“Why do you have a tattoo of a table?”
“A commodity appears, at first sight, a very trivial thing, and easily understood. Its analysis shows that it is, in reality, a very queer thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties. So far as it is a value in use, there is nothing mysterious about it, whether we consider it from the point of view that by its properties it is capable of satisfying human wants, or from the point that those properties are the product of human labour. It is as clear as noonda y, that man, by his industry, changes the forms of the materials furnished by Nature, in such a way as to make them useful to him. The form of wood, for instance, is altered, by making a table out of it. Yet, for all that, the table continues to be that common, everyda y thing, wood. But, so soon as it steps forth as a commodity, it is changed into something transcendent. It not only stands with its feet on the ground, but, in relation to all other commodities, it stands on its head, and evolves out of its wooden brain grotesque ideas, far more wonderful than “table turning” ever was.”
:what:
They get so close, especially toward the end when we are introduced to the liberals who run the good place who are completely fucking useless, and how consumption is tied directly to the evils of capitalism. But then instead of “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” being the moral, it becomes “its complicated now, so we need to change the point system so consuming things doesn’t count against you” to absolve liberals of the concerns that indentured servants make their treats. Its a version of “imperialism makes GDP go up, so its good actually”. I also refuse to believe that anyone but people from the imperial core would end up in the bad place under their current accounting system. Liberals love flattening the difference between them consuming treats and a worker in the global south.
I loved my first watch of the show, but I can never watch it again because they are all insufferable libs.