FS & Praxis

[Jim Rovira]

Bob -- I would ask, though, "a totalitarianism of what?"  I think style is
substance in this case -- at least a part of substance.  The style you describe
means the totalitarianism is not one that revolves around any particular figure
(for example, Bush) -- we don't have a totaliatarianism like Hitler's National
Socialism, in which a single, male subjectivity was imposed upon an entire
population.  Our totalitarianism doesn't care who gets elected, because it
doesn't matter.

We have a totalitarianism of consumerism.  This is an entirely different beast.
It doesn't care if you're a communist, a Marxist, a social critic, a
fundamentalist Christian, or a staunch Republican.  It can turn what you have --
even your social criticism -- into a product sold either to the masses or at
least to a discreet demographic group.  Even critiques of mass culture are now
part of mass culture, part of consumerism -- ever see the movie "The Matrix"?

This is both better and worse than older forms of totalitarianism, in that we're
"free" to think whatever we want . We're simply not free to stop being
consumers.  We can, of course.  It is theoretically possible to buy land and
livestock, grow all your own food and make your own clothing, and refuse to own
a television.

But somehow I don't think most people on this list are going to be running to
join Amish communities any time soon, even if they'd let us.

Jim Rovira

bob scheetz wrote:

> Jim,
>      I think it's universally recognized the potus is a fool.  And that's
> the measure of the contempt the ruling corporate class has for us masses.
> Because of the liberal (laissez faire) nature of the system the style is not
> classic, but the effect is unmistakably totalitarian.
>
> bob