- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Shall we?

Posted by: Red Deathy ( Socialiost Party, UK ) on June 27, 1999 at 14:00:44:

In Reply to: Let's talk about ontology posted by Samuel Day Fassbinder on June 26, 1999 at 11:54:19:

: SDF: Uh, , actually, RD, being born is not really your own effort. It's what your mother does to you -- she pushes you out of the womb.

No, but the 'rich' part is a result of doing, both the famillies doing, and eventually the individuals own doing. Being black, or talented, or fast, is never a result, per se, of doing. ANother way- richness is socialisation, blackness is biology. the difference I was pointing to.

:The matter at hand is that, since Gee thinks the born-rich deserve their privileges

I don't think he posits 'deserve', he seems to be implying that 'it just happens', like being black, being talented, its just a force of nature, hence why I poitnted out his misconcenption.

: he appears to be blaming the born-poor for what they are.

Or rather, absolving the rich for the poors poverty. Since being poor is like being born white. just happens.

: This ontology thing segues well into my question about Paul Willis' LEARNING TO LABOUR. Have you read it? What did you think about it? It's a matter of what counts as BECOMING working-class.

Not read it I'm afriad, (Nor the book you mention in teh above post), i'll look them up, sound interesting (bit out of my field- any recomendations on texts for the ideological structure of teh X-Files gladly recieved ;))

: SDF: RD I'm only interrupting here because your reply appears to be a non sequitur, otherwise I'd let you and Gee babble for all eternity. The question to ask is, "what in hell is a chosen obligation?"

1:I think Gee was meaning that folks chose to have babies, hence they assume the burden voluntarilly.
2:My point was sometimes babies come when we have no choice in the matter.
3:Overall, I agree with your point.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup