File spoon-archives/lyotard.archive/lyotard_2001/lyotard.0111, message 125

Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 19:33:26 +1000
Subject: Re: [Fwd: re:  Ethics as a figure of nihalism]


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.



> 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


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005