Late capitalism collapses the distinction between desire and interest that duty once maintained

Evidence

The problem is that late capitalism insists and relies upon the very equation of desire with interests that parenting used to be based on rejecting. In a culture in which the ‘paternal’ concept of duty has been subsumed into the ‘maternal’ imperative to enjoy, it can seem that the parent is failing in their duty if they in any way impede their children’s absolute right to enjoyment. Partly this is an effect of the increasing requirement that both parents work; in these conditions, when the parent sees the child very little, the tendency will often be to refuse to occupy the ‘oppressive’ function of telling the child what to do. The parental disavowal of this role is doubled at the level of cultural production by the refusal of ‘gatekeepers’ to do anything but give audiences what they already (appear to) want. — Mark Fisher, Capitalist Realism, 148

Categorization

  • XREF: The ‘refusal of gatekeepers to challenge’ parallels my Oslo/architecture notes on giving audiences what they appear to want, and the Frankfurt School culture industry material. — connects to: Capitalism now pre-formats desires before they can even emerge as subversive — Mark Fisher, Capitalist Realism: Is There No…, 24; Late capitalist life forces individuals to identify with the power that oppresses them — Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment, 116; Neoliberalism generated desires that remain unsatisfied and could anchor left renewal — Mark Fisher, Capitalist Realism: Is There No…, 163 (+1 more)
  • APHORISMS: The insight that a culture equating desire with interest erodes the parental/curatorial function of saying no is a durable diagnostic lens.

Broader Connections