第45章

  • E+P Manus
  • 佚名
  • 779字
  • 2016-03-02 16:28:52

If man's feelings, passions, etc., are not merely anthropological characteristics in the narrower sense, but are truly ontological affirmations of his essence (nature), and if they only really affirm themselves insofar as their object exists sensuously for them, then it is clear:

(1) That their mode of affirmation is by no means one and the same, but rather that the different modes of affirmation constitute the particular character of their existence, of their life. The mode in which the object exists for them is the characteristic mode of their gratification.

(2) Where the sensuous affirmation is a direct annulment [Aufheben] of the object in its independent form (eating, drinking, fashioning of objects, etc.), this is the affirmation of the object.

(3) Insofar as man, and hence also his feelings, etc., are human, the affirmation of the object by another is also his own gratification.

(4) Only through developed industry -- i.e., through mediation of private property, does the ontological essence of human passion come into being, both in its totality and in its humanity; the science of man is, therefore, itself a product of the self-formation of man through practical activity.

(5) The meaning of private property, freed from its estrangement, is the existence of essential objects for man, both as objects of enjoyment and of activity.

Money, inasmuch as it possess the property of being able to buy everything and appropriate all objects, is the object most worth possessing.

The universality of this property is the basis of money's omnipotence; hence, it is regarded as an omnipotent being... Money is the pimp between need and object, between life and man's means of life. But that which mediates my life also mediates the existence of other men for me. It is for me the other person.

What, man! confound it, hands and feet And head and backside, all are yours!

And what we take while life is sweet, Is that to be declared not ours?

Six stallions, say, I can afford, Is not their strength my property?

I tear along, a sporting lord, As if their legs belonged to me.

(Goethe, Faust -- Mephistopheles)

[ Part I, scene 4 ] Shakespeare, in Timon of Athens :

Gold? Yellow, glittering, precious gold! No, gods, I am no idle votarist; roots, you clear heavens!

Thus much of this will make black, white; foul, fair;Wrong, right; base, noble; old, young; coward, valiant.

Why, this Will lug your priests and servants from your sides;Pluck stout men's pillows from below their heads:

This yellow slave Will knit and break religions; bless th'accurst;Make the hoar leprosy adored; place thieves, And give them title, knee, and approbation, With senators on the bench: this is it That makes the wappen'd widow wed again;She whom the spital-house and ulcerous sores Would cast the gorge at, this embalms and spices To th'April day again. Come, damned earth, Thou common whore of mankind, that putt'st odds Among the rout of nations, I will make thee Do thy right nature. And, later on:

O thou sweet king-killer, and dear divorce 'Twixt natural son and sire! Thou bright defiler Of Hymen's purest bed! Thou valiant Mars!

Thou ever young, fresh, loved and delicate wooer, Whose blush doth thaw the consecrated snow That lies on Dian's lap! Thous visible god, That solder'st close impossibilities, And mak'st them kiss! That speak'st with every tongue, To every purpose! O thou touch of hearts!

Think, thy slave man rebels; and by thy virtue Set them into confounding odds, that beasts May have in world empire! Shakespeare paints a brilliant picture of the nature of money. To understand him, let us begin by expounding the passage from Goethe.

That which exists for me through the medium of money, that which I can pay for, i.e., that which money can buy, that am I, the possessor of money. The stronger the power of my money, the stronger am I. The properties of money are my, the possessor's, properties and essential powers. Therefore, what I am and what I can do is by no means determined by my individuality.

I am ugly, but I can buy the most beautiful woman. Which means to say that I am not ugly, for the effect of ugliness, its repelling power, is destroyed by money. As an individual, I am lame, but money procurs me 24 legs. Consequently, I am not lame. I am a wicked, dishonest, unscrupulous and stupid individual, but money is respected, and so also is its owner. Money is the highest good, and consequently its owner is also good. Moreover, money spares me the trouble of being dishonest, and I am therefore presumed to be honest.