FINAL MAYBE - TO BE CONTINUED?

Long Live This Salesman

With four children and my precious daughter to support my salesman son-in-law has not sold a single machine in six months. After such a long discouraging period and at a time when the nation and even the world is teetering on the brink of depression you would probably expect him to at least consider the science of Marxism for hope. Using my son-in-law’s story, I want to explain why this man remains a poster child for capitalism in light of the relevance of Marx's writings on philosophy and economics in today’s world in these ways: having been on both sides of the society divide - nonowning worker and nonworking owner, understanding ideology and ideological state behind Marx’s theory, and the scientific understanding of the class nature of society.

From this point on are NOTES I INTEND TO INCORPORATE IN THE BODY OF MY TEXT.

Beginning as a nonowning worker, at twenty years old my son-in-law convinced his father to open a surf shop in our desert community, an hour from the ocean. It flourished. He wasn’t alienated - to make indifferent or hostile from the workers or the nonworkers, but he enhanced – raised to a higher degree, the lives of his workers, his father and his own.


Marx describes society as being separated into "oppressor and oppressed" or in his time, the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat (35).


The Glengarry Glen Ross clip we saw in class depicts greed fueling “progress,” inequality and poverty. In the scene, Blake (Alec Baldwin) is confronting the employees, “I would have them fire your fucken ass because a loser is a loser.” Blake is taking a business opportunity to brow beat workers who one would expect should be formulating and demanding another system where exploitation would be abolished.

• The price of labor in a free-market society is determined by the demand and competence of the individual worker.
• Even a scientific understanding of the class nature of society and the ideals of socialism on a scientific basis are not enough to dissuade this young family from the opportunities abounding in capitalism.
• many of his "radical" ideas are commonplace in our society today
• Although he gives praise where it is due, he sees capitalism only as an absolute step of society. Despite their merits, the bourgeoisie have failed to "[do] away with class antagonisms" and have only created "two great hostile camps" (37).

Consider the truths that Phil Mitchinson presents in his article The Living Ideas of Karl Marx. He says, and I believe this poster child would agree: (historical perspective of society)
"The bourgeoisie and its academic experts are at a loss to explain what is happening in the world. One would look in vain in the pages of the economic journals for a rational explanation of the world crisis of their system . . . But if you read the Manifesto, you will find an accurate description of the world, not as it was in 1848, but as it is now. Phenomena such as globalization, the concentration of capital, and the exploitation of labour under the guise of modern technology – all these things were not only predicted by Marx but explained scientifically. . . How contemporary Marx's words appear. Not just the growth and interdependence of the world market is predicted here, "In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal interdependence of nations." But also the domination of that market by a handful of monopolies and the centralization and concentration of capital that this represents: "It has agglomerated population, centralized the means of production, and has concentrated property in a few hands.". . . The reduction of the workforce to the role of slaves to the machine, "in proportion as the use of machinery and division of labour increases in the same proportion the burden of toil also increases, whether by prolongation of the working hours, by the increase of the work exacted in a given time, or by increased speed of machinery."

Finally, The Marxist theory that class struggle is history’s driving force but capitalist opportunity is the place for the productive capacities of society
Where collective ownership would stifle dreams, imagination and potential
The fundamental ideology of communism, it holds that all people are entitled to enjoy the fruits of their labour but are prevented from doing so in a capitalist economic system
a social revolution isn’t needed to seize political power internationally through talent, dreams are

Marx argues that in capitalist society, an economic minority (the bourgeoisie) dominate and exploit the working class (proletariat) majority. Marx attempted to argue that capitalism was exploitative, specifically the way in which unpaid labor (surplus value) is extracted from the working class (the labor theory of value), extending and critiquing the work of earlier political economists on value. He argued that while the production process is socialized, ownership remains in the hands of the bourgeoisie. This forms the fundamental contradiction of capitalist society. Without the elimination of the fetter of the private ownership of the means of production, human society is unable to achieve further development.
property, power relations, wage labor and class. fruits of their labour . . . Expropriate to take possession of, esp. for public use by the right of eminent domain
Marx gave to the labor movement and Socialism a theoretical foundation. His social theory showed that social systems were in a continuous flow wherein capitalism was only a temporary form. His studies of capitalism showed that owing to the continuous development of perfection of technique, capitalism must necessarily develop to Socialism. This new system of production can only be established by the proletarians struggling against the capitalists, whose interest it is to maintain the old system of production. Socialism is therefore the fruit and aim of the proletarian class struggle

