24 year old from Michigan. I have 15 aunts and uncles and 50 plus first cousins. I’ve always been intrigued in anthropology and philosophy. You make me hopeful. I was born at the beginning of the social media push. Sometimes I feel like I’m in a black mirror episode. Your episodes bring me back to sanity.
Well over a decade ago, I read Lyotard's famous essay (1979) and I mean; line-by-line, word-by-word. That slim volume was ravaged by the time I was forced to let it go. I am thankful for the translators of various kind. Allegedly, even Socrates, near the end or at sometime prior, entertained the notion of creating music were he not otherwise occupied by a life of philosophy-- _The unexamined Life is not worth living_ Pichi-Avo are a team of internationally known street artists that only recently caught my eye and like Banksy, their (respective) work is not intended to last but I do like their incorporation of otherwise well-known classical statues. I want Beauty in my life. Abstract or not; when I can appreciate _it_ -- it affects my entire being and I want more of that. Great reading, West. Thank you--Always beautiful around here. Rest. Be Well. --from the Continental drift, or, the delirious denizen I thank you, again. Your online work has proven good for my mental health and that is no lie. What you do, matters.
I'm honestly tired for seeking authenticity talks and human spirit in people. I cant even blame the people, this era is creating nothing but pragmatic absurdists, nobody wanna think or try to do anything out of what works best, only longing for the past. follow what everyone likes and what trends and basically whatever gets you most socially accepted, I'm very worried about what future would look like now. thank you for making this Stephen it really help me feel less alone out here.
I LOVE YOU STEVEN WEST! Thank you for making philosophy accessible to us all. This episode on Mark Fisher reminds me of David Graeber’s piece ‘On flying cars and the declining rate of profit’. Would love to hear you cover some of Graeber’s work in future. I think it ties well with your current theme, possibility of life in capitalist ruins 🫶🔥
What if you held a protest and everyone came, Chapter 2 of Capitalist Realism is still among my favorite reads ever. Fisher was scolded when he was alive, but I'm glad to see someone like you do justice to his work and the beautiful ideas his mind had.
Thank you, Steven. I've been listening to your podcast every day on my way to work. Even when I don't agree with the information presented, you convey the ideas in a way that encourages me-and, I believe, everyone-to reflect on them, question our own beliefs, and relate the concepts to develop our own understanding. This episode is no different. While listening to it, I encountered ideas from the author with which I disagree. However, your interpretation of complex concepts in a simplified format was very helpful, especially since I haven't read Mark Fisher myself. One could argue that Mark Fisher also falls into the trap of the capitalist idea of infinite growth: resources are finite, and it’s impossible for all humans to continuously pursue infinite growth and produce endless goods, services, and ideas: One of the beauties of our time is our tolerance of various cultural ideologies, and not only tolerance for their difference, but also tolerance for the time they may need to develop to their potential at their own pace. Western culture has reached a point where basic necessities are largely met. Therefore, it is not essential to pursue exponential growth, as championed by capitalist ideology. Instead, we can slowly improve upon what is already great in our culture while waiting for the rest of the world to develop. Assisting them as we can, and alowing for them to express their difference. This includes setting boundaries when overreach occurs, as seen with Russia now, or with Germany and Japan in the past. These developments are not only economic but also artistic and philosophical. From your presentation, Mark Fisher claims that the search for meaning is of utmost importance for human well-being, asserting that progress is imperative. I disagree. While I believe that both progress and the search for meaning are inherent human values, I argue that, like other inherent values, they can be controlled or even disregarded. The will for meaning and progress, as discussed by Schopenhauer or Nietzsche, can be overcome by creating new values, as we come to understand their existence and learn how to manipulate and control them for our personal and collective benefit, striving for comfort and reducing suffering in our world-for both humans and other living forms we interact with. I view the search for meaning and progress as part of a Spinozian/Darwinian evolutionary conatus: there is no inherent meaning or purpose in the universe (at least none that we can recognize), and things continue to exist by some form of chance-driven Darwinian relative causality regardless. Meaning, purpose, and will are emergent properties of this Spinozian conatus. We perceive them because they have survived thus far. This doesn't make them important per se, but it does make them survivable and likely the basis for much of our human tendency toward progress and creativity. Thus, I argue that Mark Fisher falls into the ideological trap by supporting his claims on a necessary quest for meaning, progress, and an impossible infinite growth-all of which couriously are also part of the capitalist narrative that Mark Fisher Criticizes.
Personal meaning and purpose is different from the transcendental meaning you're describing. That's more of a religious conception, not a philosophical one. Progress also isn't exactly just technological or social advancement. In fact, what you described as Neitzchean and Schopenhauerean transcending of progress is usually what philosophers mean by progress. It's stepping out of the frame of our minds and time and expanding human horizons. I think you need to chill tf out.
@@subcitizen2012 Thank you for your reply. I understand that writing might not be my strongest talent, and if you've found any transcendental meaning in my words, then I’m probably an even worse writer than I thought! 😄 However, I believe I clearly stated that meaning is merely an emergent quality created by causal relations and sustained through a Darwinian-like process by its ability to maintain those relations. Additionally, I think there’s a misunderstanding in your interpretation of Nietzschean and Schopenhauerian ideas: both philosophers address meaning as an inherent aspect of human (but not only) existence that needs to be understood for one to better understand oneself and, consequently, live a more fulfilling life. Sorry, but i do not partake in the dualist ideology, im more of a Spinozian myself: all is nature.
I suggest “Everything is a remix” by Kirby Ferguson, it offered a very interesting counter-perspective to the critique of pastiche defining post-modernism. To me, Mark Fisher’s work pointed in an interesting direction, but I’ve come to believe that critiques of modern conditions are often too simplistic, they often miss out on ways things are better or the same.
that makes sense. Was anything cultural ever really new? If so, it almost seems arrogant to think that were the first generations not to make new culture. Sometimes Fisher's thought seems to reflect his own depression too much, though other times it seems to give him insight
I am troubled because the content of this video recreates a problem existent within many contemporary critiques of postmodernism. This problem is a desire to present postmodernism as an ideology that creates a community of postmodernists who seek to pursue some type of postmodern goals. To see postmodernism as such separates it from being a description of a period of time. Do we all live in a postmodern world, or do only some of us live postmodern lives. Jameson"s "Postmodernism: or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism" describes a social situation in which a public is immersed. Capitalism within it creates postmodernism. Postmodernism does not authoritatively create itself. People do not strive to be postmodern. They are plunged into a postmodern existence. The attack on postmodernism as an ideology, as such, is rooted so much in right wing propaganda which connects it with "cultural Marxism" that sees it as a motivated movement filled with a desire to destroy a capitalist world. A description of the postmodern world may be the product of Marxist critical theory, but it sees postmodern outcomes as being the negative consequences of capitalism not the desired results of any leftist ideology.
Thank you! Many try but fail to understand post-modern philosophy, which might have to do in part because we don't value philosophy and the humanities as much as we care about engineering and business, and then go on to boogie man it anyway. It's a bit like how Socrates was executed for corrupting the youth. That's what they're trying to do with an entire established branch and era of philosophy because they don't want to understand it and are so ideologically fixated that they probably can't.
Your awesome my friend. Ive listened to all your shows many times and learn something new every time I listen. It would have taken me years of reading to learn what you have shared. The way you approach a subject and explain it is refreshing. You give enough info to explain but leave enough for a person to form a opinion. Many blessings to you and your family, and if your ever in Daytona Beach with your family hit me up. I'm married with five kid's, and I would love to sit down and talk!
Trying to put a new spin on failed revolutions of the past. I really like this to. It relates to another aesop rock quote. "Just because you found a lost cause doesn't mean you've found a cause. That means you've found a lost cause."
Steven thank you for all the moments we have, but i feel the urge to apologize to you, i cant yet pay or give money to you, but i promisse you that one day i will be able to thank you all the hours and enlightment your series has give both to me and my GF. keep the great work
Cheers! All your work is amazing but the last episodes since the first one about Zizek are brilliant. I feel like you're the Morpheus of our time :)). I'll have to listen to them several times to really understand (to the extent I can). I feel my mind literally having a hard time accepting some things which occurred to me in the past but I kinda pushed them aside. You're leaving quite an extraordinary legacy with your podcast, respect!
