I participated in an interview for Cnet in Second Life. One of the commenters parroted once again the numb-headed conflation of “collectivism” and “collective action.” What’s with these people who make grand pronouncements about political economy, using the same loaded pejoratives about “Marxism” or “Maoism?” — but fail to do elementary homework? I will explain it once again.
I hope this is simple enough:
Collectivism is COERCED, but collective action is VOLUNTARY.
Collectivism is CENTRALLY CONTROLLED, but control of collective action is DISTRIBUTED.
A market — all markets have regulations and honor contracts, and are entered into voluntarily by buyers and sellers — is a form of collective action. Can one of these geniuses please explain to me how a market is “Marxist?”
These critiques insist that it’s all-important to note that the individual is sovereign and mobs are dumb, but again they are looking through the wrong end of the telescope. Again, simplistic logic: Tell Google what commies they are. The Pagerank algorithm is a mob measure — an aggregate of the linking decisions of many people. It works because the decisions are made by individuals who are acting in their self interest, trying to come up with relevant links for their web pages, but it works only because it aggregates those decisions. It isn’t individual versus group — it’s a group made of individuals.
Duh.
Comments
@ 21:10
I often find this to be the case. It is very similar to any term that, in order to really understand the meaning, requires more thought than being fed and believing the strawman. People don’t want to think; in this sense there is an emergent collective action (or lack of depending on perspective) that is dangerous. I often resort to the blank stare when I hear people try to tell me that I’m not an anarchist because I have a driver’s license. Without ruler not being without rule is a hopeless concept to convey to the standard deviation of zero.
@ 05:12
Sorry that I missed the Cnet interview in SL.
This makes me wonder if there might be some way to demonstrate collective action vs. collectivism in Second Life?
Like, two different versions of some kind of relatively simple game that people can participate in. I am sure there’s an easy way to do it.
@ 13:52
While I sympathize with your disgust at the right-wing distortions, I also must point out you don’t have the vocabulary right either. “Collectivism” does not necessarily imply coercion or central control. See the anarcho-collectivist movement for instance.
I don’t know if I approve of the use of “collective action” for market mechanisms and Google’s algorithm. Collective action usually implies a group that has a conscious shared purpose and a conscious means of coordination. Not that I disapprove of market mechanisms and other ways that the actions of atomized individuals get harnessed, but they seem to need a different name.
This has been a message from the Political Vocabulary Authority.
@ 16:29
mtraven, you may well be right that there ought to be a more specific term for activities engaged in by groups or populations who do not have a conscious shared purpose, but who play by the same rules — or instances like Pagerank that rely on the aggregated activities of many individuals. Don’t mistake me for an expert (or a Marxist, sociologist, or neoconservative)! But at least I read Mancur Olson and Elinor Ostrom, which Cato, Lanier, and the SL ninny failed to do.
@ 04:24
Trying to think of a word, “conspiracy” came to mind, in the context of american law (as I undertsand it?) where “the left hand needn’t know what the right hand is doing” for one to exist. However that word has strong, if not exclusively negative connotations.
It also brought to mind the title of the first TV series version of “Ghost in The Shell”, titled “Stand Alone Complexe”… though that is perhaps too dramatic, and also not without complexities. (Not to mention the series seems to be more about marketing/consumer culture in the context of nationionalistic socio-political phenomenon in futuristic Japan, haha.)
I must say tho, I always thought “smartmobs” covered that base quite well, no?
or perhaps… connectivism and unconscious connected action? We don’t aways now that we are connected to something/someone…
eh, I stop now.
@ 13:07
With an appreciation of dialectical materialism “solidarity” is a no-brainer. I mean, it’s entailed … something like enlightened self-interest. If that’s true at all, then the “conflation” is correct.
But your point really is about how 5th column deprecates anything that isn’t zero-sum game.
Terms are tools … weapons, even. It makes perfect sense that those enthrall to psychopaths dull our blades as they f*** our minds.
“Communalism” … “communiatirianism” … you can’t duck the mud they’re flinging.
Jesus was attacked and harangued and hung on a tree; Socrates was insulted and villified and executed by hemlock. No degree of perfectionism will suffice, except to ham-string proper action. “Perfectionism is the enemy of the good.”
I’ve seen 17 varieties of manipulation and exploitation since I was on the bus in ‘68. (14 years old, I was … but that’s a story for another day. Don’t think for a moment it ain’t apt!)
Bottom line there are two modes of being: one is about conquest and coercion … compulsion; the other is about reality testing, where conclusions are always subject to review, i.e. opinions are not basis for absolute truthes.