Suchergebnisse

Organizations can encourage their members to over-value means above ends. A case in point is the tendency among academics to over-value standardized ranking lists for academic journals at the expense of high quality research. To make sense of such seemingly perverse object choices, organizational researchers have turned to the concept of fetishism. However, organizational researchers have yet to consider how these fetishes are organized as sexual object choices—a strange omission given the expansive empirical and theoretical literature exploring fetishism as a sexual practice. Drawing a distinction between the fetishism of organizations and fetishism in organizations, the article seeks to redress this oversight.

The capitalist system is based on property rules, which are the same for all forms of property. Yet these rules operate differently for capital and labor as distinct forms of property. This paradox obscures the role of living labor as the source of surplus value, and hence mystifies money as self-expanding value. This "fetishism of money" facilitates "financialization," prevents accurate analysis of the capitalist system, and the formulation of alternatives.

In this paper, we analyse two recent contributions to the Marxist critique of the political economy of art: the article "Artistic Labor and the Production of Value: An Attempt at a Marxist Interpretation" by José María Durán and the book Art and Value: Art's Economic Exceptionalism in Classical, Neoclassical and Marxist Economics by Dave Beech. While Durán emphasizes the emergence of the legal category of intellectual property rights as crucial for value production in art, Beech has reached the contrary conclusion that artistic labour does not produce value and that artistic production is therefore excepted from capitalist commodity production. In our paper, we criticize both conclusions. While agreeing with Beech that artistic labour does not produce value and is thus excepted from the ideology of commodity fetishism, we believe that through the ideology of converted forms it nevertheless becomes part of capitalist commodity production. We would argue that the sector of artistic production, through the converted form of monopoly rent, establishes a production relation with other, competitive, sectors of capitalist economy. This production relation is enabled by the ideology of aesthetic fetishism, supported by the ideology of legal fetishism through the category of intellectual property rights. Contrary to Durán, we thus conclude that intellectual property rights allow for a hidden transfer of surplus value produced by the workers in the competitive sectors of the capitalist economy. ; U tekstu analiziramo dva novija priloga marksističkoj kritici političke ekonomije umetnosti: članak "Umetnički rad i proizvodnja vrednosti: pokušaj marksističke interpretacije" Hozea Marije Durana [José María Durán] i knjigu Umetnost i vrednost: ekonomska izuzetnost umetnosti u klasičnoj, neoklasičnoj i marksističkoj ekonomici Dejva Biča [Dave Beech]. Dok Duran u svojoj analizi daje naglasak zasnivanju pravne kategorije prava na intelektualno vlasništvo kao determinanti proizvodnje vrednosti u umetničkoj proizvodnji, Bič dolazi u svojoj knjizi do suprotnog zaključka da umetnički rad ne proizvodi vrednost i da je time umetnička proizvodnja izuzeta iz kapitalističke robne proizvodnje. U našem tekstu kritikujemo oba zaključka. Sa Bičom se slažemo da umetnički rad ne proizvodi vrednost i da je time izuzet iz ideologije robnog fetišizma, ali smatramo da on putem ideologije preobraženih oblika postaje deo kapitalističke robne proizvodnje. Tvrdimo da sektor umetničke proizvodnje putem preobraženog oblika monopolske rente zasniva proizvodni odnos sa drugim, konkurentskim, sektorima kapitalističke privrede. Ovaj proizvodni odnos je omogućen ideologijom estetskog fetišizma koju podržava ideologija pravnog fetišizma putem kategorije prava na vlasništvo intelektualne svojine. Contra Duranu zaključujemo da pravo na vlasništvo intelektualne svojine omogućava skriveni prenos viška vrednosti koji su proizveli radnici konkurentskog sektora kapitalističke privrede.

MARX'S CRITIQUE OF FETISHISM IS AN EXAMINATION OF THE OCCLUDING & CONTRADICTORY ASPECT OF THE CAPITALIST MODE OF PRODUCTION & THE CATEGORIES OF BOURGEOIS POLITICAL ECONOMY. FETISHISM CONCEALS A 'DOING' BENEATH A THING-LIKE 'BEING'. BEHIND THE IDEOLOGY THAT ACCEPTS INDEPENDENT & AUTONOMOUS CATEGORIES LURKS SR. A COMMODITY IS A THING, A PHYSICAL, BODILY, MATERIAL GOOD, A USE-VALUE, A SENSIBLE-SUPERSENSIBLE OBJECT; BUT A COMMODITY IS SIMULTANEOUSLY SUPER-SENSIBLE AS AN EXCHANGE VALUE OR THE PHENOMENAL FORM OF VALUE. HENCE IT HAS A DUAL CHARACTER, ITS OWN MATERIALITY & A SOCIAL FORM THAT DOES NOT CORRESPOND TO IT, & IN FACT OPPOSES IT. THE ANALYSIS OF THE COMMODITY AS THE FORM OF VALUE CONTAINS THE WHOLE SECRET OF FETISHISM SINCE THROUGH IT THE PRESUPPOSED SOCIAL CONDITIONS ARE REVEALED. MARX INSISTS THAT THE COMMODITY IS THE 'SUBJECT' OF CAPITALIST PRODUCTION, & NOT ABSTRACT LABOR NOR THE VALUE WHICH MEASURES IT, BECAUSE THE COMMODITY IS BOTH A THING & A VALUE. THE CRITICISM OF FETISHISM CANNOT BE REDUCED TO A MERE SHIFT FROM RELATIONS AMONG OBJECTS TO TIES AMONG PEOPLE. THE SELF-CONTRADICTION OF APPEARANCES, THE UNDERLYING DUAL CHARACTER OF ABSTRACT & CONCRETE LABOR, & THE REALITY OF ALIENATION MUST BE REVEALED. A. KARMEN.

The act of delegation raises peculiar problems for political philosophy, especially when a multitude delegate certain powers to one person. Delegation is interpreted as the basis of political alienation & fetishism. Abuse of delegated powers is difficult to correct: in addition to strategies of departure or protest, a common strategy is foundation of a competing organization; but such an organization will also develop a system of delegation with the same problems. Statements of politicians on behalf of collectivities are interpreted as comparable to statements of oracles on behalf of gods. A characteristic result of the emergence of organized delegation is the withdrawal of people in general from meetings & politics & the emergence of a culture of permanence among representatives. The final revolution against delegation will not be achieved so long as demands for political participation continue. W. H. Stoddard