Capitalism and its effects on our culture and economy
The mind map begins with capitalism, which is located in the center. In week 5, we learned there are four types of capitalism (1) Economic capital (2) Social Capital (3) Cultural capital (4) Symbolic capital. I directly connected all of these types to “racial capitalism”, since, through the course, we learned racialization, segregation, and domination are inseparable parts of capitalism (Gilmore & LaDuke, 2020). Through the course, we also learned that “identity” is the way we understand ourselves, others, nature, technology, and others in a socially and politically constructed way. Instead, “subjectivity” has no category, and it is better to be used through cultural economy discourse. I showed this matter at the bottom of my mind map. I also put a color guide to explain the application of each color in the mind map.
I divided what we learned through the course into 5 main topics in my mind map, which have been shown in dark blue: (1) Environment (2) Labor (3) Technology (4) Education (5) Culture. In the following, I explain how I categorized these main topics into several subtopics with their negative impacts on society and the necessary theories and tools to address these issues.
(1) Environment
The discussion of class in week 3 started with “urban planning”, and the way it is used in favor of capitalism. Cities are planned to transport goods, resources, people, waste, and data in a way that capitalism makes more profit. I also thought urbanization could relate to “smart city” approach. Smart cities bring about socio-spatial consequences that Lynch (2019) discusses in his paper. We also discussed “gentrification” in the seminar, which is a way capitalism reproduces itself by displacing people, causing lots of inequality in cities (Cocola-Gant, 2019).
Resources and commons are important topics that we discussed extensively throughout the course. We learned different types of commons: (1) Biophysical commons (2) Cultural commons (3) Knowledge commons (4) Social commons (Gibson, 2016). The “individualism” in society and “vertical form of decision-making” for commons and resources bring about lots of inequality. In this vein, I linked commons to individualism in red color and then to collective and horizontal society in green color, because according to Gibson (2016), all community members in a collective and horizontal structure can show their care and responsibility towards commons in the present and for the future.
In the “resources” topic, we discussed a lot about “commodification of nature”, the relation of humans with nature, and the way these relations affect culture and economy. According to Smessaert et al. (2020), the commodification of nature happens through “Privatization”. The commodification of animals can put them on the verge of “extinction”, as we saw in Collard’s (2018) article regarding the commodification of Sea otters. Indeed, Collard (2018) explained extinction of the animal occurs quicker in capitalism. In the class, we talked about “anthropocentrism” and its negative impact (human/nature binary) that has detached us from nature (week 4). In the course material, Gibbs’ (2020) paper taught us there is a binary of “killing and caring” for animals through commodification and conservation of nature. Therefore, I made a link between resources and commodification of nature and animal extinction in the mind map.
On the other hand, Khalili (2018) explained the commodification of nature leads to socio-ecological consequences because the commodification of nature results in the exploitation and stratification of labor of different races. Bonds (2013) argued geography and racialization are connected in different ways, thus economic geographers should investigate how economic markets spatially reproduce racism and racialized marginalization. So, I linked “resources” to “environmental racism”, then I linked “environment” to “labor” through “geography” in the mind map. Bonds (2013) also introduced “feminist economic geography” and “critical race theory (CRT)” as tools for economic geography to address the issue, so I linked these tools to “environmental racism” as well. In another article, Katz (2002) discussed the relation of “environment” (ecology) with “capitalist reproduction labor”. She explained ecological degradation and topographies change the political decisions in that place and in turn, affect the labor and their social life. So, I linked “environment” to “geography”, then to “economic geography”, and I considered “feminist economic geography” and “critical race theory” as tools to study social reproduction in the context of ecology.
(2) Labor
Through the course, we learned different kinds of labor: (1) High skilled labor (e.g., engineers), (2) Low skilled labor (e.g., food service labor, factory labor, cleaners, construction labor, care worker, etc.), (3) Unpaid labor (care worker). So, I show these categories in the mind map. Regarding “unpaid labor”, we learned capital accumulation is not possible without patriarchal man-woman relations. So, “social reproduction theory” is a tool to study the reproductive labor situation in the capitalist system; hence I linked labor to this theory and Marxist theory. However, I made “Marxist theory” in red color since it does not consider surplus value for housework and childcare and women’s inside-of-house tasks (Vogel, 2013, cited in Rodríguez-Rocha, 2020). I also put mobile labor in this section. According to Katz (2002), globalization exploits the reproductive labor force, who are mobile labor in globalized capitalism. This issue should be addressed through social reproduction theory again. Therefore, I linked mobile labor to social reproduction theory in the mind map. I also linked “labor” directly to “intersectionality theory”, since it studies the different aspects of labor exploitation. Also, in week 3, we learned capitalism cares about the healthy state of labor since the high productivity of labor leads to higher profit. This matter can be studied through Bioplastics, which refers to the political situation of human life. So, I put this matter on the mind map because I find it so essential.
In articles, I got acquainted with “precarious labors” who work in cultural industries with forced creativity in an insecure situation, such as freelancing employment (Gill and Pratt, 2008). Soriano & Cabañes (2020) discuss the role of online media groups as “entrepreneurial solidarities”, as a platform for precarious labors rights and demand. So, in my mind, I linked labor to technology, and I considered online platforms as a tool for labor rights by making them green. Digital labor as a newly emerging type of labor has also been linked to technology. (I will explain it in the next section.)
(3) Technology
During the course, we talked extensively about "platform capitalism", "digital workers," "smart cities," and "COVID-19" and the role of technology in this regard. So, I put these sub-topics in my mind map in the category of technology.
Delfanti (2019) explained the hard situation of digital workers in capitalism, such as Amazon warehouse workers. He noted capitalism tries to make more profit by increasing labor productivity through automating tasks and controlling them oppressively. Also, Lynch (2019) criticized smart cities and their socio-cultural consequences since decisions for cities are taken in a vertical system. So, in my mind map, I linked smart city, big data, and platform capitalism, datafication, to labor despotism. I considered the Workerist theory as a tool to examine the problems that labor is facing in the capitalist system. I also showed "TS movement", and "online mutual aid group" in green color, meaning they are the beneficial methods that we can use to improve the modern digital world in a democratic way. To be more specific, "Technological sovereignty" (TS movement) is the local and decentralized group in Barcelona that provides digital development and initiatives for the community with a democratic approach. Also, some online mutual aid groups helped vulnerable populations via online platforms, which emerged during COVID-19 as a bottom-to-the-top approach (Chevée, 2021).
(4) Education
I divided education into two sections: (1) vertical mode of study (2) horizontal mode of study. Meyerhoff (2019) argued vertical mode of study is part of capitalism, and she named this educational system a colonial-capitalist institution. This system is intertwined with racial capitalism, colonialism, and patriarchy causes marginalization and oppression (in red color), and is defined through Epistemologies of Ignorance (green color). The vertical modes of study lead to duality in many concepts like human and non-human, black versus white, child and adult, men and women, savage and civilized, rich and poor, and white and others. I put this issue on my mind map and considered “racial capitalism” as a method to study this system. On the other hand, the horizontal mode of study created by low-class women is a bottom-to-the approach that creates an opportunity for people to interact with each other in an equal situation. This mode of study embraces indigenous people’s culture and knowledge and connects people to nature. Experimental College at Oberlin College and Experimental College of the Twin Cities (EXCO) is a good example of this system that has provided new alternate modes of study, easy access, and free education for the community (Bieler & Morton, 2021). In the mind map, I linked the horizontal mode of study to indigenous knowledge. Then I linked EXCO as an example to these two boxes.
(5) Culture
Through the seminar, we learned commodification of culture means the process of treating culture as a mere commodity. This approach has made humans' life and their taste something faster. Capitalism makes cultural trends, such as art, food, and fashion, quickly obsolete and brings about a consumerist society (Week 5). In the mind map, I considered Fordism theory as a tool for studying the system of mass production and its political and social implication (Week 8).