Marxism has done away with the old utopian views that Socialism would be brought about by the intelligence and good will of some judicious men; as if Socialism were a demand for justice and morality; as if the object were to establish an infallible and perfect society. Justice and morality change with the productive system, and every class has different conceptions of them. Socialism can only be gained by the class whose interest lies in Socialism, and it is not a question about a perfect social system, but a change in the methods of production leading to a higher step, i. e., to social production. . . part of their inner self; it dominates their thoughts, their feelings, their entire conception of the world. Because Marxism is the theory of social development, in the midst of which we stand, therefore Marxism itself stands at the central point of the great mental struggles that accompany our economic revolution.(Walker)


proletarian revolution — In order to overcome the fetters of private property the working class and Upon this, material foundation classes would be abolished and the material basis for all forms of inequality between humankind would dissolve.
Expropriation is politically motivated and forceful confiscation and redistribution of private property outside the common law, allegedly to establish social justice
encouraging economic growth.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Ana Mejia’s blog
Heigh-Ho Marx!
The seven dwarfs spend their days mining for diamonds, rubies and other expensive stones. These stones can be seen as a commodity, which according to Karl Marx is "an object outside us, a thing that by its properties satisfies human wants of some sort or another" (Marx 665). Although it is not shown in the movie, it is safe to assume that these men then give the commodities produced to a person in a higher position who gives them some sort of wage. Judging by their patched clothes and the tiny cottage they live in, the dwarfs make just enough money to survive. The diamonds they dig up, however, are sold for incredibly high prices, none of which they receive. This is exactly what Marx declares makes a capitalist economic system: "the appropriation from workers of more value than they are paid for" (Marx 665).
production is no longer the interest of capital (capitalism) or the state (socialism) but rather in the hands of the vast community whereupon the nature of social relations have lost their commodified forms and taken on production of a new system. This new system is characterized by producing not for profit, but for need. Need can be understood in a number of ways, but what we have here is the theoretical transformation of human labor into a new social role. No longer does the worker go to work to produce commodities for profit of his employer; rather, workers collectively produce for the expanding needs of a continuously developing people in the most efficient means.
Marxism 101: What is Communism?
Adjust font-size: + – Published February 12, 2008 by: Brian Rice http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/586829/marxism_101_what_is_communism.html

oppressors and the Oppressed. Marx sees this gulf as being about the same as lord and serf, prince and peasant, emperor and slave. "The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms" (Marx 66).
The forces that the bourgeoisie strived to create, the empires of industry and the struggling class of the common man, are to be their very "grave diggers" (50).


Work Cited

Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto.
Mitchinson, Phil. “The Living Ideas of Karl Marx.” March, 2003. Web. April 20, 2010. http://www.marxist.com/150years/living_ideas_marx.html
Walker, Chas. “Marxism 101 - To each according to his Greed? Class 2.” Sep 4, 2009. Web. April 22, 2010. www.youtube.com/watch?v=8A_YUUBpKV4

Analysis #4 Does NCIS - Foucault Force

Where a Panoptical structure is normally in a circle with an observation tower in the center surrounded by an outer wall of cells for the incarceration of mental patients or convicts, for seven seasons at the center of NCIS is Supervisory Special Agent Leroy Jethro Gibbs (Mark Harmon) and his agents and their team that seem incarcerated, as they seem to be confined to their jobs 24/7 as they investigate crimes involving Navy and Marine Corps personnel. If the central idea to Foucault’s Panopticism is the systematic ordering and controlling of humans through subtle and often unseen forces then Agent Jethro Gibbs is a picture of Foucault Force when in his "office" - acubicle with his team at hand, surrounded "cells” consisting of labs, offices, a morgue . . . there is one notable exception.

NCIS - 'Hit The Head' Montage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QqMUuOPsa0o
I spent VERY MUCH time trying to embed this video to prove my exception, but have given up :(

While the purpose of the panoptic design is to increase the security through the effectiveness of outward surveillance and not only do the story lines revolve around Gibbs and his team like Foucault’s Panopticism, everything is visible to their audiences (which revolve around them as well). It’s from this core that all the surrounding cells are visible, each valuable member is kept under observation and all the ensuing action is generated from the core as well. While Gibbs and a part of his team have freedom to come and go just as a guard would in a panoptic prison, many of the team is confined to “cells” consisting of labs, offices, a morgue . . . The inmates are not convicts, and there is no danger of a plot or an attempt at collective escape, but there is at times the danger of contagion, risk of their committing violence on one another these “prisoners” seem to like it there. I like them there too :)

Although they are not always a model of Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon of a self-disciplined society, the NCIS core often behaves like schoolchildren, with copying, noise, play and pranks. However, advances in technology and surveillance techniques have made Foucault’s theories all the more pertinent to NCIS and its population – millions of fan.

