i am into accessibility and game design. i go by sysopod on other platforms as well
why do leftists use the term "instrumentalization" so much? like, whose work are they quoting from? i assume there's some discourse-context for why they don't use simpler terminology like "using" or "turning into a tool". i ask as also a leftist, and i'm genuinely curious.
i've tried googling this and i'm coming up with nada.
Possible answer 1: Marxist thought in the 60s-70s was split into two camps, Instrumentalists and Structuralists, and they differed in how they conceived of the state. The terms remain in active use because of this legacy.
Possible answer 2: It's a side-effect of theory being produced mainly by academics, so the language around marxism gets saddled with their baggage.
Either, both or neither might be the case, I'm speculating.
both sound like good avenues! i mostly hear it as having negative connotations, like "a particular class or culture being instrumentalized by the dominant hegemony", which doesn't quite match up with what i understand about Instrumental Marxists- but i admittedly don't know much.
I think I found the source of popularity in Marcuse's One-Dimensional Man. Terms like instrumental, instrumentalism, instrumentality and instrumentalization (of people) are the main thematic concern of the work and these terms pop up around 60 times in my ebook. It is also a very influential work to this day (a great read).
Another possibility I thought of was that it was a case of an awkward word being the most nuanced translation of an ambiguous term in German or a romance language, but I'm pretty sure it was Marcuse now.
oh! that sounds right- thank you so much for researching, and so quickly! i'll have to check that out.
i had half thought about your latter suggestion- awkward translations have become something of a theme lately for me- but i figured that would be a dead end for me search-engine wise.
