Is Capital a progressively hegemonic historical telos colonizing the whole of human existence?

[Marx]

Yes, of course. It is a pseudosentient social abstraction directly analogous to the Hegelian Geist ; the germ of its existence is the value-form, the psychological point of comparison between prices on the world market. This entity !over forward and develops through the course of capitalist history.

[dead0man]

no

[Marx]

no

Why not?

[dead0man]

because no one thing can "colonize the whole of human existence".

[Marx]

because no one thing can "colonize the whole of human existence".

A social abstraction, such as Capital, absolutely can where it displaces all modes of production antecedent to it (and from which it originated). The absolutely overwhelming majority of human beings are subjected to it, for better or worse, for the time being. Compare feudalism, where the dominant abstraction was oblige  and various theories of blood justifying the rule of the nobility through lineage.

[dead0man]

but people produce things all the time that have nothing to do with "Capital".  How many artists are producing art today that will never been seen by another human?  300,000? A million?  I don't know, but it's a lot.

[Marx]

but people produce things all the time that have nothing to do with "Capital".  How many artists are producing art today that will never been seen by another human?  300,000? A million?  I don't know, but it's a lot.

To be sure (this is a more sophisticated version of the mud pie argument). But the overwhelming amount of production is social production. Even the artist who produces solely for himself still interacts with Capital in some fashion.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Marxism is incredibly stupid.

[Marx]

Marxism is incredibly stupid.

Can you challenge the core proposition?

[CEO Mindset]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

[Marx]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

We aren't talking about money. We're talking about Capital , which is not the same!e thing and includes an entire complex of social relationships.

[CEO Mindset]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

We aren't talking about money. We're talking about Capital , which is not the same!e thing and includes an entire complex of social relationships.

any of that only applies in civilizations' contending states periods like the west in the past couple tendies, china during it's warring states/spring & autumn periods, the hellenistic era before rome unified the area

[Marx]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

We aren't talking about money. We're talking about Capital , which is not the same!e thing and includes an entire complex of social relationships.

any of that only applies in civilizations' contending states periods like the west in the past couple tendies, china during it's warring states/spring & autumn periods, the hellenistic era before rome unified the area

All of those civilizations predate Capital as such.

[CEO Mindset]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

We aren't talking about money. We're talking about Capital , which is not the same!e thing and includes an entire complex of social relationships.

any of that only applies in civilizations' contending states periods like the west in the past couple tendies, china during it's warring states/spring & autumn periods, the hellenistic era before rome unified the area

All of those civilizations predate Capital as such.

not really. the current plutocratic phase isn't anything special and will end up either ending due to imperial consolidation or as seems more likely fall apart gradually as the west decays

[Mr. Reactionary]

Marxism is incredibly stupid.

Can you challenge the core proposition?

Anyone who espouses Marxism in 2021 is not a good faith actor worthy of debate.

[Frodo]

A little off topic, but what do you think of the four-part book series ('Empire', 'Multitude', 'Commonwealth', and 'Assembly') by post-Marxist philosophers Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri? 

[Marx]

A little off topic, but what do you think of the four-part book series ('Empire', 'Multitude', 'Commonwealth', and 'Assembly') by post-Marxist philosophers Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri? 

Of these I've only read Empire, and that only once. I have devoted myself to reading everything Marx himself wrote, so my knowledge of some of the tertiary literature is lacking. I'm currently undertaking a study of notions of sovereignty, reading Carl Schmitt in the light of Foucault and Giorgio Agamben, so I am fine with reading it, but I really think all you absolutely need is a line-by-line reading of Marx (I wish Lenin had read, for example, "Conspectus On Bakunin's Statism And Anarchy").

[Big Abraham]

Great analysis from this newbie poster, especially with his understanding of the constant revolutionizing of the productive forces and of the economic base of societal relations. I'm glad to see another adherent of the orthodox Marxian school among us.

[CEO Mindset]

A little off topic, but what do you think of the four-part book series ('Empire', 'Multitude', 'Commonwealth', and 'Assembly') by post-Marxist philosophers Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri? 

Of these I've only read Empire, and that only once. I have devoted myself to reading everything Marx himself wrote, so my knowledge of some of the tertiary literature is lacking. I'm currently undertaking a study of notions of sovereignty, reading Carl Schmitt in the light of Foucault and Giorgio Agamben, so I am fine with reading it, but I really think all you absolutely need is a line-by-line reading of Marx (I wish Lenin had read, for example, "Conspectus On Bakunin's Statism And Anarchy").

please explain how you were gonna get an anarchist utopia from 1910s russia

[Mr. Reactionary]

A little off topic, but what do you think of the four-part book series ('Empire', 'Multitude', 'Commonwealth', and 'Assembly') by post-Marxist philosophers Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri?  

