A performativity-driven system defines needs by their value to performance, not by suffering

Evidence

The only counterindication is that not satisfying them can destabilize the whole. It is against the nature of force to be ruled by weakness. But it is in its nature to induce new requests meant to lead to a redefinition of the norms of “life.” In this sense, the system seems to be a vanguard machine dragging humanity after it, dehumanizing it in order to rehumanize it at a different level of normative capacity. The technocrats declare that they cannot trust what society designates as its needs; they “know” that society cannot know its own needs since they are not variables independent of the new technologies. Such is the arrogance of the decision makers—and their blindness. — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 438

Categorization

• XREF: This is the exact ‘system’ logic that Jameson answers — the erasure of the subject’s independent needs under capital. Direct echo of Lyotard’s ‘vanguard machine’ vs. Jameson’s late-capitalist totality. — connects to: Research funding subordinates truth to the goal of performativity — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 342; System theory’s true goal is performativity, optimizing input-output ratios — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 148; The productive apparatus shapes individual needs, not just work roles — Herbert Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the…, 97 (+2 more)
• DEFINE: Defines the performativity principle’s deepest consequence: needs are endogenous to the system, not independent variables.

Broader Connections

• System theory’s true goal is performativity, optimizing input-output ratios #corroborates (0.95) — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 148