Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:33:26 +1000
From: hbone <hbone-AT-optonline.net>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: re:  Ethics as a figure of nihalism]


Steve,

Nearly everything you say about commodification as harmful to "community" is
something I've thought about and agree with, the question is what can be
done and when and how.

regards,
Hugh

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




>
> Mal
>
> the issue started because of Hugh's belief in communuties having some
> value and worth
>
> "... a continuity of personal relationships and institutional support
> for those relationships  they affect significant others, parents and
> children, extended families, tribes, communities."
>
> Given that the structure of the communities in question, and perhaps if
> I used the equally specular but different communities of this side of
> the atlantic it would have been clearer, is predominantly one that
> oppresses and excludes rather than includes and liberates. In this
> specific society community is used to place the human subject into a
> place where they belong. In previous, equally unpleasent societies, a
> common language placed the subject into its community,  but now the
> commodity spectacle constructs an artificial reconstruction of
> community.  Our societies have lost the community that the common
> language, the myths had been able to maintain. In place of the
> unpleasent communities founded on death and sacrifice, our communities
> are founded on commodification, spectacle and division. The divided
>  nature of our communities constitutes them as inactive because the
> common language of community is derived from its commodification.
>
> False communities and neighbourhoods are generated everywhere - for
> example - at work 'teams' and 'communities' are built to enable the
> business to maximise its use of human resources through the false
> community it constructs. The currently suspended (because of 911)
> refugee and economic migrant issue in europe, is founded on the myth of
> refugees and migrants being welcomed and this being a society which
> tolerates difference. The reality is of course different for the
> spectacle uses the former myth to hide the oppression of difference. The
> use and glorification of redundent and oppressive cultural norms based
> on cultural, racial, sexual and local stereotypes is normal.
>
> If 'community' is being used to oppress and control - which is the
> result of the excessive commodification - then on a day to day basis we
> need to be careful before we accept the idea that it is in itself a
> positive value...
>
> regards
>
> steve