FREUD IN THE WAITING ROOM

ANALYSIS #3

FREUD IN THE WAITING ROOM

In her play The Waiting Room sand-up comic Lisa Loomer takes a darkly funny look at the dangers encountered on the path to beauty and perfection. Loomer writes in a very different voice than a man would as she presents three women in a doctor’s waiting room from different historical periods killing themselves to look beautiful. Victoria is a prim Nineteenth Century English woman trussed up in a whalebone corset wearing a bustle who is prone to "hysterical" fits. Her husband believes she has "had too much education" so he has arranged for her to have her ovaries removed. Forgiveness from Heaven is a Chinese woman from the 1700s who believes her tiny bound feet make her desirable in the eyes of men. One of her toes has just fallen off. The third woman is Wanda, thoroughly modern. She has had a lot of cosmetic surgery done and is now suffering serious complications from her three breast augmentations. Loomer cleverly uses literature, a book by Freud that one of her characters is reading, to encourage her audience to psychoanalyze her characters and themselves as they find Freud in the waiting room.

First, Victoria's husband, who wants her ovaries removed, denounces the Chinese as barbaric, while the husband of the Chinese woman who adores his wife's bound feet, denounces the English as barbaric. By juxtaposing time periods and using earthy humor Loomer both comically and tragically shows how little has changed over time. Victoria hides her book by Freud from her husband because her husband believes her desire to educate herself has caused her ovaries to atrophy and has given her hysteria. It doesn’t seem to matter to him that her corset is forcing her uterus out of her vagina. Loomer amplifies the serious nature and accentuates the help psychoanalysis would be with comedy – she gives Victoria a tic whenever she says the word “husband.”

In Scene 2 Wanda is absorbed in a Glamour Magazine and Victoria comes into the waiting room distraught wanting Wanda to run downstairs to Barnes and Nobel to get her another copy of Freud because, “while she and her husband were discussing Freud’s theories . . . her husband quite accidentally, of course . . . dropped Freud. . . into the fire” (48). She asks Wanda to hurry, because she “wants to finish Freud by [her] appointment” (49). When Wanda is curious Victoria admits she bit her husband’s nose and now he’s wondering if “a few teeth might not be removed as well” (49). Like Freud, Victoria is willing to believe her problems are in her mind, but that she thinks she’ll have all the answers before her doctor’s appointment intensifies the comedic drama. Although desperate for freedom, Victoria is still wearing the corset that the doctor told her is, “compressing [her] stomach, dislocating the kidneys, crushing [her] liver, and constricting [her] heart.” But, she says, about her outfit, “it is pretty isn’t it” (49).

The dramatic impact is also intense with Loomer’s unique blend of love, despair, and reality in the characters Forgiveness from Heaven and Wanda. Although these characters don’t consider Freud, they are prime examples of his theories. For instance, Forgiveness is actually proud that the stench in the office comes from her rotting feet. She says, “I would wash them but my husband, he’s crazy for the smell. Likes to eat watermelon seeds from the toes. Almonds. (Delighted.) Dirt” (12). Forgiveness and her husband sound like two year olds to me. I can only imagine the psycho-sexual life or childhood memories awakened in this couples relationship, but they are thought provoking. Tiny feet . . . desirable in her father’s eyes . . . hmmmm.
Loomer describes Wanda as, “A modern gal from Jersey. Forty. Enormous breasts and perfected everything else . . . ballsy . . . but as vulnerable as she appears streetwise, and smarter than she’s gone out of her way to look” (7). As the play is ending in an emotionally charged scene (By now I’m glad the play is almost over because the scenes are emotionally exhausting as well.) Wanda is considering which of the terrible options available to her she should chose to treat her breast cancer. She realizes her whole family has died of cancer. She says, “My dad never got to see me. . . pretty. (Forces a smile.) Well, hey I wouldn’t want him to see me like this now would I?” (69,70).

Aha!

Aha what?

I’m not sure, but I’m meeting Freud in The Waiting Room again.

Works Cited
Loomer, Lisa. The Waiting Room. Dramatists Play Service Inc: New York, N.Y. 1998.