social structure critique
The Zeitgeist movement believes that modern society has not achieved the goal of "meeting the survival needs of all". Survival needs include not only food, water, comfortable housing and clean air to live on; they also include a good social environment and relationships between people. The abnormal distribution of resources caused by the financial-market system in modern society can no longer provide all human beings with equal and rich material treatment. And the sense of competition and the given ideology of class differences it advocates no longer have any characteristics of a healthy social environment. Among them, people were raised as insecure social atoms, taught to be wary of others and compete with others in society, and through one examination system after another, groups of people were engraved into the unequal society of the whole society. structure. It's a cliché that people work hard just to bring fresh blood to a whole sick economy: Workers just survive by working, and they don't work for a better life for themselves, but for a better life for themselves. Consortiums and billionaires have added to the overflowing fortune castle. In modern society, "workers" no longer appear only in factories, but in workplaces, shopping malls, and even officialdom and all social positions. Our work does not contribute anything to society other than aggravating "structural violence". No job seeks to remove inequalities in the social structure (we are simply taking on the inequalities of the social structure) and pushes human beings to live in a less stressful, less violent phase, because, logically, all jobs are themselves The product of the whole unequal society, and therefore cannot be opposed to the foundations upon which it was founded.
While the critique of social structure is nothing new, the left's critical tradition has always done the job, but it still seems to be necessary for most social theory.
Metaphysics in Contemporary Society: An Analysis of "Human Nature"
The Zeitgeist movement believes that the reason for the establishment of such a high-handed, problematic and unequal society lies in people's narrowly defined and distorted values of human nature. This narrow understanding of human nature holds that, from ancient times to the present, all "human nature" factors seem to have accounted for the vast majority of human progress. Therefore, as an indispensable "human nature", it is the moral skeleton of the entire social system. People seem to think that human nature is fixed and instinct is unchanged, because the narrow life instinct creates a competitive and unequal environment. Society is also irreversible. The Zeitgeist movement denied this negative commitment to human nature in the social composition, criticizing it as an ignorant value, and the Zeitgeist movement's own position on human nature was behaviorist. Elaboration is necessary here. This behaviorism holds that human beings do not have an absolute human nature that plays a decision-making role. On the contrary, it is precisely the specific social environment that determines human beings' understanding of human nature. Here, we return to Marx's materialist view of history, and under the interpretation of behaviorism, we can see more clearly: an inherent understanding of human nature is instead a social ideology, which is the curing agent of the entire social structure ( "Human nature is like that", "It's just like that, and you can't change it"). This blind faith in a fixed, eternal human nature creates an unequal society. Class is no longer an acquired form, but a congenital form. In the language of Marxism, this blind faith corresponds to the "idealist view of history". However, what needs to be criticized is that idealism does not essentially assume a "constant" in moral belief, and materialism does not essentially assume the position of "variables", the meanings they produce in possible contexts Often the opposite is true, for example: idealism claims that the knowledge of the world changes with the knowledge of consciousness, materialism claims that consciousness does not have this privilege, but the change of matter produces this effect. Then, it can be said that the universalism assumed by matter here is not different from the ideal universalism, both of which are at the top of determinism. When materialism becomes the barrier of metaphysics, idealism can also turn the page and criticize the ontological rigidity of materialism in turn, claiming that materialism is a law and mechanism, and itself is a variable and a function. In this sense, the materialist-idealistic binary game can be endless, and the materialist-idealistic Marxist language is imprecise. The key assertion of this behaviorism is that any ism, as long as it is a universalist concept, does not necessarily contain an ontological commitment to itself, on the contrary, an ontological commitment only It is a potential open space, and it is only possible to establish a new relationship with it. Besides, it cannot have an irreversible ontology part. The innate rhetoric is vague and metaphysical, and we can see subtle outlines from it, but if it is implemented on concrete things, it is already affected by new relationships. Vulgar biological understanding is one example. People's narrow understanding of genes claims that all human behavior has been programmed into the DNA sequence, and some innate elements occupy irreversible positions. And behaviorism will say that the reason why it can speak the innate part is that it has been affected by our behavior, this kind of parallel-movement does not appear in our speech all the time, so innate determinism must be it's wrong. Genes contain only potential possibilities, and what triggers genetic determinism can only be the relationship to it, not the gene itself. The behaviorist argument claims that the basic constitution of human beings is only the sum of a series of relations, this series of relations is malleable and changeable, and there is no reason for us to continue to believe in human nature, because human nature, as an inert substance of a series of relations, is fundamentally Reactionary, we should aim to change the set of social relationships that make up narrow humanity and distorted values.
The social construction influenced by "human nature"
Furthermore, the Zeitgeist movement pointed out the market economy theory and the backward social relations constructed on the basis of "human nature". This includes a critique of Adam Smith, who, in The Wealth of Nations, declared that there was a "race of labour", as we so easily hear in everyday life: "They were born to be coolies. ." The socialization code of racism is undoubtedly feudal, backward, and absurd in the ideology that still exists in society in modern times. The Zeitgeist movement opposes this unequal social construction, criticizes the political economy of the market, and believes that the construction of the market economy is only beneficial to the minority. This racist idea undoubtedly also represents the interests of the elite and the elite. At the expense of the majority to achieve this, there is absolutely no reason for us to hold on to such a society and the values that underpin its functioning. It is worth mentioning that the criticism of the market economy is not uncommon, but the disclosure of the financial and monetary system is not much. Although there is no disclosure of the specific operation mode of the financial and monetary system in this "Spirit of the Times Movement - Moving Forward", it puts forward a more important point: modern capitalism is composed of two parts: the market economic system and the financial and monetary system. Let us not forget the important position of the financial and monetary system in the entire operation of power. To liquidate capitalism, we must not only abolish the market economy, but also destroy the entire financial and monetary system. For the financial and monetary system, in short, the disclosure of what money really is is a relatively lacking part of contemporary academic criticism, and the following popular science film makes a good start:
Irrational Economic System
After the critique at the level of social composition, there is the critique of the resource allocation of the entire economic operation mechanism. The Zeitgeist movement argues that economics as it is today deviates from the very meaning of the word economy. The word economy comes from ancient Greek and means a way of rationally managing and allocating resources. The current economic "bricks" are the accomplices of the powerful and the elite. They have never considered the efficiency, method and humanitarianism of resource allocation. They waste time on the stock market and prices, and use ignorant mathematical models to maintain the operation of the market economy. Poverty and excess are never expected to be eradicated. These economic bricks believe that the measure of human social happiness is only the growth of GDP, and there is no evidence to prove the degree of human social happiness. This utilitarianism is undoubtedly a failure. The film cites a rather ironic example: economic bricks have reason to believe that the increase in medical insurance consumption represents the increase in the happiness of human society, which means that more patients need to appear in the society, and they are caught in the disease-infinite treatment. in cycle. This absurdity arises because of a misplaced theory of demand by economic bricklayers. They believe that the only way to meet demand is to produce more consumer goods and stimulate consumption by all. Here we see demand being shaped abnormally: by producing more goods. To think that poverty can be eradicated through mass production and consumption is undoubtedly putting the cart before the horse, according to the Zeitgeist movement. Chaotic production never takes into account the implementation of basic survival needs, but instead creates commodities without any use value. This is definitely a waste of productivity. The current situation is that there are countless labors lacking the quality of basic subsistence needs to produce goods lacking any basic use value, and the lack of the latter aggravates the lack of the former. We are all familiar with this situation: the alienation of workers. The Zeitgeist movement believes that if production is not designed to fundamentally meet the survival needs of every human being, then it cannot be a necessary structure for the basic functioning of society. It is absurd that the current market-financial system is such a monkey And the necessary structure of the crown can't help but smack your tongue.
Due to the exploitation of irrational consumption in the market, the resources that human beings can use are also facing depletion. The Zeitgeist movement believes that the market does not have a long-term vision, and that it is not so much a sustainable economic system as it is a game of gambling that “get over it and die.” Of course, in the long run, we will never win because the capital we gamble with is our debt to the natural environment. The market economy owes a large amount of "debt" to nature from the very beginning, because it ignores the limitations of the earth's resources and the speed of recycling, and because of its focus on continuous growth and strategies to stimulate consumption, the market economy is incalculable. The speed of mining and consumption, so that the speed of recycling and regeneration is far lower than the speed of human mining and consumption. In this case, the scarcity of resources is undoubtedly a matter of time.
