Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 06-17-2007, 08:47 AM

maybe in your "real world" that's the case, seretogis--but ususally when the term gets used, it refers to particular characteristics of the ownership of the instruments of production, a particular range of ways of organizing production itself, a particular type of market and a particular logic of market relations. it refers to features of a social system. actually, it refers to a series of such systems (in one series: monopoly capitalism, fordism, flex accumulation, globalizing capitalism--each phase emerges from within what precedes it--each phase is distinguished from the other by its patterns of organization, patterns of integration with state functions, etc....)

from your post, what seems to be the case is that capitalism is capitalism if it operates in a way that you vaguely approve of but is not capitalism if it doesnt.
so for you, the term doesnt refer to social system characteristics, but is more like the word "tasty" when applied to peanut butter.

if you want to use capitalism as a adjective to modify the implicit referent "economic activity that i like" then of course you are free to do so: but there is no agreement at all---at all--that this usage makes sense to anyone who is not you.

besides, meanings are matters of convention: if you want to demonstrate your point, maybe indicate where there is a community that uses capitalism as an adjective in the way that you do, and then i can point to a huge mountain of material-analytic----from the analytic to the political to the polemical, cutting across academic, political and popular writing done over the past 150 years or so---that uses the term in the way that i outline as well.

you cant win this one.
maybe we should move on to such discussion as there might be about the claims in the op.

06-17-2007, 08:47 AM	#6 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	maybe in your "real world" that's the case, seretogis--but ususally when the term gets used, it refers to particular characteristics of the ownership of the instruments of production, a particular range of ways of organizing production itself, a particular type of market and a particular logic of market relations. it refers to features of a social system. actually, it refers to a series of such systems (in one series: monopoly capitalism, fordism, flex accumulation, globalizing capitalism--each phase emerges from within what precedes it--each phase is distinguished from the other by its patterns of organization, patterns of integration with state functions, etc....) from your post, what seems to be the case is that capitalism is capitalism if it operates in a way that you vaguely approve of but is not capitalism if it doesnt. so for you, the term doesnt refer to social system characteristics, but is more like the word "tasty" when applied to peanut butter. if you want to use capitalism as a adjective to modify the implicit referent "economic activity that i like" then of course you are free to do so: but there is no agreement at all---at all--that this usage makes sense to anyone who is not you. besides, meanings are matters of convention: if you want to demonstrate your point, maybe indicate where there is a community that uses capitalism as an adjective in the way that you do, and then i can point to a huge mountain of material-analytic----from the analytic to the political to the polemical, cutting across academic, political and popular writing done over the past 150 years or so---that uses the term in the way that i outline as well. you cant win this one. maybe we should move on to such discussion as there might be about the claims in the op. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 06-17-2007 at 08:50 AM..