [...] Calling our current economic system "late capitalism" suggests that, despite our gleaming buzzwords and technologies, what we're living through is just the next iteration of an old system of global capitalism. In other words, he writes, "cheer up: things have always been terrible!" What is new, Leary says, quoting Marxist economic historian Ernest Mandel, is our "belief in the omnipotence of technology" and in experts. He also claims that capitalism is expanding at an unprecedented rate into previously uncommodified geographical, cultural, and spiritual realms.
These words narrow our conceptual horizons -- they "manacle our imagination," Leary writes -- making it more difficult to conceive alternative ways of organizing our economy and society. We are encouraged by powerful "thought leaders" and corporate executives to accept it as the language of common sense or "normal reality." When we understand and deploy such language to describe our own lives, we're seen as good workers; when we fail to do so, we're implicitly threatened with economic obsolescence. After all, if you're not conversant in "innovation" or "collaboration," how can you expect to thrive in this brave new economy? [...] Calling our current economic system "late capitalism" suggests that, despite our gleaming buzzwords and technologies, what we're living through is just the next iteration of an old system of global capitalism. In other words, he writes, "cheer up: things have always been terrible!" What is new, Leary says, quoting Marxist economic historian Ernest Mandel, is our "belief in the omnipotence of technology" and in experts. He also claims that capitalism is expanding at an unprecedented rate into previously uncommodified geographical, cultural, and spiritual realms.
There is nothing knew about our belief in the omnipotence of "experts." It started in the Progressive Era. Everything you see today is just a hardening of trends that were generations in the making.
Coming from the right side of the spectrum, I don't see much respect for "experts" or technology on our side. What I see on the left side is two factions:
1. The highly intelligent and/or connected who know the game and play it for maximum fun, profit and power.
2. The average and 1SD above who love to pretend to be "educated" or "data-driven" folks. All of those postures people take on media such as constantly liking "I Fucking Love Science" to act the intellectual.
The former are scared of losing their power and privilege; the latter are scared of looking like the "rubes" and "hicks" they mock in fly-over country.
The only reason most people are not begging is because there are some laws preventing the crony capitalists from extracting every ounce of flesh.
Remains willfully clueless that the people pushing socialism (authoritarianism) are the same ones digging their heels in to push "crony capitalism".
Socialism is where a small group seeks control with lies and manipulation that center around the phrase "the greater good".
Crony capitalism is where a small group seeks control with lies and manipulation that center around the phrase "the greater good".
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Oh, what a surprise. A reactionary cites Zimbabwe and Venezuela, and not Norway and Germany. Film at 11.
I think it's adorable to talk to me about "funding the discussion" or whatever, as you build a Venezuela strawman for what you and those of your ilk imagine progressive views.of economics and capitalism to be. Positively adorable. And particularly telling that the only argument that's ever able to be produced is "b .b...b..but Venezuela" whenever it's suggested that the neoliberal distortion of capitalism might not be the healthy way.