Of these I've only read Empire, and that only once. I have devoted myself to reading everything Marx himself wrote, so my knowledge of some of the tertiary literature is lacking. I'm currently undertaking a study of notions of sovereignty, reading Carl Schmitt in the light of Foucault and Giorgio Agamben, so I am fine with reading it, but I really think all you absolutely need is a line-by-line reading of Marx (I wish Lenin had read, for example, "Conspectus On Bakunin's Statism And Anarchy").

please explain how you were gonna get an anarchist utopia from 1910s russia

Marxists have still never explained how we get from an all powerful proletariat dictatorship with the ability to control and seize everything, kill all nonbelievers, and equalize" society to literally no government anarchy.

[Vosem]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

Technological trends have these becoming less differentiated with time, right? The more complex the weaponry, and the more that you need large amounts of money to own or operate it, the more potential application of force starts to be indistinguishable from simple wealth.

I don't think these things ever quite become the same, but a modern centibillionaire who could in principle build vast drone forces that can bomb countries into submission, and hire some comparatively small number of operators and technicians, is more easily analogizable to a classical warlord than a classical merchant.

Anyway, OP is on the one hand spouting nonsense but on the other hand is gesturing towards a truth that it seems like a law of history to date that the influence of capital becomes stronger, and more obvious, (and ISTM more welcomed) over time.

[CEO Mindset]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

Technological trends have these becoming less differentiated with time, right? The more complex the weaponry, and the more that you need large amounts of money to own or operate it, the more potential application of force starts to be indistinguishable from simple wealth.

I don't think these things ever quite become the same, but a modern centibillionaire who could in principle build vast drone forces that can bomb countries into submission, and hire some comparatively small number of operators and technicians, is more easily analogizable to a classical warlord than a classical merchant.

Anyway, OP is on the one hand spouting nonsense but on the other hand is gesturing towards a truth that it seems like a law of history to date that the influence of capital becomes stronger, and more obvious, (and ISTM more welcomed) over time.

I'd be careful about generalizing from the past 200 years or so for longterm patterns. The presence of both cheap fossil fuels and populations of high-IQ races existing in large numbers as opposed to existing as rare curiosities in burnt out ruins aren't guarantees.

[Vosem]

no

read your spengler... force ends up triumphing over money every time in history

Technological trends have these becoming less differentiated with time, right? The more complex the weaponry, and the more that you need large amounts of money to own or operate it, the more potential application of force starts to be indistinguishable from simple wealth.

I don't think these things ever quite become the same, but a modern centibillionaire who could in principle build vast drone forces that can bomb countries into submission, and hire some comparatively small number of operators and technicians, is more easily analogizable to a classical warlord than a classical merchant.

Anyway, OP is on the one hand spouting nonsense but on the other hand is gesturing towards a truth that it seems like a law of history to date that the influence of capital becomes stronger, and more obvious, (and ISTM more welcomed) over time.

I'd be careful about generalizing from the past 200 years or so for longterm patterns. The presence of both cheap fossil fuels and populations of high-IQ races existing in large numbers as opposed to existing as rare curiosities in burnt out ruins aren't guarantees.

Neither of these seem like likely obstacles in the near future to me -- estimates on total fossil fuels remaining are enough to last us for centuries even before accounting for likely falling population (or progress in solar/nuclear power) without fertility breakthroughs -- which, OTOH, have already occurred: the existence of a small number of wealthy fertility-maximizers using surrogate mothers (some multimillionaires with dozens of children on account of surrogates already existing) suggests most of humanity will come to be descended from such people in fairly short order assuming fertility preferences are even slightly hereditary, once you consider exponential growth. These people may not be eminent scientists but they're also obviously not dumb, and are probably likelier than most to use things like embryo selection for whatever traits they want (of which intelligence would be one; at least one embryo-selected child has been born in the US and companies to organize more exist. (This would also correlate wealth more closely with fertility, in addition to force, which probably forestalls the scenario you're assuming here).

[CEO Mindset]

You woefully underestimate the amount of influential liberals clueless about biotech there are if you don't expect a probable slowdown, potential full stop in biotech advancement soon.

[Vosem]

You woefully underestimate the amount of influential liberals clueless about biotech there are if you don't expect a probable slowdown, potential full stop in biotech advancement soon.

This is like expecting a slowdown in the development of novel recreational drug replacements. All the tools and technology already exist, and can be used even in quite poor countries; only adoption is left, and even adoption by a tiny fraction of humanity would meaningfully alter the current direction of human evolution.

Note that the multimillionaires in the article I cite above are residents of Sakartvelo, which is not exactly a biotech hotspot.