I have felt for a while that I have lost my grip on time. That the last 25-odd years have kind of blurred together. I attributed it to being personally stuck and to not conscientiously marking the time with the normal rituals (birthdays, christmases, equinoxes, tattoos, marriages, kids, graduations, etc). It seems like at least part of the reason may in fact be what you describe in this episode, and that's disconcerting because it's external to me.
Lovely episode. Everyone learns by copying. Imitation is necessary. No art is original but a continuation of a process started long ago by the first of us. The idea of remixing and nostalgia is propaganda useful for marketing and selling things and ideas. There’s more people today and more people with access to technology that allows them to be creative, AND be able to share it with the world. So we notice it more. Because imitation is necessary for learning anything, all creativity will be a copy. It’s a lot more noticeable today. Although, I also believe that everyone’s personal take on a thing or a thought can be considered original, regardless that they’re using a language, culture, and technology they didn’t create themselves. Even this subject, the language, specific phrases, format, and thoughts considered are not original. Thousands of years ago someone said that there was nothing new under the sun, I’m sure thousands of years before that it was said by another. We’re saying it today and we’ll say it 2k years from now.
Thank you for 2 really thought provoking episodes. Only just come across your channel and it is some feat to talk solo on philosophical ideas for 40 mins without eliciting a single yawn! As a child of the late 50's this critique makes a lot of sense and I would have to confess to feeling like a post-modernist although I would never have considered myself so even if I had understood the term previously. Having read and listened to a lot of viewpoints over the last couple of years in particular I have concluded that there are some basic values that are non-negotiable for any society to function on a long term basis. I am tolerant of other views as trying to bludgeon, reason or just cajole others to your own point of view rarely works. I probably always had an idea of what I thought was a 'decent' human being so perhaps I was never really a post-modernist. Even in my ignorance I never liked the term! Mark Fisher's view as you explain it is quite compelling but I don't see it as stable state. The dynamics of neoliberalism mean that at some point it will no longer be possible to maintain the realism as more and more people are excluded from 'getting by.' There are ideas of how to restructure society and I am particularly drawn to those which recognise the complexity of human interaction (Hayek got that right!) and make space for that complexity within a framework of agreed values. Sadly, I suspect it will be conflict rather psychedelics that bring about change which will militate against a more consensual outcome.
Haunted not just by the past but by the futures which were supposed to come about. Aesop Rock has a whole album written about this called Integrated tech solutions. He also has a really great quote, "The same alleys we used to imagine Babylon feel like abandoned malls overgrown with spanish moss Commotion froze in time with no sign Of your lamb of god it's a land of the lost Scrambling for canned applause." I feel this puts a good spin on your points about nostalgia and the lost future.
Just like in other genres of the humanities, when criticism became more prevalent than creative works, the downward slide began. A copy of a copy of a copy is so much easier to produce than anything original.
I'm only 30 minutes in and I've already heard a whole suite of discussions I've had with my son in the last 2 years. A bit stunned to find so many common beliefs in one place. Maybe I'm not going crazy after all.
In Underground, the Jam have the lyrics, "The public wants what the public gets..." - in a chicken and egg scenario, it may seem that the public are driving the demand for nostalgia. I would conversely speculate on whether it is simply big business taking less and less risks by leaning on what has already got a proven track-record - the public can't buy it if the market won't make it. Reciprocally, savvy mercenary artists can see which way the wind is blowing and they'll make their art accordingly. I guess what will likely happen, as is happening with the spate of Super hero movies is that folks will eventually get sick of them and find something more interesting to watch (I'd refute the idea that we simply haven't the imagination anymore, perhaps we need the imagination to search out the different?) - and then the mainstream will plod after the next trend.
Everyone forgets that new art and ideas depend on new technologies. The Fender guitar makes rock and roll possible, the synthesizer makes Prog Rock possible; smaller portable synthesizers and drum machines make post punk/new wave possible. The invention of the camera makes movies possible and new achievements in sound make talkies possible. We simply haven't created any new technologies that lend themselves to mass movements in art and music--we've just been perfecting old technologies; so we have to go back to modernist "middens" to glean what we can from the past to create anything at all. And AI simply cannot go anywhere forward because it is all dependent on the past; its datamine dates back at 1-2 years before whatever story/graphic/video/soundscape it purports to "invent".
Mine hasn't but capitalist realism remains so relevant to our time that I can't help but think about it at least once a month. That and his vampire castle concept live rent free in my head.
BRILLIANT !! Psychedelic Socialist, Acid Communist, Capitalist Realist - such a crazy mixed up world we are living in !! By the way LOVE WINS , every time. ☮
The way former generations saw the future gave us the present we (apparently) have. It needs to be pointed out that this slow cancellation began to set in place when the internet took off; a culture dominated by the electronic media where everyone is wired together in real time has given us a world of imaginative mediocrity.
I think newer iterations of Star Trek are a great example of capitalist realism. Old Trek imagined a world which was fundamentally different, in which individuals had very different priorities in a very different society. It was also a world in which humans had resolved most of their differences, and learned to live together. In new Trek, the possibility of change is entirely forgotten about - some people even say it is "more realistic", which is a telling phrase. Even if newer shows pay some lip service to the economics of the future being different, the actual results of that society still appear in may ways to be identical to a capitalist society (albeit a more futuristic and gentler one). It's a matter of record that the TNG writers struggled with Rodenberry's vision of a postcapitalist future, but at least they managed to portray it to some degree. Modern Trek writers seem to be entirely incapable of making the same imaginative leap, even when they have footsteps to follow in. It really is like capitalism has such a hold on their minds, that it is easier to imagine an entire universe of alien races, weird technologies and space battles, than to imagine anything could be fundamentally different in economic, political, or cultural terms.
Something missed is how past envisionings of the future has shaped the options for a future society. Much of the resentment (how does that play into nostalgia) of the past is how their decisions have shaped what's possible now. There are less options, which necessarily constricts how big you can dream (except for possible dystopias, which has been flourishing).
Marx's alienation & amnesia very related maybe. The demographic timebomb is also a big factor, retiring baby boomers ... Aging people become fearful of change, become nostalgic & conservative with small c become "C" with just a little nudge from capital. The error of postmodernism is its saying " the "truth is there is no truth" which of course is paradoxical at best, its value is seriously questioning...everything & especially "who's" truth, but is not so good at answers, metamodernism ..this is the way. Damian Walters is doing some great essays / podcasts on these issues on Science Fiction with Damien Walter especially on Frank Herbert's Dune & his postmodern critique. The human spirit has the juice to see through the fog of capitalist realism & all the nostalgic reflections of reflections - especially when reality comes a knocking. Turns out you cant keep externalising costs for infinite growth in a finite world, without self terminating, relative values cant successfully argue with climate change. Hence why the right tends to deny it, as its a limiting factor to doing what the hell they want. Capitalism as "human nature" is very deliberately selective emphasis on one part of human nature & specifically the most pathological bits... to justify the pathology of power as its manifested in worldly affairs. What about love, inspiration, self sacrifice thats occurred over history, multi generational projects { cathedrals, ....} sure CR can spin capitals role in those things but not without losing explainatory power.
the whole reason is it feels like music, movies, and video games etc have become so stagnant is because they have been turned into commodities, where the consumers expect the product to remain consistent, imagine if Taylor swift was to all of a sudden start singing heavy metal music, her fanbase would be not to happy
There's plenty of new futures in sci-fi and other fiction, and these new ideas sometimes even make it to the screen. But what if the future just doesn't change and that's normal? We had the same future for millennia, up until a few hundred years ago. Then we got the optimistic modern conception of the future, which was supposedly mortally wounded in WW1, eventually dying in the 60s, when the future got darker. But the modern conception of the future still exists, even if it's now "campy". Why should it be that the future changes in the popular mind? Is it really 'cancelled' just because we never get there?
Expectations of the future and then disappointment 😂 let’s do this all over again and again. You can laugh at it if you see how silly we are. I’ve just ordered three packets of expectation from Amazon. So I’m looking forward to my disappointment with glee.
I'm an experienced industrial controls engineer, I have the technical talent to help anyone build a small scale automation to reduce their overhead. for that to work, it needs an interested community. Becuase that automation and its maintenance only makes sense when it has a significant output, far more than a house. an entire restaurant. anyways, if you want to talk about it. hit me up.
3:29 You are still a brain, no moral system can by sheer virtue of its axioms or veracity of its arguments alone, guarantee to work on any prefrontal cortex, any amygdala irrespective of its physical condition at any moment in time. For instance, I admire Sam Harris' focus on well being (I ignore his is-ought solution ), I have a deterministic view of the world and see consciousness as weakly emergent, an epi-phenomena. When I am at my best, at my healthiest I don't think anyone should be subjected to the criminal justice system, my view demands it's total abolishment in favor of a humane quarantine model (Sapolsky) and yet if some random prick wielding a machete confronts me on the street and threatens my life or I even feel my life is under threat, I will very likely want that person arrested immediately for my own safety. Yet if I were in court, had some rest, food, a little entertainment and so on I would almost certainly ask for charges to be dropped, lessened or for them to be sent to a psychiatric ward. That is the reality of holding the moral positions that I do while having an enlarged amygdala from CPTSD and a frayed PFC from living in poverty and trying to maintain a low wage job and as much of a normal life as I can muster while also having ASD. I may disagree with moral relativists but they still have brains, they will act as their history and gene sensitivity determine they do.
I'm not sure what philosophy I espouse. What I do see, is that "capitalist realism" is what it is because of the power structures into which our lives are embedded. It serves the interests of the powerful for me to think this is the best of all possible worlds, a term I think I read in Candide by Voltaire, who put the words in the mouth of Pangloss. Our Pangloss are the media and the people that absorb their messaging.
The thing about Voltaire is that he was a satirist. He took that saying from elsewhere, and turned it on its head. Although it is the best of all possible worlds, it is simultaneously the worst of all possible worlds
@@andrewbowen2837 Indeed Voltaire was a satirist. He took that saying from Leibniz, because it was a self-serving one: "this is the best of all possible worlds" is an apology of the powers that be.
After only listening to the last two episodes of your cast w/ Fisher, that was thrust across my TH-cam feed unbidden, but I believe I've previously subscribed to your podcast years ago but have no recollection of ever really listening to it; current Austrian economist Saifedean Ammous's work around monetary policy and economics would seem to be an explanation and counterpoint to the condition that your outlining with Fisher.
It's interesting that you use the 70's as a high point of diverse popular musical expression, as that was when Bretton Woods collapsed, and the current system embarked...yes I was a very young listener starting exactly in 1970 with my first AM radio...
"and because they can't go forwards to the future, they go backwards towards nostalgia." This isn't the only other option. Nihilism can deeply ground you in the present moment, not the past or the future. And I see a beautiful world where non-judgment (views of how things ought to be), ground us deeply in the present with "what is." All ethical claims are false. This is the root of non-judgment, yes, universalizing difference until everything is seen as one-of-a-kind (without comparison or judgment against an ideal category). Such a world, where everyone "lives in the present" due to a lack of purpose, sounds like the real meaning of paradise and peace to me.
Referring to capitalism like it's a thing is a source of a lot of unclear thinking There's Kleptocratic capitalism that's developed in the United States and recent decades and on the other hand there's social democratic capitalism that promotes the common good. Socialism can also take very diverse forms
Imagine the nostalgia that gen alpha will feel in 10, 20 years. _"Remember that weird toilet head thing that everyone was raving about? Good times!"_ When brain rot becomes nostalgia, our species will be doomed.
A lot of new cultural items age pretty bad, they don't left imprint after few years Current culture stuck in present and lost in present, while culture from past (like 20 century) don't have this problem So truly understanding "old" culture could be even more relevant for todays people
Stephen West: Consider adding a "Thanks" button to your videos so we can put a couple of bucks in the tip jar. There are kids scooping ice cream with a tip jar on the counter. I think you're adding much more value. You should have a tip jar, too. Figure out how to monetize and get that "Thanks" button up there!
"There's no clear boundary where something becomes old, there's constant recycling" Yeah that's totally because of capitalism. The renaissance recycling Greeks, people adapting classics for theatre plays, the same motives and characters repeating again and again in folk tales and epic songs, all of those didn't happen...
Has anyone here read Metamodernism: The Future of Theory (2021) by Jason Josephson Storm? 10/10 recomendation for anyone unfamiliar with his work who is interested in potential paths forward from this Postmodern condition we find ourselves in! Honestly, i bet his work word make for a Reality good episode that would tie in nicely to where this series is at right now, and I would love to hear your thoughts on it.
I will admit of the value moral relativism only insofar as we are trying to philosophize. Outside of philosophizing, moral relativism is a nihilism, me thinks.
At its base, it is nihilism. If everything is valid and equal, at bottom, that means there is nothing that is the standard, nothing objective, nothing true. But that's not necessarily a bad thing
einstein had a secret theory called _special relativity part deux_ it states that nature gave people the ability to kill eachother because "some people just gotta die"
I go to a local supermarket. It’s part of a chain. That chain is owned by a conglomerate in the Netherlands which owns chains on three continents. Part of every dollar spent in the store flows to the top. It’s not paranoia to say the one-tenth of one percent have their own agenda and are willing to use fair means and foul to achieve them. Adam Smith, for one, believed it. Nor is it fantasy to say that innovative technologies are stolen and suppressed.
A friend once told me the law is the codified consensus of the people. How can a consensus be achieved if we don't talk to each other? Ethics is similar to this IMHO. Regarding nostalgia, can one be nostalgic about an era one never originally experienced first hand? Artforms such as the theatre couldn't exist without some form of reference to the past. That's not nostalgia, that's cultural development. I think the idea of obsolecence is an invention of only the last few decades, driven by financial interests. I also think that people's own worldviews are being deliberately undermined. I say disallow that and just pursue the stuff you like, regardless of which era they're 'from'. Naratives are forged by experience. Go out and get some for yourself.
Isn't expecting new culture to consume every decade something that is very new in human history? Perhaps going back to classics is the more natural and better state for humans rather than craving new stuff to consuuum
Bro HUGE [citation needed] on “music hasn’t changed much in the last 24 years”!!! That was a hilariously obvious oversight for such a usually rigorous scholar, I laughed out loud. Fun fact: basically everyone is way more emotionally involved (and laudatory of the innovation within) the music that they listened to as a teenager. E: omg and then you use Eminem’s comeback as an example?? That’s like using don quixote to point out how metatextual novels are - nah, that’s just the literal theme of that specific work!
I am a historical materialist, so I think the reason the future has not come to be is because we haven’t solved the following problems; scarcity, computational, pedagogy. We have to solve the material scarcity to break capitalism. We have to solve computation to account for & map the whole planet’s resources & plan their distribution. Lastly (or firstly), we need to solve the way we learn & apply knowledge to solving the other problems. Once these problems are solved, mass consciousness will be elevated, so the reasons for conflict would be eliminated.
I'm a historical materialist too. You need to bring it in, bud, because you are out there. Better to find actual problems with actual solutions you can actually find. Otherwise you're sort of like a perpetual motion machine engineer. Obviously infinite growth will fail eventually. It doesn't need intervention and it's not an actual problem or one that can be solved. Every time you pop open a beer or uncork a wine bottle you're observing infinite growth solving itself. We are far and away from the resource limits of the earth. Distribution, okay, sure, but it's not like we aren't good at distributing things. It can be done, but doesn't have anything to do with computation, at least not before the resources themselves and then the resources to distribute those resources can be procured ina way that everyone else agrees with you about. THAT is the historic and material problem you're not seeing, and YOU are part of the problem. Good luck with that. Better to go spend your time on something else. You're not going to solve these problems or convince anyone that can. Now THAT is some historical materialist realism for you. Grow up bud.
@@subcitizen2012 I never said infinite growth. I said solve scarcity. We are actually close to being able to produce energy & matter from the vacuum. Do your googles on that. I also said we need to solve the “computation problem” this too is almost solved with quantum computing & AI (I don’t think you need to google that). Finally, I said we need to solve pedagogy. We have started to implement more long tail problem solving type learning environments. I think if we integrate IEP’s with that, we get closer to more humans actual using their intellectual potential. The solutions are out there, but you clearly seem to be exemplifying #CapitalistRealism in that you can’t even imagine a different future. But I hope this short explanation help open your mind a bit. Have a great day.
