LukacvsGramsci - Andrew I think of reification as an...

Andrew: I think of reification as an extension and generalization of
commodity fetishism...so the idea is that parts of social reality...be
they economic laws, the worker's activity, commodities, etc. are MIS-
perceived as having essential properties. A more correct, more
encompassing view would see these "things" as "effects" of society
functioning as a systemic totality, as dynamic social relations.
: You can also think of reification in terms of Weberian rationalization.
rational calculation on Weberian terms involves taking a particular
context in which that calculation is valid as given. To penetrate the
veil of reification, you'd need to see the processes that brought about
that context.
no problem.
so to make a concrete example, take your computer.
Andrew: we typically perceive it as having a collection of properties
that are a "physical" or direct part of it. it can run programs...it has a
certain value if exchanged on the market...but this is only a partial
picture.
the computer fulfills a socially determined need for us. it is only in a
certain societal context that these programs do something useful for
us. furthermore, it's sale as a discrete commodity obscure its origins in
social relationships of production. we don't think of the hyper-
exploitative labor in various countries...processes of resources
extraction in far off locales, etc...that are just as much a part of the
computer as the more "immediate" properties.
I think that this is on the right track.
more precisely, we mis perceive the complex of social relationships
that determine an objects uses and the conditions of its existence as
isolated properties of the object "in itself".
so it's really a qualitative distinction, rather than a question of the
quantity of value of the object.
hey...sorry to do this, but I'm going to be off to bed soon.
me: Ok thank you soo much!
Andrew: best of luck on the test. and as you think of reification, try to
relate it to class-consciousness.
Midterm on Tuesday, bring a blue book
o Focused on a single question: Write an essay on that question
and it’s going to have to do with comparing Lukacs and Gromsci
How to compare Gromsci and Lukacs and wrapping up Western
Marxism
Western Marxism is reflecting on the double paradox

o First is being why has capitalism proven to be so durable if it is
crisis ridden and etc. Why has it been so successful?
+ The problem of WM is a combination of theoretical
commitments and a set of empirical realities
# WM appears in the 1920s, a successful revolution in
Eastern Europe and a failed revolution in Western Europe
# WM is a reflection on a failure
+ The central economic analysis of Marxism:
# A. Abandon Marxism as a theory. The prediction of
increasing class polarization and the claim that capitalism leads to
crises and it would seem that the theory itself is wrong.