resource-oriented economy
After the critique, the Zeitgeist movement suggested a resource-oriented economy. The Zeitgeist movement believes that human technological progress and social development are extremely disproportionate. Scientific rational thinking has not penetrated into the economic system. In modern times, it is necessary for us to examine the construction of society using a purely scientific perspective. Chief among them is the rational measurement and evaluation of resources and the normalization of basic human needs. First calculate the distribution of resources and the speed of recycling, extract resources within a sustainable development scale, and distribute them to the most efficient production ranks. This production is efficient for two factors: first, it aims to In first and foremost meeting basic food, water, air, and housing, the quality of these basic needs must meet the healthy standards of human life, which will undoubtedly minimize physical or psychological trauma. Physical trauma refers to hunger and disease caused by the lack of basic needs, and psychological trauma refers to the fear, insecurity, and the resulting pressures of life in order to strive for limited resources. The Zeitgeist movement believes that the exclusion of these two types of trauma should be the most basic function of a healthy society. Second, social construction replaced by general mechanized production. In addition to management and design, all production that can meet basic needs is contracted by machines. The Zeitgeist movement pointed out that today's human technology can completely achieve this, whether it is small-scale parts production or large-scale heavy industrial production, and even building, transportation, and transportation should be automated and mechanized. It is a pity that today's technology is also an "irrational technology" driven by the interests of the market. Whether it is the direction of development or the purpose of use, it is not nested into the framework of the entire resource-oriented economy, so it is not Not playing the great role it could have had. The Zeitgeist movement believes that the total replacement of production by mechanical technology is a liberation for human beings, so that human beings have time to use their creativity to accomplish things that machines cannot. The mental activities of human beings are no longer limited to the anxiety of survival. Healthy survival has become the premise of human life rather than a ghost that haunts people. Life is no longer composed of a series of work and consumption, but through the basic production The maintenance of the system and the creative undertakings that grow on it are coherent. The latter is far from unknown for human life. The Zeitgeist movement believes that the removal of a society where humans spend most of their time making a living has undoubtedly liberated human creativity, and it is precisely in this sense that human civilization can usher in real prosperity.
The context of the Zeitgeist movement
Although the resource-oriented economy is still a "rudimentary", this new social model breaks the cage of "the end of history", especially against those who believe that the market economy is the best economic system. idea. This material promotion of the society we live in returns to Marx's naive materialism, which aims to use practical and effective material means to promote human social life. A very important addition is undoubtedly a continuation of Marx's thinking on the mode of production. The resource-oriented economy has opened up a new grand narrative, but this grand narrative may not lead to the succession of social power, but the dissolution and melting of social power. The Zeitgeist movement believes that the basic survival needs of human beings are Unity is indisputable and will not be negated by cultural differences. It seems that all human beings should not refuse this kind of overall planning and distribution of resources. At this point, I think the Zeitgeist movement may want to take a historical progressivist perspective, and they need to argue that human cultures throughout history have evolved and eventually led to a resource-oriented economy. Because we know that an important factor in the establishment of a resource-oriented economy is the popularization of technology, and for the anti-technology crowd, this popularization is undoubtedly fascist. The pursuit of an ancient or tribal way of organizing life requires no technology at all, and most postmodern theories aim at detechnization, the epistemology woven by the fields they create without technical thinking and Life practice is incompatible with epistemology and life practice in a technological context. I think the Zeitgeist movement can justify itself in this sense: if globalization with the spread of technology is irreversible, then we have no reason to think that a nomadic life, a life close to a "symbolic exchange" is possible, Even if it is in the realm of self-consciousness, the environment it relies on is a two-way squeeze of the market economy and the spread of technology. Since the popularization of technology is irreversible and gradually penetrates from large to small, we ignore it more and more so that it is unnecessary to cancel it at the micro level. Why don’t we push it to the extreme and cancel it completely?
Although we have little reversible time left, this does not lead us to bring the social enterprise to a complete end and disappearance. In the postmodern sense, the social enterprise has ceased to exist, but isn't it always performing its own absence? The efforts of postmodern theory at the micro level are effective. Its overall confrontation with the grand narrative eliminates the distribution of power, and the poetic and charming organizational form of knowledge and cognition will become everyone's survival skills in the future. But that doesn't stop us from pushing the grand narrative to its final stages. The pragmatic solutions of the Zeitgeist movement cannot escape the suspicion of technological universalism, but they are good enough as a vanishing technique for grand narratives.
View more about Zeitgeist: Moving Forward reviews