You need to look into narrative. There are only a few stories. Also, the way that ideas evolve is by recycling and reworking them over and over and over. It gives us theatre, literature, music. Mark is off the mark here - we need to resurrect and reuse and refashion the past. The real problem is rooted in capitalism - it's copyright law. A protection racket to maximize profits from Mickey Mouse.
Pointing to the derivativeness of art as evidence of living in some postmodern paradise/dystopia I think really ignores the history of art. It has always been derivative, and derivative art has always been popular. To cite one of the examples of popular video games being safe rehashings of older titles completely ignores the passion projects pushing the boundaries of the art form, some that have become wildly popular, and they in turn go on to inspire a new generation of variations. This is how art and ideas work, and I'm skeptical that it has much to do with postmodernism or capitalist realism.
It's funny to hear anyone use capitalism in an attempt to promote socialism. Example, entertainers like TS sell "nostalgia" because people are willing to pay money for it and entertainers aren't, for the most part, in the business for charity but, rather, to make money. It's a purely capitalistic endeavor. Do you ever find it odd that the only socialist nations that prosper are those who trade with capitalistic nations? Fact is, socialism can't work without capitalism propping it up. That's "capitalistic realism".
I don't think it's the least bit helpful to discuss how to form new ideas of the future in the 21st century by constantly referring back to Capitalism and Communism, which are ideas of the 19th century (rehashed ever since, as if that dualism provides a complete description of the possible space of human existence) going back to the 18th century - if you read Adam Smith, who is the root of both. You can talk about 21st century society in terms of people wanting power, wanting stability and all those other things. There is no need to call them capitalists - as it turns out, there were stupidly rich and corrupt people all over the communist and socialist world as well and for the same reasons. There is no need to think of the world as being either left or right or disinterested in politics. This is just a constant repeat of 18th century French Revolution politics.
Kirkpatrick Sale addresses that pretty well, right? I think what is at play is that we have a modern problem, and try to solve it with a modern solution. We are not yet postmodern. According to Latour, we've never even been modern
@@andrewbowen2837 Not really. The name "asset communism" gives it away. It is just yet another remix of things that have already been done since at least the 19th century, which is certainly not a solution to the problem of a society being unable to imagine a new future for society (or bring such ideas to public attention). This would require new ideas that are as new as communism was in the 19th century, but certainly not the idea of communism itself - which has been proven by experience to not work in practice with real people, just like neo-liberalism.
You realize the entire basis of modern capitalist societies is ideas from 500 years ago? Culture takes a long time to evolve. Also there is a meaningful difference between the terms you’re angry at. I think you could do with actually reading the ideas of Marx.
It is SO funny that either Mark Fisher or the narrator (I suspect both) when discussing nostalgy as a symptom of our miserable and inhumane post-modernity don't even notice how nostalgic they themselves sound - "there were times when the grass was greener and you knew for sure which style of music you needed to listen to to be considered modern for the current decade" lol.
I am a historical materialist, so I think the reason the future has not come to be is because we haven’t solved the following problems; scarcity, computational, pedagogy. We have to solve the material scarcity to break capitalism. We have to solve computation to account for & map the whole planet’s resources & plan their distribution. Lastly (or firstly), we need to solve the way we learn & apply knowledge to solving the other problems. Once these problems are solved, the reasons for conflict would be eliminated & mass consciousness can elevate. “Since 1619, we been post apocalyptic Runaway slaves chased by Bladerunners Domestic terrorism beyond ThunderDome Can’t have star trek Or flying cars running on water Pulled from they sky With drug wars, But not Star Wars goin on Our TOP engineers gettin high Or getting shot in a psyop I mean industrial espionage I mean patent pending Never ending Capitalist Realism They Bend our light By the prism Known as prison” (excerpt from “Long Live The King” by @thelosopher)
These points are so internally inconsistent. What am I missing? So we dont have a unified culture of art because its constantly new stuff, but we also cant break away from the old culture because we keep rebooting old stuff? To think that references to earlier culture being dominant is exclusive to our time? How many hundreds of years have we been playing Bach's Toccota and Fugue? How many references to classical music were being used in the 1970 rock (hint: a lot). What era was the western movie big? What, they couldnt move past the 1890s culture? Laurence of Arabia was a book before it was a movie! What stagnation that they had to rehash the same story! The Anead is just a copy of the Illiad! Why are there so many greek and roman subjects in Romantic Era paintings? The culture had obviously stagnated! The mulsims philosophers were all just remixing Aristotilian and Platonist philosophy, which was just a response to the Eliatics, Miletians, and Pythagoreans. Why was Shelly writing Prometheus Unbound, a fanfic-sequal to an Ancient Greek play? This isn't an aspect of culture under capitalism. This is an aspect of CULTURE. Having a quote from hamlet show up in Star Trek is no more or less cultural recycling than a rap artist today referencing RUN DMC. IN FACT, if anything, the modern artistic culture is DISTICNTLY un-capitalist with the introduction of sharing art via the internet. Now noone needs an art degree and connections at a famous gallery to become an artist. No one needs the mega media corporations to agree to play their songs on the radio. No one needs a Hollywood Studio to make a film. You just need Instagram, Spotify, and TH-cam respectively. The disunity you talk about is people being free to explore whatever they want outside of the corporate stranglehold on culture.
31:23 Greed isnt the natrual instinct and desire of people; self interest is. The left conflates these two to make this point. That way they can say "look at all the people being kind and working together" without having to acknowledge that they are incentivized to be kind and work together because it naturally benifits them to do so. De Tocqueville wrote about this, calling it "Enlightened Self Interest".
The biggest sign that we're stuck in capitalism and unable to imagine something else, in my mind, is how we keep coming up with new kinds of jobs as old ones get replaced by automation and AI. We really could advance into the future if we wanted to. But we insist on the idea that everyone has to work and make money. Even though that means coming up with new jobs that there previously was no demand for. This is going to be a bigger problem as the world ages and fewer people are born. It will simply be impossible to to create new jobs, as there wont be enough people to work in the old jobs. And the solution is obvious to me. We have to stop coming up with new jobs. Instead we should embrace the idea that not everyone needs to work. Let the machines do the work, and we can focus on other things. Then maybe we'll be able to move on from capitalism.
24 year old from Michigan. I have 15 aunts and uncles and 50 plus first cousins. I’ve always been intrigued in anthropology and philosophy. You make me hopeful. I was born at the beginning of the social media push. Sometimes I feel like I’m in a black mirror episode. Your episodes bring me back to sanity.
Excited to check this out!
Yes brother. Great episode. Been reading Mark Fisher for years and so good to see him filter up into the social consciousness.
Well over a decade ago, I read Lyotard's famous essay (1979) and I mean; line-by-line, word-by-word.
That slim volume was ravaged by the time I was forced to let it go.
I am thankful for the translators of various kind.
Allegedly, even Socrates, near the end or at sometime prior, entertained the notion of creating music were he not otherwise occupied by a life of philosophy-- _The unexamined Life is not worth living_
Pichi-Avo are a team of internationally known street artists that only recently caught my eye and like Banksy, their (respective) work is not intended to last but I do like their incorporation of otherwise well-known classical statues.
I want Beauty in my life. Abstract or not; when I can appreciate _it_ -- it affects my entire being and I want more of that.
Great reading, West.
Thank you--Always beautiful around here.
Rest. Be Well.
--from the Continental drift, or, the delirious denizen I thank you, again.
Your online work has proven good for my mental health and that is no lie.
What you do, matters.
What an incredible episode. Thank you.
I'm honestly tired for seeking authenticity talks and human spirit in people. I cant even blame the people, this era is creating nothing but pragmatic absurdists, nobody wanna think or try to do anything out of what works best, only longing for the past. follow what everyone likes and what trends and basically whatever gets you most socially accepted, I'm very worried about what future would look like now. thank you for making this Stephen it really help me feel less alone out here.
Dying for the pt 2, your last episode is one of the absolute best intros to contemporary philosophy
I LOVE YOU STEVEN WEST! Thank you for making philosophy accessible to us all. This episode on Mark Fisher reminds me of David Graeber’s piece ‘On flying cars and the declining rate of profit’. Would love to hear you cover some of Graeber’s work in future. I think it ties well with your current theme, possibility of life in capitalist ruins 🫶🔥
What if you held a protest and everyone came, Chapter 2 of Capitalist Realism is still among my favorite reads ever. Fisher was scolded when he was alive, but I'm glad to see someone like you do justice to his work and the beautiful ideas his mind had.
