| | |
|
VeblenIfYouGiveAMouseACookie 7 - 06 Apr 2010 - Main.StephenSevero
|
| | Did you ever think capitalism might end because it was too… successful? Veblen offers this possibility.
Specifically, Veblen seems to define capitalism as the creation of conspicuous consumption. The higher classes accumulate profit to devote themselves to conspicuous consumption. Everyone emulates everyone who is higher than them in the social hierarchy. The lower classes emulate the higher classes by consuming as conspicuously as they possibly can. As capitalism progresses and the manifestations of conspicuous consumption grow in number, Veblen seems to say the lower classes may begin to feel like they are getting poorer and poorer comparatively. This feeling might be so strong that capitalism itself is overthrown. | | | -- KalliopeKefallinos - 06 Apr 2010 | |
>
> |
I don't think that Veblen's invocation of evolution is at all a joke. He devotes much of the middle chapters to a Darwinian (more Lamarckian) analysis of social and pecuniary pressure and how that selects for certain mindsets. Not just in the individual (if a man feels the exigencies, he is more apt to change) but also inheritance of natural predispositions and acquired traits as well.
-- StephenSevero - 06 Apr 2010 | | | |
|
|
VeblenIfYouGiveAMouseACookie 6 - 06 Apr 2010 - Main.KalliopeKefallinos
|
|
<
< | | | | Did you ever think capitalism might end because it was too… successful? Veblen offers this possibility.
Specifically, Veblen seems to define capitalism as the creation of conspicuous consumption. The higher classes accumulate profit to devote themselves to conspicuous consumption. Everyone emulates everyone who is higher than them in the social hierarchy. The lower classes emulate the higher classes by consuming as conspicuously as they possibly can. As capitalism progresses and the manifestations of conspicuous consumption grow in number, Veblen seems to say the lower classes may begin to feel like they are getting poorer and poorer comparatively. This feeling might be so strong that capitalism itself is overthrown. | | | It's important to remember the different time period in looking to his claims and diction. In 1899, "sports" wasn't exactly sports as we see it today. I think a similar thing holds for his description of "barbarians" and "savages".
-- StephenSevero - 06 Apr 2010 | |
>
> | Aerin, my goal in this post was to talk about Veblen without invoking Marx, but thanks for the opportunity haha. I see 3 significant differences between Veblen and Marx regarding capitalist critique and class conflict that are worth exploring:
(1) Veblen's conception of society (and therefore of class conflict) is interestingly different from Marx insofar as Veblen maintains that the objective situation of the poor as a class is not in fact growing worse over time. For Marx, the proletariat is led to overthrow capitalism because their objective situation worsens such that they finally realize what's really going on. Veblen's poor class will only just "feel" like things are getting worse as time goes on.
(2) Even Marx is willing to admit that some commodities have use value. Veblen's stance is far more extreme in this respect.
(3) Even though Marx critiques capitalism, he saw it as part of man's evolutionary history. Veblen says capitalism is just another form of the same shit that's been going on for centuries. He sprinkles the term "evolution" throughout the book jokingly, I think.
Do you agree with this? Hope this makes sense...
-- KalliopeKefallinos - 06 Apr 2010 | | | |
|
|
VeblenIfYouGiveAMouseACookie 5 - 06 Apr 2010 - Main.StephenSevero
|
| | Did you ever think capitalism might end because it was too… successful? Veblen offers this possibility. | | | Because they have the money to access the course/courts, the leisure time to play, and they enjoy it? Do only poor people truly enjoy athletics?
-- SamHershey - 06 Apr 2010 | |
>
> |
Actually, for Veblen it's almost the opposite. The rich love sports because they show how financially strong you are - you can mock war without worrying about being productive. Of course, the poor "delinquents", another group that retains the overly predatory "bellicose frame of mind" also enjoy sports.
It's important to remember the different time period in looking to his claims and diction. In 1899, "sports" wasn't exactly sports as we see it today. I think a similar thing holds for his description of "barbarians" and "savages".
-- StephenSevero - 06 Apr 2010 | | | |
|
|
VeblenIfYouGiveAMouseACookie 4 - 06 Apr 2010 - Main.SamHershey
|
| | Did you ever think capitalism might end because it was too… successful? Veblen offers this possibility. | | | I never understood why the men and women who run Fortune 500 companies seem to spend a lot of time on the golf course, or the tennis or the squash court. This offers a pretty good explanation why.
-- AerinMiller - 06 Apr 2010 | |
>
> |
Because they have the money to access the course/courts, the leisure time to play, and they enjoy it? Do only poor people truly enjoy athletics?
-- SamHershey - 06 Apr 2010 | | | |
|
|
VeblenIfYouGiveAMouseACookie 3 - 06 Apr 2010 - Main.AerinMiller
|
| | Did you ever think capitalism might end because it was too… successful? Veblen offers this possibility. | | | This reminds me of the equality of outcome/equality of opportunity debate in wealth distribution. John Rawls posits that people will not want more even if they see others have more, but if you accept the proposition that even minor relative inequalities exist, his assumption underestimates the actual impact these inequalities in wealth may produce. Take for example a city in suburban United States which builds schools and shopping malls that are only accessible by car because most citizens can afford personal transportation. If an individual resides outside a reasonable walking distance from resources such as food, education, and house maintenance devices, which many people in larger states do, having a car and gasoline becomes obvious basic necessities for some, though a car is considered a luxury in many parts of the world and beyond financial means for many families. You should look at Anne Phillips's essay 'Defending Equality of Outcome' if you're interested in problems of perceived relative inequality.
-- NovikaIshar - 06 Apr 2010 | |
>
> |
Ah, somehow I deleted my comment - here goes the second try:
Kalliope I didn't read any class conflict in Veblen's text, I think that was pretty well covered by Marx 40 years prior. Veblen, as far as I can see, is more concerned with a sociological (economic?) break-down of how the class gap got so broad. His tone and perspective are detached, like some kind of ethnographer. Isn't there something so refreshing about being told that all these things we want, and all the status these things bring, is just a bizarre cultural vestige?
I never understood why the men and women who run Fortune 500 companies seem to spend a lot of time on the golf course, or the tennis or the squash court. This offers a pretty good explanation why.
-- AerinMiller - 06 Apr 2010 | | | |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |