The debate around how to organize life in our current economic and
social conditions is getting popular these days. There seems to be many ideas
involving self-help gurus trying to wrap their heads around how to best wade
through the uncharted waters of life. One idea here is self-optimisation. This is about optimising the self through technology and market. Today, social media platforms serve as tools for self-optimisation. Platforms like Tiktok and Instagram influence fashion, social life and politics. Although activists would underscore the emancipatory potential or the
liberatory experiences of digital platforms, one should not shy away from matters
like FOMO and other mental health issues which are rather connected to these
platforms. So, what is the right approach to 'optimising' life? The question of staying outside the
system to escape the system is impossible today. And this is where self-help gurus come up with their ‘detoxing methods’ to manage life in the consumer
society.
A recent article by Clare Coffey Failure to Cope “Under Capitalism”
highlights the current belief systems related to life and living life. The
attitude of staying idle and blaming the system for exhaustion is scrutinised
in this article. This incapacity of the individual to even participate in his/her
daily routine is considered to be a symptom of life under capitalism. And it is mostly the left (maybe in a hopeless attempt to create allies) that would
say: “No, it’s not your problem, it’s capitalism.” But it is not that simple.
The idea of getting up every morning and going through your daily routine
can be depressing. It’s true. But it surely hinges on the person and the socio-economic
factors. But hear me out, human agency is something that is often neglected
here. The tendency to brood over things that are beyond our control is usual.
But is everything beyond our control?
Recently a professor from my institute asked me to explain my M.Phil. dissertation.
My arguments on the thesis were related to the current political contexts of
populism and how cryptocurrencies and other web 3.0 technologies are pushed
forward as a silver bullet. I analysed how the recent trends are seemingly political
but tend to undermine political institutions, thus becoming an
anti-political force in the process. So, the professor asked, “Okay you say
this is antipolitical. What difference does it make if it is political?”
Honestly, I feel this question is both dumb and clever. Although
the professor who asked the question is famous for his ‘obscene’ tautological
reversals, the joke is on me who dismissed the question outrightly. The
question itself was a validation for what I was trying to achieve through my
thesis. Coming back, this question of “what is the difference if it’s political”
is crucial here. To tell ourselves that things will be perfect when we move out
of the capitalist system somewhat feels like a lame excuse. Here the question of “what is the difference if
it’s political” should be reframed as “what is the difference if it’s not
capitalism”. Will we really exist without boredom? Will we really be happy? If you
ask me, the chances are low or at least that’s what I would like to believe.
This should be read along with the dominant narratives regarding mental
health today. It was Jordan Peterson who popularized these questions relating
to micro-spaces inviting the Left to grapple with his self-styling mantra. Even
though we might not agree with Peterson’s observations or opinions, we must
accept that the problem that he tries to address is relevant. The Left here
addresses these questions in a different way because it believes that there are
no specific tools for the liberation of the psyche. So instead, some of them
would say the psyche will be automatically liberated along with the liberation
of socio-economic relations in capitalism. Regardless of what’s true, we should believe that there are things that we can affect if we really wish
to transcend the system. We should live as if we have agency and whether or not
that’s truly the case is a different issue altogether. To sit back and lament
that there is no meaning in acting is wrong. As Jacques Rancière writes, “For
me the fundamental question is to explore the possibility of maintaining spaces
of play.”
Ethical consumption
Ethical consumption is in this regard related to what I’ve written above. In order to not participate in the system, people often engage in ethical consumption. People stop consuming certain products along with consuming less in view of the environment and the future. This is also considered as resisting the system. The idea that certain consumer choices would change the relations of production and the nature of the market is wrong. For example, I recently heard about a guy who would not drink Coca Cola because he considers it to be unethical since Coca Cola is an MNC. I mean this is more symptomatic of the present age than the past when the communist parties used to protest against Coca Cola. As Jacques Rancière writes, “One must find ways to create other places, or other uses for places. But one must extricate this project from the dramatic alternatives expressed in questions like How do we escape the market, subvert it etc.? These critics of the market call for subversion only to declare it impossible and abandon all hope for emancipation.”
Considering politics as only a moral problem to be solved is the core issue
here. This is where political correctness also becomes a debatable topic. The
cultural wars that we fight run parallel with the ethical consumption that I’ve
mentioned here. The idea here is to consume and communicate ethically without aspiring for the fundamental change. This makes you an ethical
consumer. Here, we should try to understand the politics of consumption. As a
consumer what the market asks is consumption without reflection. Again, this mindless
consumption should be challenged and this shouldn’t be done by subscribing to
certain ethical standards but by understanding the relations of production of the
system in the very process of consumption. In other words, we should consume
the product, never the idea (here, the idea being, the current conditions to be the
natural conditions of life).
Independence Day
These days I never end anything without mentioning the Communist party of India. One should rather be aware of this obsession. India celebrated its 75th Independence Day on August 15 and the Communist Party of India was very much involved in the celebration. The fact that the party clearly has moved to the ‘democratic socialist’ path became evident with how the party reacted to the special moment in the history of Indian democracy. But nevertheless, the official ideology of class struggle and dictatorship of the proletariat still lingers in the party constitution.
When you look at the communist parties globally, CPI was the first
to embrace democratic socialism but is still one of the many to hold on to its
dogmatic past. This itself is not an issue but this revering of the past is clearly dishonest. Earlier in the year, CPI and CPM leaders participated in the
centenary event of CCP which solidified arguments regarding how CPM still favors a new world order under China.
But again, this is all pretension.
Therefore, the nostalgia remains an unbearable truth for the
communists in India. They still consider their tradition valuable but here, the past
is not being used to create new imaginings in the present and this in a way makes the Indian Communists
the true ‘traditionalists’. They once incepted a new course with democratic
socialism but in their integration to the system they stopped considering
themselves capable of further change. This creates an immutability which also
sustains the party in a limbo. Ultimately the idea is to make a choice between
whether to bring forth a different organizing principle for the society or to
make capitalism more progressive and ethical. And the Communist party clearly
made the choice to stick to the second option in the guise of sticking to the first option.
Tragedy: The media in Latin America is calling it the 'Pink tide', not the 'Red tide'. They are truly afraid to address it as a new form of Communism.
Our media would surely call ours a 'Red wave' - So much for characterising
our media as anti-communists!
Comments
Post a Comment