Mark Fisher for the win ! love it.
Thank you, Steven. I've been listening to your podcast every day on my way to work. Even when I don't agree with the information presented, you convey the ideas in a way that encourages me-and, I believe, everyone-to reflect on them, question our own beliefs, and relate the concepts to develop our own understanding.
This episode is no different. While listening to it, I encountered ideas from the author with which I disagree. However, your interpretation of complex concepts in a simplified format was very helpful, especially since I haven't read Mark Fisher myself.
One could argue that Mark Fisher also falls into the trap of the capitalist idea of infinite growth: resources are finite, and it’s impossible for all humans to continuously pursue infinite growth and produce endless goods, services, and ideas:
One of the beauties of our time is our tolerance of various cultural ideologies, and not only tolerance for their difference, but also tolerance for the time they may need to develop to their potential at their own pace.
Western culture has reached a point where basic necessities are largely met. Therefore, it is not essential to pursue exponential growth, as championed by capitalist ideology. Instead, we can slowly improve upon what is already great in our culture while waiting for the rest of the world to develop. Assisting them as we can, and alowing for them to express their difference. This includes setting boundaries when overreach occurs, as seen with Russia now, or with Germany and Japan in the past.
These developments are not only economic but also artistic and philosophical.
From your presentation, Mark Fisher claims that the search for meaning is of utmost importance for human well-being, asserting that progress is imperative.
I disagree. While I believe that both progress and the search for meaning are inherent human values, I argue that, like other inherent values, they can be controlled or even disregarded. The will for meaning and progress, as discussed by Schopenhauer or Nietzsche, can be overcome by creating new values, as we come to understand their existence and learn how to manipulate and control them for our personal and collective benefit, striving for comfort and reducing suffering in our world-for both humans and other living forms we interact with.
I view the search for meaning and progress as part of a Spinozian/Darwinian evolutionary conatus: there is no inherent meaning or purpose in the universe (at least none that we can recognize), and things continue to exist by some form of chance-driven Darwinian relative causality regardless.
Meaning, purpose, and will are emergent properties of this Spinozian conatus. We perceive them because they have survived thus far. This doesn't make them important per se, but it does make them survivable and likely the basis for much of our human tendency toward progress and creativity.
Thus, I argue that Mark Fisher falls into the ideological trap by supporting his claims on a necessary quest for meaning, progress, and an impossible infinite growth-all of which couriously are also part of the capitalist narrative that Mark Fisher Criticizes.
Personal meaning and purpose is different from the transcendental meaning you're describing. That's more of a religious conception, not a philosophical one.
Progress also isn't exactly just technological or social advancement. In fact, what you described as Neitzchean and Schopenhauerean transcending of progress is usually what philosophers mean by progress. It's stepping out of the frame of our minds and time and expanding human horizons.
I think you need to chill tf out.
@@subcitizen2012 Thank you for your reply.
I understand that writing might not be my strongest talent, and if you've found any transcendental meaning in my words, then I’m probably an even worse writer than I thought! 😄
However, I believe I clearly stated that meaning is merely an emergent quality created by causal relations and sustained through a Darwinian-like process by its ability to maintain those relations.
Additionally, I think there’s a misunderstanding in your interpretation of Nietzschean and Schopenhauerian ideas: both philosophers address meaning as an inherent aspect of human (but not only) existence that needs to be understood for one to better understand oneself and, consequently, live a more fulfilling life.
Sorry, but i do not partake in the dualist ideology, im more of a Spinozian myself: all is nature.
I suggest “Everything is a remix” by Kirby Ferguson, it offered a very interesting counter-perspective to the critique of pastiche defining post-modernism. To me, Mark Fisher’s work pointed in an interesting direction, but I’ve come to believe that critiques of modern conditions are often too simplistic, they often miss out on ways things are better or the same.
Indeed, that's a must see
that makes sense. Was anything cultural ever really new? If so, it almost seems arrogant to think that were the first generations not to make new culture. Sometimes Fisher's thought seems to reflect his own depression too much, though other times it seems to give him insight
@@ChannelMath yes good point, it's something I battle with also
Im so happy youre covering this! Watching it now!
Thanks Stephen, much appreciated!
I am troubled because the content of this video recreates a problem existent within many contemporary critiques of postmodernism. This problem is a desire to present postmodernism as an ideology that creates a community of postmodernists who seek to pursue some type of postmodern goals. To see postmodernism as such separates it from being a description of a period of time. Do we all live in a postmodern world, or do only some of us live postmodern lives. Jameson"s "Postmodernism: or the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism" describes a social situation in which a public is immersed. Capitalism within it creates postmodernism. Postmodernism does not authoritatively create itself. People do not strive to be postmodern. They are plunged into a postmodern existence. The attack on postmodernism as an ideology, as such, is rooted so much in right wing propaganda which connects it with "cultural Marxism" that sees it as a motivated movement filled with a desire to destroy a capitalist world. A description of the postmodern world may be the product of Marxist critical theory, but it sees postmodern outcomes as being the negative consequences of capitalism not the desired results of any leftist ideology.
Nah your wrong
Excellent comment.
Thank you! Many try but fail to understand post-modern philosophy, which might have to do in part because we don't value philosophy and the humanities as much as we care about engineering and business, and then go on to boogie man it anyway. It's a bit like how Socrates was executed for corrupting the youth. That's what they're trying to do with an entire established branch and era of philosophy because they don't want to understand it and are so ideologically fixated that they probably can't.
@@theshireling this guy hasn't read hamlet
Do the majority of us in the world live in a postmodern fashion, even unawares, I think is the question. And I know, I feel, my answer!
Geez, I'm so Glad you make these! Really helps when there's other people interested in these things 👍🙏
Your awesome my friend. Ive listened to all your shows many times and learn something new every time I listen. It would have taken me years of reading to learn what you have shared. The way you approach a subject and explain it is refreshing. You give enough info to explain but leave enough for a person to form a opinion. Many blessings to you and your family, and if your ever in Daytona Beach with your family hit me up. I'm married with five kid's, and I would love to sit down and talk!
Trying to put a new spin on failed revolutions of the past.
I really like this to. It relates to another aesop rock quote.
"Just because you found a lost cause doesn't mean you've found a cause. That means you've found a lost cause."
Steven thank you for all the moments we have, but i feel the urge to apologize to you, i cant yet pay or give money to you, but i promisse you that one day i will be able to thank you all the hours and enlightment your series has give both to me and my GF. keep the great work
New to this channel. I am so thankful for your work.
Cheers! All your work is amazing but the last episodes since the first one about Zizek are brilliant. I feel like you're the Morpheus of our time :)). I'll have to listen to them several times to really understand (to the extent I can). I feel my mind literally having a hard time accepting some things which occurred to me in the past but I kinda pushed them aside. You're leaving quite an extraordinary legacy with your podcast, respect!
Really enjoy your podcast. Timely content for the world we live in. Thanks for sharing.
I have felt for a while that I have lost my grip on time. That the last 25-odd years have kind of blurred together. I attributed it to being personally stuck and to not conscientiously marking the time with the normal rituals (birthdays, christmases, equinoxes, tattoos, marriages, kids, graduations, etc). It seems like at least part of the reason may in fact be what you describe in this episode, and that's disconcerting because it's external to me.
Lovely episode.
Everyone learns by copying.
Imitation is necessary.
No art is original but a continuation of a process started long ago by the first of us.
The idea of remixing and nostalgia is propaganda useful for marketing and selling things and ideas.
There’s more people today and more people with access to technology that allows them to be creative, AND be able to share it with the world. So we notice it more.
Because imitation is necessary for learning anything, all creativity will be a copy. It’s a lot more noticeable today.
Although, I also believe that everyone’s personal take on a thing or a thought can be considered original, regardless that they’re using a language, culture, and technology they didn’t create themselves.
Even this subject, the language, specific phrases, format, and thoughts considered are not original.
Thousands of years ago someone said that there was nothing new under the sun, I’m sure thousands of years before that it was said by another.
We’re saying it today and we’ll say it 2k years from now.
