Den dobbelte fordrejning: begrebet fetichisme i kritikken af den politiske økonomi

Translated title of the contribution: The Double Inversion - The Concept of Fetishism in the Critique of Political Economy

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Karl Marx’s critical analysis of ‘the secret of the fetishism of commodities’ – according to which the universal domination of the commodity form makes social relations appear in the form of relations between things – is today widely regarded as a central element of the critique of political economy. The concept of fetishism was generally neglected until in the 1920’s, and the debates around this concept did not really take off until the 1960’s. Since then, there have essentially been two predominant interpretations of Marx’s concept of fetishism: on the one hand those who regards fetishism as an ideological phenomenon, as something that has to do with the way in which social reality is represented for and in the social agents. On the other hand there are those who insists that fetishism refers to a certain displacement or inversion at the level of social practice itself, and not its ideological representation. In this article, I review these conflicting readings in the light of a close reading of Marx’s use of the term fetish(ism) in all of his writings from the Grundrisse (1857) onwards. I argue that Marx used this term to refer to an ideological phenomenon, and that he was right in doing so. I also point out that this does not entail subscribing to a naïve view of ideology as false consciousness or class manipulation that can be abolished by enlightenment and criticism
Original languageDanish
JournalSlagmark
Issue number77
ISSN0108-8084
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

Inversion
Political Economy
Fetishism
Commodities
1920s
Close Reading
Domination
Karl Marx
Social Relations
Ideology
Manipulation
Social Reality
Consciousness
Fetish
Criticism
Critical Analysis
1960s
Enlightenment
Nave
Social Practice

Cite this

@article{9387a4304b57410fbc91cc6f2f0a278f,
title = "Den dobbelte fordrejning: begrebet fetichisme i kritikken af den politiske {\o}konomi",
abstract = "Karl Marx’s critical analysis of ‘the secret of the fetishism of commodities’ – according to which the universal domination of the commodity form makes social relations appear in the form of relations between things – is today widely regarded as a central element of the critique of political economy. The concept of fetishism was generally neglected until in the 1920’s, and the debates around this concept did not really take off until the 1960’s. Since then, there have essentially been two predominant interpretations of Marx’s concept of fetishism: on the one hand those who regards fetishism as an ideological phenomenon, as something that has to do with the way in which social reality is represented for and in the social agents. On the other hand there are those who insists that fetishism refers to a certain displacement or inversion at the level of social practice itself, and not its ideological representation. In this article, I review these conflicting readings in the light of a close reading of Marx’s use of the term fetish(ism) in all of his writings from the Grundrisse (1857) onwards. I argue that Marx used this term to refer to an ideological phenomenon, and that he was right in doing so. I also point out that this does not entail subscribing to a na{\"i}ve view of ideology as false consciousness or class manipulation that can be abolished by enlightenment and criticism",
author = "Mau, {S{\o}ren Mads}",
year = "2018",
language = "Dansk",
journal = "Slagmark",
issn = "0108-8084",
publisher = "Aarhus Universitet Institut for Filosofi og Idehistorie. Afdeling for Idehistorie",
number = "77",

}

Den dobbelte fordrejning: begrebet fetichisme i kritikken af den politiske økonomi. / Mau, Søren Mads.

In: Slagmark, No. 77, 2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Den dobbelte fordrejning: begrebet fetichisme i kritikken af den politiske økonomi

AU - Mau, Søren Mads

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Karl Marx’s critical analysis of ‘the secret of the fetishism of commodities’ – according to which the universal domination of the commodity form makes social relations appear in the form of relations between things – is today widely regarded as a central element of the critique of political economy. The concept of fetishism was generally neglected until in the 1920’s, and the debates around this concept did not really take off until the 1960’s. Since then, there have essentially been two predominant interpretations of Marx’s concept of fetishism: on the one hand those who regards fetishism as an ideological phenomenon, as something that has to do with the way in which social reality is represented for and in the social agents. On the other hand there are those who insists that fetishism refers to a certain displacement or inversion at the level of social practice itself, and not its ideological representation. In this article, I review these conflicting readings in the light of a close reading of Marx’s use of the term fetish(ism) in all of his writings from the Grundrisse (1857) onwards. I argue that Marx used this term to refer to an ideological phenomenon, and that he was right in doing so. I also point out that this does not entail subscribing to a naïve view of ideology as false consciousness or class manipulation that can be abolished by enlightenment and criticism

AB - Karl Marx’s critical analysis of ‘the secret of the fetishism of commodities’ – according to which the universal domination of the commodity form makes social relations appear in the form of relations between things – is today widely regarded as a central element of the critique of political economy. The concept of fetishism was generally neglected until in the 1920’s, and the debates around this concept did not really take off until the 1960’s. Since then, there have essentially been two predominant interpretations of Marx’s concept of fetishism: on the one hand those who regards fetishism as an ideological phenomenon, as something that has to do with the way in which social reality is represented for and in the social agents. On the other hand there are those who insists that fetishism refers to a certain displacement or inversion at the level of social practice itself, and not its ideological representation. In this article, I review these conflicting readings in the light of a close reading of Marx’s use of the term fetish(ism) in all of his writings from the Grundrisse (1857) onwards. I argue that Marx used this term to refer to an ideological phenomenon, and that he was right in doing so. I also point out that this does not entail subscribing to a naïve view of ideology as false consciousness or class manipulation that can be abolished by enlightenment and criticism

M3 - Tidsskriftartikel

JO - Slagmark

JF - Slagmark

SN - 0108-8084

IS - 77

ER -