Path: utzoo!hoptoad!dasys1!gf
From: gf@dasys1.UUCP (G Fitch)
Newsgroups: alt.individualism
Subject: Economics and Individualism (Too Long)
Keywords: consumption individual economy
Message-ID: <3714@dasys1.UUCP>
Date: 4 Apr 88 23:03:06 GMT
Distribution: alt
Organization: The Big Electric Cat
Lines: 93


The economy we live in is driven by consumption.  The desire to
acquire products and services is what encourages people to work
and invest, thereby making possible the production of surplus
labor value which, as capital, feeds further expansion of the
economy.  The sale and consumption of the products and 
services completes the circuit, validating the labor of
the workers (whether or not the goods are of any real use to them.)
Since most players on the economic field are directed by a desire
to increase the "bottom line", they fall into conformity with the
prevailing system, that is, the expansion of consumption.

Consumption can be made most efficient, thereby growing at the
fastest rate, if the worker-consumers are all alike.  It is easiest
then to fit them into job slots, and provide goods which can be
expected to appeal to them.  Substantial variation causes inefficiencies.
For example, if workers are attached to large families living in 
particular towns, it will be difficult to move them around to meet
business needs.  Similarly, if the potential market for a type of
product is divided into many segments with strong and differing
preferences, the market will be fragmented, and production and
distribution will be unable to achieve economies of scale.

This uniformity can be most readily achieved by the atomization of
society.  That is, each person's attachment to particulars must
be weakened or eliminated, whether to family, religion, community,
party, social group, "race", region, and so on.  And, paradoxically,
this weakening of ties and atomization of the social fabric can be
most immediately brought about through the promulgation of "individualism."

Individualism is always portrayed as something at odds with group
membership, although in fact it is membership in groups which provides
persons with their strongest and most effective means of being
particular.  A person in a small group is usually well-known to
other members of the group and has a needed function within the
group.  The strongest groups, such as families and sometimes religious,
political, or business groupings, often contain elements of compulsion
which solidify the individual's position within the group at the same
time as they may seem to suppress her or his individuality; for the
group is as bound to the member as the member is to the group.

When everyone is completely individualized, on the other hand, entirely
"free" of obligation and relationship, that is, when the social fabric
is completely atomized, then everyone is in every practical sense the
same.  And, to the extent that persons differ, they are more vulnerable
to pressures from the system as a whole, since there are no intervening
or supporting institutions.

Do the great corporations and institutions which make up the framework
of our economic system plot to bring about this state of affairs?
No, they don't have to; the pressures produced by a consumption-
oriented economy suffice, and the great players are as susceptible
to those pressures as the others.  Those who produce the goods and
services also produce the education or propaganda required
to instill in the population a knowledge of, and desire for, the
products.  This is, of course, advertising; an industry whose size
and high profile reveals its central importance, and its effectiveness
as well.

At the same time as the population's tastes are being homogenized
a kind of spurious particularism is developed, such as the difference
between Pepsi and Coca-Cola, or, better yet, the difference between New
and Classic Coca-Cola.  This pseudo-particularism is characterized by
products which differ trivially so that they can appear different 
while being produced by the same methods (and often in the identical
factories) and so that the advertising for one will reinforce, rather
than diminish the advertising for another.  Pepsi and Coke advertise
with youth, teeth, splashing water and frosty cans, for each other;
7-Up advertises for both as well as itself by calling itself "The Uncola".
Everyone has had the experience of finding a product, say, tea,
displayed for several feet of shelf space in a supermarket under
several different brands and packagings, yet all the same, pekoe
and orange pekoe, in spite of the fact that there are dozens or
hundreds of other types of tea.  

Pseudo-particularism has an additional benefit: it reassures the
consumers that they really are particular, in spite of the fact
that, as far as the system is concerned, they aren't.  This spurious
form of particularism is especially strong among the present and
future leaders of the system and evidences itself in such trivia
as red suspenders, antique cars, and cranky politics.  In point
of fact, the system needs leaders who have the same quality of
replaceability as the workers and the components of the machines
they work with; a quality which can be brought about only through 
standardization.  Here, the intellectual circle is completed.  
These leaders profess individualism while they practice self-
standardization.  The illusion is complete.


-- 
G Fitch	        				{uunet}!mstan\
The Big Electric Cat     {ihnp4,harvard,philabs}!cmcl2!cucard!dasys1!gf
New York City, NY, USA  (212) 879-9031          {sun}!hoptoad/