Loved listening to this-thanks for your brilliant work! ❤️
A great episode! Thank you!
Thank you for 2 really thought provoking episodes. Only just come across your channel and it is some feat to talk solo on philosophical ideas for 40 mins without eliciting a single yawn! As a child of the late 50's this critique makes a lot of sense and I would have to confess to feeling like a post-modernist although I would never have considered myself so even if I had understood the term previously.
Having read and listened to a lot of viewpoints over the last couple of years in particular I have concluded that there are some basic values that are non-negotiable for any society to function on a long term basis. I am tolerant of other views as trying to bludgeon, reason or just cajole others to your own point of view rarely works. I probably always had an idea of what I thought was a 'decent' human being so perhaps I was never really a post-modernist. Even in my ignorance I never liked the term!
Mark Fisher's view as you explain it is quite compelling but I don't see it as stable state. The dynamics of neoliberalism mean that at some point it will no longer be possible to maintain the realism as more and more people are excluded from 'getting by.' There are ideas of how to restructure society and I am particularly drawn to those which recognise the complexity of human interaction (Hayek got that right!) and make space for that complexity within a framework of agreed values. Sadly, I suspect it will be conflict rather psychedelics that bring about change which will militate against a more consensual outcome.
Haunted not just by the past but by the futures which were supposed to come about.
Aesop Rock has a whole album written about this called Integrated tech solutions.
He also has a really great quote,
"The same alleys we used to imagine Babylon
feel like abandoned malls overgrown
with spanish moss Commotion froze in time with no sign
Of your lamb of god it's a land of the lost
Scrambling for canned applause."
I feel this puts a good spin on your points about nostalgia and the lost future.
This was an amazing episode.
Just like in other genres of the humanities, when criticism became more prevalent than creative works, the downward slide began. A copy of a copy of a copy is so much easier to produce than anything original.
I'm only 30 minutes in and I've already heard a whole suite of discussions I've had with my son in the last 2 years. A bit stunned to find so many common beliefs in one place. Maybe I'm not going crazy after all.
In Underground, the Jam have the lyrics, "The public wants what the public gets..." - in a chicken and egg scenario, it may seem that the public are driving the demand for nostalgia. I would conversely speculate on whether it is simply big business taking less and less risks by leaning on what has already got a proven track-record - the public can't buy it if the market won't make it. Reciprocally, savvy mercenary artists can see which way the wind is blowing and they'll make their art accordingly. I guess what will likely happen, as is happening with the spate of Super hero movies is that folks will eventually get sick of them and find something more interesting to watch (I'd refute the idea that we simply haven't the imagination anymore, perhaps we need the imagination to search out the different?) - and then the mainstream will plod after the next trend.
Everyone forgets that new art and ideas depend on new technologies. The Fender guitar makes rock and roll possible, the synthesizer makes Prog Rock possible; smaller portable synthesizers and drum machines make post punk/new wave possible. The invention of the camera makes movies possible and new achievements in sound make talkies possible. We simply haven't created any new technologies that lend themselves to mass movements in art and music--we've just been perfecting old technologies; so we have to go back to modernist "middens" to glean what we can from the past to create anything at all. And AI simply cannot go anywhere forward because it is all dependent on the past; its datamine dates back at 1-2 years before whatever story/graphic/video/soundscape it purports to "invent".
I think that only strengthens the argument - there aren't any meaningful new innovations.
IMO, the interesting thing about the evolution of popular music is the trends in harmonic structure over the past 100 years.
Thanks for dropping this tonight! 🙏🏽 Listening To It Now 🔥🔥
Excellent thoughts. My mind is spinning while i say goodbye to the Jetsons.
Great video, by the way!🙂
Damn you do a great job articulating Fisher. I am studying him and this helps.
My entire algorithim has been revolving around Mark Fisher past few months for some reason
Mine hasn't but capitalist realism remains so relevant to our time that I can't help but think about it at least once a month.
That and his vampire castle concept live rent free in my head.
Lucky you
My algorithm is alotta soccer shorts … glad to get this video for a break
BRILLIANT !! Psychedelic Socialist, Acid Communist, Capitalist Realist - such a crazy mixed up world we are living in !! By the way LOVE WINS , every time. ☮
Really
“LOVE(say it loud and proud) wins! Every time!” Except when it doesn’t. Love may be our only hope, but who says we must win?
thank you so much, kind sir
This is important!
The way former generations saw the future gave us the present we (apparently) have. It needs to be pointed out that this slow cancellation began to set in place when the internet took off; a culture dominated by the electronic media where everyone is wired together in real time has given us a world of imaginative mediocrity.
I think newer iterations of Star Trek are a great example of capitalist realism. Old Trek imagined a world which was fundamentally different, in which individuals had very different priorities in a very different society. It was also a world in which humans had resolved most of their differences, and learned to live together. In new Trek, the possibility of change is entirely forgotten about - some people even say it is "more realistic", which is a telling phrase. Even if newer shows pay some lip service to the economics of the future being different, the actual results of that society still appear in may ways to be identical to a capitalist society (albeit a more futuristic and gentler one).
It's a matter of record that the TNG writers struggled with Rodenberry's vision of a postcapitalist future, but at least they managed to portray it to some degree. Modern Trek writers seem to be entirely incapable of making the same imaginative leap, even when they have footsteps to follow in. It really is like capitalism has such a hold on their minds, that it is easier to imagine an entire universe of alien races, weird technologies and space battles, than to imagine anything could be fundamentally different in economic, political, or cultural terms.
As an Israeli 24 y/o, I extremely relate to this as I've myself transformed from a post modernist towards these ideas with the war going on.
I think of futura as a font.
Best channel ever
Which 10 books should I read?
Hey Stephen, are we still getting a talk with Zizek?
I believe so, yes. I'll keep you posted when I know.
Do I understand correctly that A.I. Art is the ultimate form of pastiche art?
It's all it can be, since it can't create.
Something missed is how past envisionings of the future has shaped the options for a future society.
Much of the resentment (how does that play into nostalgia) of the past is how their decisions have shaped what's possible now. There are less options, which necessarily constricts how big you can dream (except for possible dystopias, which has been flourishing).
All of this calls for Lao Tse: maybe we are amoral...
I recommend aerobic existentialism: run, walk, run, walk, run, walk. Enact a hunter gatherer consciousness which is what I think it means to be human.
Marx's alienation & amnesia very related maybe. The demographic timebomb is also a big factor, retiring baby boomers ... Aging people become fearful of change, become nostalgic & conservative with small c become "C" with just a little nudge from capital. The error of postmodernism is its saying " the "truth is there is no truth" which of course is paradoxical at best, its value is seriously questioning...everything & especially "who's" truth, but is not so good at answers, metamodernism ..this is the way.
Damian Walters is doing some great essays / podcasts on these issues on Science Fiction with Damien Walter especially on Frank Herbert's Dune & his postmodern critique.
The human spirit has the juice to see through the fog of capitalist realism & all the nostalgic reflections of reflections - especially when reality comes a knocking. Turns out you cant keep externalising costs for infinite growth in a finite world, without self terminating, relative values cant successfully argue with climate change. Hence why the right tends to deny it, as its a limiting factor to doing what the hell they want.
Capitalism as "human nature" is very deliberately selective emphasis on one part of human nature & specifically the most pathological bits... to justify the pathology of power as its manifested in worldly affairs.
What about love, inspiration, self sacrifice thats occurred over history, multi generational projects { cathedrals, ....} sure CR can spin capitals role in those things but not without losing explainatory power.
I did enjoy this one. Immensely. I'm grateful for the work you do.
the whole reason is it feels like music, movies, and video games etc have become so stagnant is because they have been turned into commodities, where the consumers expect the product to remain consistent, imagine if Taylor swift was to all of a sudden start singing heavy metal music, her fanbase would be not to happy
nice !
This episode 👌🏼
I like this episode
Time is blurry for me because my ADHD gets in the way of my ability to form memories 😅 Names are difficult for me.
There's plenty of new futures in sci-fi and other fiction, and these new ideas sometimes even make it to the screen.
But what if the future just doesn't change and that's normal? We had the same future for millennia, up until a few hundred years ago. Then we got the optimistic modern conception of the future, which was supposedly mortally wounded in WW1, eventually dying in the 60s, when the future got darker. But the modern conception of the future still exists, even if it's now "campy".
