Re: Re: ideology

[miyachi <miyachi9@xxxxxxxxxx>]

on 2002.1.19 02:51 AM, Justin Schwartz at jkschw@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>
>
>>
>> Andre Gunder Frank sent us this gem.
>>
>> Milton Friedman ended his 1976 Nobel Prize lecture with the observation:
>>
>> "The drastic change that has occurred in economic theory has not been
>> the
>> result of ideological warfare. It has responded almost entirely to the
>> force of events; brute experience proved far more potent than the
>> strongest of political or ideological preferences"
>>
>> --
>
>
> It's Uncle Miltie's version of Che's quip that "It's not _my_ fault that
> reality is Marxist!"
>
> jks
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
>
I tried to define " ideology" as below
1.On Ideology


Marx(Engels) wrote in "German ideology"
" in civil law the existing property relationship are declared to be the
result of the general will. The jus utendi et abutendi itself asserts on the
one hand the fact that private property has become entirely independent of
the community, and on the other the illusion that private property itself is
based solely on the provate will, the arbitrary disposal of the thing. This
illusion of the jurist also explains the fact that for them, as for every
code, it is altogether fortuitous that individuals enter into relationship
among themselves (e.g. Contract).
. Once the ruling ideas have been separated from the ruling individuals and
, above all, from the relationship which result from a given stage of the
mode of production, and in this way the connection has been reached that
history is always under the sway of ideas, it is very easy to abstract from
these various ideas "idea", The notion, etc, as the dominant force in
history, and thus to understand all separate ideas and concepts as "forms od
self-determination" on the part of the concept developing in history.
Persons represent the 'concept' in history, ijto the "thinkers" , the "
philosophers", the ideologists, who again are understood as the
manufacturers of history."
This reversal was not fuly explained untill Capital is completed.

In Capital Marx wrote
" Capital-profit, land-ground-rent, labour-wages, this economic trinity as
the connection between the component of value and wealth in general and its
sources, completes the mystification of the capitalist mode of production,
the reification of social relations, and the immediate coalescence of
material relations of production with their historical and social
specificity: the bewitched, distorded and upside-down world haunted by
Monsieur le Capital and Madame la Terre, who are at the same time social
characters and mere things ."
Why this upside-down, mysitificated world emerged? Marx explained
" We have already shown in connection with the most simple categories of
capitalist node of production and commodity production in general, in
connection with commodities and money, the mystifying character that
transforms the social relation for which the material elements of wealth
serve as bearers in the course of production into properties of these things
themselves(commodity) ,stillmore explitly transforming the relation of
production itself into a thing (money). All forms of society are subject to
this distortion, in so far as they involve commodity production and monetary
circulation. In the capitalist mode of production, however, where capital is
the dominant category and forms the specific relation of production, this
bewitched and distorted world develops much further.If we view capital first
in immediate process of production, as a pumper-out of surplus labor, this
relationship is still very simple; the real connection impress itself on the
bearer of this process, the capitalists,themselves, and is still in their
consciousness. The fierce struggle over the limits of the working day shows
this in a striking way. But even within this immediate sphere,the sphere of
the immediate process between labour and capital, the matter does not rest
at this simple stage. With the development of relative surplus- value in the
specifically capitalist mode of production, involving the growth of the
productive forces of social labour, these productive forces and the social
context of labour appear in the immediate labour process as shifted from
labour to capital. Capital thereby already becomes a very mystical being,
since all the productive forces of social labour appear attributable to it,
and not yo labour as such, as a power springing forth from its own womb.
Then the circulation process intervenes, with all sections of capital, even
agricultural, participating in it to the same degree. In this sphere, the
conditons of the original production of fall completely into the background.
Even in the immediate production process , capitalist is active also as
commodity producer, as manager of commodity production. . . Whatever the
surplus-value capital has pumped out in the immediate production process and
expressed in commofities, the value and surplus-value contained in these
commodities must first be realized in the circulation process. Both the
restration of the values advanced in production, and particularly the
surplus-value contained in the commodities, seem not just to be realized
only circulation but actually to arise from it.This appearence is reinforced
by two circumstances in particular. The actual production process, as unity
of the immediate production and the process of circulation , produces new
configulations in which the thread of the inner connection get more and more
lost, the relations of production becomming independent of one another and
the components of value ossification into independent forms. "(Capital vol
3. chapter 48 )
Thus Marx explained why does inner real connection is replaced with the
false semlances which develops in the surface sphere of capitalist
production. In the surface sphere , these false semblances function as not
only entities but also subject which move the world.Further, These
semblances form its corresponding patterns of consciousness(law,
religion,state,violence apparatus,etc). People swayed by these patterns of
consciousness live double lives, namely, in the sphere of semblance world
and in the sphere of inner real connection world. Their cousciousness and
behavior become to distorted , incoherent and divide. To more degree people
are swayed by these semblence world, to smaller degree they belong to the
real world, and reversal, within which people believe in the semblence world
as the real and the real world as the illusional, hostile power, occurs. In
this positon, world appears to return to Hegel's world within which
consciousness or ideas rule real world. But, in the other way, to smaller
degree people believe in the semlance world, to more degree they can
recognize their real social connection.


MIYACHI TATSUO
Psychiatric Department
Komaki municipal Hospital
Komaki city
AICHI Pre,
JAPAN
miyachi9@xxxxxxxxxx