#ruthless criticism

[ultroid2068]

"Before anything else, it is necessary to consider this as the point of arrival of a long historical process that parts from the production of absolute relative surplus value and reaches, by necessity, to the production of relative surplus value; from the forced prolonging of the working day to the increase, which appears spontaneously, of the productive force of labour ; to the pure and simple extending of the process of production in its entirety to its internal transformation, which leads it to continually revolutionize the process of labour, in an ever more organic function and dependence of the valorization process.

The relation, which before could be easily established, between the sphere of production and the other social spheres is now transformed into a relation that is much more complex between the internal transformations of the sphere of production and the internal transformations of the other spheres. It is transformed, beyond this, into a relation that is much more mediated, organic and mystified, more evident and hidden at the same time, between capitalist production and bourgeois society.

The more that the determinant relation of capitalist production grasps the social relation in general, the more it appears to disappear within the latter as a marginal aspect. The more that capitalist production penetrates in profundity and invades, in extension, the totality of social relations, the more society appears as a totality relative to production and production as a particularity relative to society.

When the particular generalizes itself, is universalized, it appears represented as general, as universal. In the social relation of capitalist production, the generalization of production expresses itself as the hypostatization of society.

When specifically capitalist production has already weaved the whole web of social relations, it itself emerges as a generic social relation. The phenomenal forms reproduce themselves with immediate spontaneity, as current forms of thought: “the substantial relation should be discovered by science.”

If we limit ourselves to a purely ideological approach of this reality, we do nothing more than reproduce this reality as it presents itself, inverted in its appearance. If we want to understand the intimate material link of the real relations a theoretical effort is needed of scientific penetration which, before anything else, strips the object—bourgeois society—of all its mystified phenomenal forms, that have been ideologized, in order to isolate and attain its hidden substance which is and continues to be the relation of capitalist production."

- Mario Tronti, Factory and Society, 1962.

(translation by Guio Jacinto)

[shituationist]

On “The Standard of Living Like Never Before”:

Anyone who measures the modes of appearance of modern wage labor in pauperism will inevitably not be able to discover poverty; because this is the reason he makes his comparison. The purpose of the exercise consists solely in the temerity of depicting the supplying of workers with necessities as the good deed of the free-market economy and its democratic state, and explaining all demands that go beyond these necessities to be presumptuous. The worker’s share in the social wealth is measured by this and not by the needs that adjust themselves as necessary requirements each time the level of production increases; rather, the mere reproduction of the workforce appears in this biased comparative standpoint as prosperity, and thus a reason for warmly praising capitalism. When this viewpoint is brought up by the worker himself as a judgment about his position – “I could be worse off,” “it goes (relatively) well for me” – he is also not driven to an objective judgment, but usually makes a comparison with his nearby surroundings: the co-worker who is paid worse, the unskilled man at the bad machine and similar negative models, leading to a positive conclusion which is nevertheless recognizable as an expression of his discontent – why else would anyone relativize their own needs in the poverty of others?

[shituationist]

The friend of meritocracy praises the competition which has firm control in all the crucial areas of life – school, job market and occupation – for the fact that class society no longer distributes its jobs according to national origin, religion, gender and race, but to all equally and democratically according to achievement. He thinks nothing of the fact that this competition generally only exists where its makers skimp on the number of winner's positions and admit the mass of the competitors, according to their criteria, into loser's jobs; where consequently before the start of the competition its main result is already certain: the occupational hierarchy of class society. Whoever praises the state-ordered permission to be allowed to take part in the competition, thus to possibly make all co-competitors losers, and moreover imagines that his efforts would give him control over this is – in the mentioned sense – stupid.

Why does school make people stupid?

[ultroid2068]

Constructive “criticism”

Criticism must examine whether what is being criticized needs to be improved at all, and not rather abolished. One should not seek to make t

"Ruthless criticism of capitalism is extinct nowadays, at any rate. The Left, as the loyal opposition, competes for votes by promising to fight austerity and “neoliberalism.” In other words, it demands a more effective and less crisis-prone economy, while the economy as such, capitalism, is ignored. They do not want to remove the underlying cause of crisis, but rather treat the symptom. What they want is better state management of poverty — not a change in the mode of production, only a change to the unequal distribution of wealth...

We must make a criticism that says that it is a fundamental mistake to strive to be constructive in making our criticisms, because this means committing oneself from the outset to preservation of the existing order. Criticism must examine whether what is being criticized needs to be improved at all, and not rather abolished. Because one cannot make this system better — on the contrary, it already functions too well! — we have no suggestions for improvement.

Rather, we insist that these problems exist because of the system. It is not our program to contribute mild or well-intentioned suggestions so that what we criticize can succeed. Those affected make a mistake when they criticize constructively from the outset, betting on the wrong horse. For they are always going to be poorly served by the present social order, given its functional requirements and prevailing logic. We believe it is the task of leftwing politics to tell people this.

The vast majority of dependent employees do not think and act as members of a class that is aware of the contradiction between their interests and those of capital and the state which establishes these social conditions. The wage-dependent think and act as responsible members of a national “we” who see their opponents more as “foreigners” (e.g. the refugees) than in local entrepreneurs and politicians. This mistake is fatal. No more constructive criticism; no more nationalist lies; no no more groveling!

- Constructive "Criticism", Intransigence, Issue #3.

[bakaity-poetry]

"The internal difficulties seem to be almost greater than the external obstacles. For although no doubt exists on the question of “Whence,” all the greater confusion prevails on the question of “Whither.” Not only has a state of general anarchy set in among the reformers, but everyone will have to admit to himself that he has no exact idea what the future ought to be. On the other hand, it is precisely the advantage of the new trend that we do not dogmatically anticipate the world, but only want to find the new world through criticism of the old one. Hitherto philosophers have had the solution of all riddles lying in their writing-desks, and the stupid, exoteric world had only to open its mouth for the roast pigeons of absolute knowledge to fly into it. Now philosophy has become mundane, and the most striking proof of this is that philosophical consciousness itself has been drawn into the torment of the struggle, not only externally but also internally. But, if constructing the future and settling everything for all times are not our affair, it is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be."

[eelfoe]

Marx wrote a letter called “For a ruthless criticism of everything existing” and I think that’s a Good Idea

[abookwithnopictures]

Two passages:

"But, if constructing the future and settling everything for all times are not our affair, it is all the more clear what we have to accomplish at present: I am referring to ruthless criticism of all that exists, ruthless both in the sense of not being afraid of the results it arrives at and in the sense of being just as little afraid of conflict with the powers that be." "Hence, nothing prevents us from making criticism of politics, participation in politics, and therefore real struggles, the starting point of our criticism, and from identifying our criticism with them. In that case we do not confront the world in a doctrinaire way with a new principle: Here is the truth, kneel down before it! We develop new principles for the world out of the world’s own principles. We do not say to the world: Cease your struggles, they are foolish; we will give you the true slogan of struggle. We merely show the world what it is really fighting for, and consciousness is something that it has to acquire, even if it does not want to. The reform of consciousness consists only in making the world aware of its own consciousness, in awakening it out of its dream about itself, in explaining to it the meaning of its own actions."