Why should it be that the future changes in the popular mind? Is it really 'cancelled' just because we never get there?
Expectations of the future and then disappointment 😂
let’s do this all over again and again.
You can laugh at it if you see how silly we are.
I’ve just ordered three packets of expectation from Amazon.
So I’m looking forward to my disappointment with glee.
I'm an experienced industrial controls engineer, I have the technical talent to help anyone build a small scale automation to reduce their overhead. for that to work, it needs an interested community.
Becuase that automation and its maintenance only makes sense when it has a significant output, far more than a house. an entire restaurant.
anyways, if you want to talk about it. hit me up.
3:29 You are still a brain, no moral system can by sheer virtue of its axioms or veracity of its arguments alone, guarantee to work on any prefrontal cortex, any amygdala irrespective of its physical condition at any moment in time.
For instance, I admire Sam Harris' focus on well being (I ignore his is-ought solution ), I have a deterministic view of the world and see consciousness as weakly emergent, an epi-phenomena. When I am at my best, at my healthiest I don't think anyone should be subjected to the criminal justice system, my view demands it's total abolishment in favor of a humane quarantine model (Sapolsky) and yet if some random prick wielding a machete confronts me on the street and threatens my life or I even feel my life is under threat, I will very likely want that person arrested immediately for my own safety. Yet if I were in court, had some rest, food, a little entertainment and so on I would almost certainly ask for charges to be dropped, lessened or for them to be sent to a psychiatric ward.
That is the reality of holding the moral positions that I do while having an enlarged amygdala from CPTSD and a frayed PFC from living in poverty and trying to maintain a low wage job and as much of a normal life as I can muster while also having ASD.
I may disagree with moral relativists but they still have brains, they will act as their history and gene sensitivity determine they do.
Don't forget hormones and moods. We get into some real Heideggerian stuff there
I'm not sure what philosophy I espouse. What I do see, is that "capitalist realism" is what it is because of the power structures into which our lives are embedded. It serves the interests of the powerful for me to think this is the best of all possible worlds, a term I think I read in Candide by Voltaire, who put the words in the mouth of Pangloss. Our Pangloss are the media and the people that absorb their messaging.
There's no need to espouse philosophy. Philosophy is usually just an exploration of what is. So, espouse that.
@@subcitizen2012 Fair enough. My point was in the rest of the message, though :)
The thing about Voltaire is that he was a satirist. He took that saying from elsewhere, and turned it on its head. Although it is the best of all possible worlds, it is simultaneously the worst of all possible worlds
@@andrewbowen2837 Indeed Voltaire was a satirist. He took that saying from Leibniz, because it was a self-serving one: "this is the best of all possible worlds" is an apology of the powers that be.
@@mbottambotta that makes sense
After only listening to the last two episodes of your cast w/ Fisher, that was thrust across my TH-cam feed unbidden, but I believe I've previously subscribed to your podcast years ago but have no recollection of ever really listening to it; current Austrian economist Saifedean Ammous's work around monetary policy and economics would seem to be an explanation and counterpoint to the condition that your outlining with Fisher.
It's interesting that you use the 70's as a high point of diverse popular musical expression, as that was when Bretton Woods collapsed, and the current system embarked...yes I was a very young listener starting exactly in 1970 with my first AM radio...
"and because they can't go forwards to the future, they go backwards towards nostalgia." This isn't the only other option. Nihilism can deeply ground you in the present moment, not the past or the future. And I see a beautiful world where non-judgment (views of how things ought to be), ground us deeply in the present with "what is." All ethical claims are false. This is the root of non-judgment, yes, universalizing difference until everything is seen as one-of-a-kind (without comparison or judgment against an ideal category). Such a world, where everyone "lives in the present" due to a lack of purpose, sounds like the real meaning of paradise and peace to me.
Five to One by the Doors
Referring to capitalism like it's a thing is a source of a lot of unclear thinking There's Kleptocratic capitalism that's developed in the United States and recent decades and on the other hand there's social democratic capitalism that promotes the common good. Socialism can also take very diverse forms
Imagine the nostalgia that gen alpha will feel in 10, 20 years. _"Remember that weird toilet head thing that everyone was raving about? Good times!"_
When brain rot becomes nostalgia, our species will be doomed.
A lot of new cultural items age pretty bad, they don't left imprint after few years
Current culture stuck in present and lost in present, while culture from past (like 20 century) don't have this problem
So truly understanding "old" culture could be even more relevant for todays people
Stephen West: Consider adding a "Thanks" button to your videos so we can put a couple of bucks in the tip jar.
There are kids scooping ice cream with a tip jar on the counter. I think you're adding much more value. You should have a tip jar, too. Figure out how to monetize and get that "Thanks" button up there!
"There's no clear boundary where something becomes old, there's constant recycling"
Yeah that's totally because of capitalism. The renaissance recycling Greeks, people adapting classics for theatre plays, the same motives and characters repeating again and again in folk tales and epic songs, all of those didn't happen...
Has anyone here read Metamodernism: The Future of Theory (2021) by Jason Josephson Storm?
10/10 recomendation for anyone unfamiliar with his work who is interested in potential paths forward from this Postmodern condition we find ourselves in!
Honestly, i bet his work word make for a Reality good episode that would tie in nicely to where this series is at right now, and I would love to hear your thoughts on it.
Needs more Mises.
A method of waking people up to their [the] consciousness? That's easy! Nationwide psilocybin centres
OH SHIT HE JUST WENT THERE I DIDNT EVEN KNOW
I will admit of the value moral relativism only insofar as we are trying to philosophize. Outside of philosophizing, moral relativism is a nihilism, me thinks.
At its base, it is nihilism. If everything is valid and equal, at bottom, that means there is nothing that is the standard, nothing objective, nothing true. But that's not necessarily a bad thing
einstein had a secret theory called _special relativity part deux_
it states that nature gave people the ability to kill eachother because "some people just gotta die"
I go to a local supermarket. It’s part of a chain. That chain is owned by a conglomerate in the Netherlands which owns chains on three continents. Part of every dollar spent in the store flows to the top. It’s not paranoia to say the one-tenth of one percent have their own agenda and are willing to use fair means and foul to achieve them. Adam Smith, for one, believed it. Nor is it fantasy to say that innovative technologies are stolen and suppressed.
Machiavelli was describing a way that some people are.
I think postmodernism has a has a foundation strangly laid on Malthusianist ground.
❤❤
Should the integrity of a philosopher’s works be diminished if they commit suicide?
A friend once told me the law is the codified consensus of the people. How can a consensus be achieved if we don't talk to each other? Ethics is similar to this IMHO. Regarding nostalgia, can one be nostalgic about an era one never originally experienced first hand? Artforms such as the theatre couldn't exist without some form of reference to the past. That's not nostalgia, that's cultural development. I think the idea of obsolecence is an invention of only the last few decades, driven by financial interests.
I also think that people's own worldviews are being deliberately undermined. I say disallow that and just pursue the stuff you like, regardless of which era they're 'from'. Naratives are forged by experience. Go out and get some for yourself.
Isn't expecting new culture to consume every decade something that is very new in human history? Perhaps going back to classics is the more natural and better state for humans rather than craving new stuff to consuuum
Bro HUGE [citation needed] on “music hasn’t changed much in the last 24 years”!!! That was a hilariously obvious oversight for such a usually rigorous scholar, I laughed out loud. Fun fact: basically everyone is way more emotionally involved (and laudatory of the innovation within) the music that they listened to as a teenager.
E: omg and then you use Eminem’s comeback as an example?? That’s like using don quixote to point out how metatextual novels are - nah, that’s just the literal theme of that specific work!
How does the Chinese government appeal to you?
I remember the past. You could just ask me.
my favorite matrix movie is 4
I am a historical materialist, so I think the reason the future has not come to be is because we haven’t solved the following problems; scarcity, computational, pedagogy. We have to solve the material scarcity to break capitalism. We have to solve computation to account for & map the whole planet’s resources & plan their distribution. Lastly (or firstly), we need to solve the way we learn & apply knowledge to solving the other problems. Once these problems are solved, mass consciousness will be elevated, so the reasons for conflict would be eliminated.