Decolonization of museums was another topic that we discussed in the class. We learned history narrations and archives play an essential role in the colonialization of museums. It is essential to pay attention to who narrated the history? Who set up the archives? Who is telling the stories? Many museums represent white supremacy and black slavery so they should be decolonized. Lonetree (2021) noted decolonization in museums could happen by honoring Indigenous knowledge and culture. Indeed, museums should tell stories of progress, citizenship, and racial and national difference. In the mind map, I showed indigenous culture, cultural diversity in green color, and colonial power in red color, and linked them to monuments and museums. Also, narrations and archives have been connected to both monuments and museums. I put orientalism in my mind map as well, since, in the class, we talked about orientalism creating a binary between West and East and making Eastern countries as "others". I also linked "The Politics of Display" and 'Museum without Objects' as decolonial examples of museums by showing them in green color (Vergès, 2021).
At the very bottom of the mind map, I showed that the Top-to-the-bottom system should be modified to be a Bottom-to-the-top system, which contributes to social justice in cultural and economic aspects.
Reference
Bieler, A., & Morton, A. D. 2021. Is capitalism structurally indifferent to gender? Routes to a value theory of reproductive labour. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space. http://proxy.library.brocku.ca/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X211031572
Bonds, A. (2013). Racing economic geography: The place of race in economic geography. Geography Compass, 7(6), 398-411.
Cocola-Gant, A (2019) Gentrification and displacement: urban inequality in cities of late capitalism. Schwanen, T. and R. Van Kempen (Eds.) Handbook of Urban Geography. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Collard, R. (2018). Disaster Capitalism and the Quick, Quick, Slow Unravelling of Animal Life. Antipode, 50(4), 910–928. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12389
Delfanti, Alessandro. 2019. Machinic dispossession and augmented despotism: Digital work in an Amazon warehouse. New Media and Society. 1-17
Gibson, Katherine. 2016. Take Back the Economy: Any Time, Any Place: Pedagogies for Securing Community Economies. Antipode 2012 RGS-IBG Annual Lecture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8_r1pwxvM&ab_channel=antipodeonline
Gill, R., & Pratt, A. (2008). In the social factory?: Immaterial labour, precariousness and cultural work. Theory, Culture & Society, 25(7-8), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276408097794.
Katz, C. (2001). Vegabond capitalism and the necessity of social reproduction. Antipode, 33(4), 709–728. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00207.
Khalili, L., (2018) A World Built On Sand And Oil: When Natural Resources Become Essential Commodities, https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/trade/world-built-sand-and-oil
Lynch, Casey. 2019. Contesting Digital Futures: Urban Politics, Alternative Economies, and the Movement for Technological Sovereignty in Barcelona, Antipode A Radical Journal of Geography 52(3): 660-680.
Lonetree, A. (2021). Decolonizing Museums, Memorials, and Monuments. The Public Historian, 43(4), 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1525/tph.2021.43.4.21
Meyerhoff, E. (2019). Beyond education: Radical studying for another world. U of Minnesota Press.
Rodríguez‐Rocha, V., 2021. Social Reproduction Theory: State of the field and new directions in geography. Geography Compass, vol. 15(8), e12586. http://proxy.library.brocku.ca/login?url=https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12586
Smessaert, J., Missemer, A., & Levrel, H. (2020). The commodification of nature, a review in social sciences. Ecological Economics, 172, 106624–. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106624
Soriano, C. R. R., & Cabañes, J. V. A. (2020). Entrepreneurial Solidarities: Social Media Collectives and Filipino Digital Platform Workers. Social Media + Society, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120926484.
Vergès, F., (2021), Decolonizing the Museum? with Franτoise Verges [Video] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STi30reki38&ab_channel=TheCourtaul
Weber, L., (2015), On-Demand Workers: ‘We Are Not Robots’, the Wall Street Journal, https://www.wsj.com/articles/on-demand-workers-we-are-not-robots-1422406524
