I figured that was most of this forum. Even the people who are clearly minority comrades say this to me basically " all forms of oppression must be fought back against, now, but class is the primary mode of oppression"

  • Changeling [it/its]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I think to put base and superstructure into a hierarchy is to ignore their dialectical nature.

    It’s really that simple. But also, when I heard that a few years ago I thought it was nonsense jargon, so here’s an explanation for anyone reading who had that sentence slide right off their brain.

    We’re obsessed with thinking of everything as hierarchical. Even in a group of two things or people, many of us find our brains trying to figure out which one is dominant over the other. The Marxist concepts of base and superstructure are often seen through this lens. The economic base is everything about a society that involves its people’s relationship to the means of production. The superstructure is everything else. Culture, politics, media, religion, etc. The relationship between these two parts of society is like this: One part shapes the other part, and in return the shaped part protects its shaper. So for example, the economic base of exploitation of people in the color in the US gave rise to the cultural construction of race as we know it, but that same construct protects the economic order of capitalist oppression via white supremacy.

    So which is the shaper and which is the protector? Base or superstructure? The key insight relevant to this conversation is that both parts perform both functions. That’s the dialectical portion. So to run with the racial example, the economic conditions of chattel slavery and indigenous genocide in the US were themselves made possible by racial pseudoscience which arose to justify colonialism. The base and superstructure push and pull one another this way.

    There may be people reading this who have a lot to say about me implying that base and superstructure perform both functions equally, but I specifically didn’t say that because it’s generally not true. But I do believe that balance has changed in the west since the time of Marx and Engels.

    I think of these systems like a river. You have the water and you have the riverbed. They’re a dynamic system and if you want to redirect the river, it doesn’t make sense to move the water’s path without modifying the bed as well.

    • D61 [any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      :asagiri: Fill me with theory!

      • Changeling [it/its]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I know it. I intentionally don’t state which is which, but I really wish I had a better physical analogy. Until then, I’m gonna stick with the river.

    • GalaxyBrain [they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Good post. It's like genetics and enviroment stuff. One doesn't 'control' the other in any meaningful sense.

    • happyandhappy [she/her]
      ·
      2 years ago

      i think an important distinction also is that the superstructure is the institutions of culture, politics, media, religion, education and family on the one hand, and the repressive legal state apparatus on the other.

      the realm of ideology is generated by the institutions of the superstructure which reflects back on the superstructure as the superstructure reflects back on the base.

      you might be interested in reading Althusser's work on overdetermination as it pertains exactly to what you wrote, and explains the meaning of "the base determines the superstructure in the last instance".