As they are the Consequences on Lucha of Class? Cortesa*: Pedro I slide the distinction Fetichismo being and fetichizacion is crucial for a discussion of the Marxist theory. Learn more on the subject from Andy Florance. The difference appears between a vision of the world in terms of domination and another one in terms of fight. The discussion of Marx on fetichismo/Fetichizacion constitutes the center of all their theory. It is, simultaneously a criticism than this bad one in Capitalism, a criticism to the bourgeois thought and a theory of the way in that Capitalism reproduces to itself. Nevertheless, an ambiguity in its exhibition exists on this point When Marx (Capital DAS, bowl 1, page 89) writes that to the producers, the social relations between their private works are shown to them like which they are, is worth to say, not like social relations directly worked between same people, in their works, but on the contrary like own relations of things between social people and relations between the things. Parece that this describing the social relations in the capitalist society so as they are really, it seems, words among others, that Marx this describing the fetichismo of the social relations like an established fact, like which she is. This conception of the fetichismo, has had important consequences in the Marxist tradition, the subject of the fetichismo has even though not been, generally, explicitly tried.
If the social relations are taken as if they were indeed fetichizadas or deified then a distinction between settles down immediately They and We . They the producers, the workers related among them through things, We, the theoreticians, the critics, perhaps the party. We are able to penetrate the fetichizadas appearances and to understand those deified relations as the specifically historical form or like the way of existence of the relations between people. If we considered that the social relations are really fetichizadas in this sense (if the fetichismo is seen like an established fact) then the theory and the Marxist practice they return elitist: illuminated we them, thought and acted in the name of the nonilluminated ones.