I'm a historical materialist too. You need to bring it in, bud, because you are out there. Better to find actual problems with actual solutions you can actually find. Otherwise you're sort of like a perpetual motion machine engineer. Obviously infinite growth will fail eventually. It doesn't need intervention and it's not an actual problem or one that can be solved. Every time you pop open a beer or uncork a wine bottle you're observing infinite growth solving itself. We are far and away from the resource limits of the earth. Distribution, okay, sure, but it's not like we aren't good at distributing things. It can be done, but doesn't have anything to do with computation, at least not before the resources themselves and then the resources to distribute those resources can be procured ina way that everyone else agrees with you about. THAT is the historic and material problem you're not seeing, and YOU are part of the problem. Good luck with that. Better to go spend your time on something else. You're not going to solve these problems or convince anyone that can. Now THAT is some historical materialist realism for you. Grow up bud.
@@subcitizen2012 I never said infinite growth. I said solve scarcity. We are actually close to being able to produce energy & matter from the vacuum. Do your googles on that. I also said we need to solve the “computation problem” this too is almost solved with quantum computing & AI (I don’t think you need to google that). Finally, I said we need to solve pedagogy. We have started to implement more long tail problem solving type learning environments. I think if we integrate IEP’s with that, we get closer to more humans actual using their intellectual potential. The solutions are out there, but you clearly seem to be exemplifying #CapitalistRealism in that you can’t even imagine a different future. But I hope this short explanation help open your mind a bit. Have a great day.
Grato
You need to look into narrative. There are only a few stories.
Also, the way that ideas evolve is by recycling and reworking them over and over and over. It gives us theatre, literature, music. Mark is off the mark here - we need to resurrect and reuse and refashion the past. The real problem is rooted in capitalism - it's copyright law. A protection racket to maximize profits from Mickey Mouse.
Pointing to the derivativeness of art as evidence of living in some postmodern paradise/dystopia I think really ignores the history of art. It has always been derivative, and derivative art has always been popular. To cite one of the examples of popular video games being safe rehashings of older titles completely ignores the passion projects pushing the boundaries of the art form, some that have become wildly popular, and they in turn go on to inspire a new generation of variations. This is how art and ideas work, and I'm skeptical that it has much to do with postmodernism or capitalist realism.
The unbiased bear of fossil fuel supply.
It's funny to hear anyone use capitalism in an attempt to promote socialism. Example, entertainers like TS sell "nostalgia" because people are willing to pay money for it and entertainers aren't, for the most part, in the business for charity but, rather, to make money. It's a purely capitalistic endeavor.
Do you ever find it odd that the only socialist nations that prosper are those who trade with capitalistic nations? Fact is, socialism can't work without capitalism propping it up. That's "capitalistic realism".
Algorithm
ngl i feel like when it come to eg games and clothe i buy old games and old clothing even from before my time cuz everything jus just shit quality now
The future was canceled in 1997
These bastards
Too quiet.
I don't think it's the least bit helpful to discuss how to form new ideas of the future in the 21st century by constantly referring back to Capitalism and Communism, which are ideas of the 19th century (rehashed ever since, as if that dualism provides a complete description of the possible space of human existence) going back to the 18th century - if you read Adam Smith, who is the root of both. You can talk about 21st century society in terms of people wanting power, wanting stability and all those other things. There is no need to call them capitalists - as it turns out, there were stupidly rich and corrupt people all over the communist and socialist world as well and for the same reasons. There is no need to think of the world as being either left or right or disinterested in politics. This is just a constant repeat of 18th century French Revolution politics.
Kirkpatrick Sale addresses that pretty well, right? I think what is at play is that we have a modern problem, and try to solve it with a modern solution. We are not yet postmodern. According to Latour, we've never even been modern
@@andrewbowen2837 Not really. The name "asset communism" gives it away. It is just yet another remix of things that have already been done since at least the 19th century, which is certainly not a solution to the problem of a society being unable to imagine a new future for society (or bring such ideas to public attention). This would require new ideas that are as new as communism was in the 19th century, but certainly not the idea of communism itself - which has been proven by experience to not work in practice with real people, just like neo-liberalism.
@@frankwunderlich-pfeiffer9081 did you read past my first sentence?
You realize the entire basis of modern capitalist societies is ideas from 500 years ago? Culture takes a long time to evolve. Also there is a meaningful difference between the terms you’re angry at. I think you could do with actually reading the ideas of Marx.
It is SO funny that either Mark Fisher or the narrator (I suspect both) when discussing nostalgy as a symptom of our miserable and inhumane post-modernity don't even notice how nostalgic they themselves sound - "there were times when the grass was greener and you knew for sure which style of music you needed to listen to to be considered modern for the current decade" lol.
I am a historical materialist, so I think the reason the future has not come to be is because we haven’t solved the following problems; scarcity, computational, pedagogy. We have to solve the material scarcity to break capitalism. We have to solve computation to account for & map the whole planet’s resources & plan their distribution. Lastly (or firstly), we need to solve the way we learn & apply knowledge to solving the other problems. Once these problems are solved, the reasons for conflict would be eliminated & mass consciousness can elevate.
“Since 1619, we been post apocalyptic
Runaway slaves chased by Bladerunners
Domestic terrorism beyond ThunderDome
Can’t have star trek
Or flying cars running on water
Pulled from they sky
With drug wars,
But not Star Wars goin on
Our TOP engineers gettin high
Or getting shot in a psyop
I mean industrial espionage
I mean patent pending
Never ending
Capitalist
Realism
They Bend our light
By the prism
Known as prison”
(excerpt from “Long Live The King” by @thelosopher)
Yeah.
These points are so internally inconsistent. What am I missing?
So we dont have a unified culture of art because its constantly new stuff, but we also cant break away from the old culture because we keep rebooting old stuff?
To think that references to earlier culture being dominant is exclusive to our time? How many hundreds of years have we been playing Bach's Toccota and Fugue? How many references to classical music were being used in the 1970 rock (hint: a lot). What era was the western movie big? What, they couldnt move past the 1890s culture?
Laurence of Arabia was a book before it was a movie! What stagnation that they had to rehash the same story! The Anead is just a copy of the Illiad! Why are there so many greek and roman subjects in Romantic Era paintings? The culture had obviously stagnated! The mulsims philosophers were all just remixing Aristotilian and Platonist philosophy, which was just a response to the Eliatics, Miletians, and Pythagoreans. Why was Shelly writing Prometheus Unbound, a fanfic-sequal to an Ancient Greek play?
This isn't an aspect of culture under capitalism. This is an aspect of CULTURE. Having a quote from hamlet show up in Star Trek is no more or less cultural recycling than a rap artist today referencing RUN DMC.
IN FACT, if anything, the modern artistic culture is DISTICNTLY un-capitalist with the introduction of sharing art via the internet. Now noone needs an art degree and connections at a famous gallery to become an artist. No one needs the mega media corporations to agree to play their songs on the radio. No one needs a Hollywood Studio to make a film. You just need Instagram, Spotify, and TH-cam respectively. The disunity you talk about is people being free to explore whatever they want outside of the corporate stranglehold on culture.
25:30 sounds like someone hasnt watched Black Mirror. Or The Expanse. Or Interstellar?
31:23 Greed isnt the natrual instinct and desire of people; self interest is. The left conflates these two to make this point. That way they can say "look at all the people being kind and working together" without having to acknowledge that they are incentivized to be kind and work together because it naturally benifits them to do so. De Tocqueville wrote about this, calling it "Enlightened Self Interest".
32:30 Cash is not king in an inflationary fiat currency system. Otherwise we would be all better off using dollars from Zimbabue. Just sayin
The biggest sign that we're stuck in capitalism and unable to imagine something else, in my mind, is how we keep coming up with new kinds of jobs as old ones get replaced by automation and AI. We really could advance into the future if we wanted to. But we insist on the idea that everyone has to work and make money. Even though that means coming up with new jobs that there previously was no demand for. This is going to be a bigger problem as the world ages and fewer people are born. It will simply be impossible to to create new jobs, as there wont be enough people to work in the old jobs. And the solution is obvious to me. We have to stop coming up with new jobs. Instead we should embrace the idea that not everyone needs to work. Let the machines do the work, and we can focus on other things. Then maybe we'll be able to move on from capitalism.