Capital functions dispositionally on the scientific tradition - not THE tradition; there are many types of approaches in the sciences - of treating the universe as a collection of objects whose causal properties can be decisively known, so as to be manipulated.
Curiously, various members of the Marxist tradition have pursued this thread as well, which consists of a theoretical project of discovering the causal operations of capital as a natural object to be studied, in order to manipulate and transform it. This generally means the project of understanding value and where value comes from, as well as the social nature of labor that makes this value possible, so as to understand how capital regenerates itself, in hopes of altering this dynamic.
Needless to say, capital completely rejects this project, a project which uses the exact theoretical methodology that capital functions with. This behavior manifests itself in the mainstream economic tradition, where there is a drive to deify the market and render it objective - NOT an object, but a naturalized, almost supernatural entity that has power over everything else - as opposed to having it picked apart and tinkered with as an object of study.
This impulse is similar to the political phenomenon of governments and corporations wishing to know everything possible about the populace, while denying any attempts at an elucidation of themselves in the eyes of the public.
Or you can see this in the behavior of particular individuals who are engaging in hypocritical activities, calling for openness and harmony, but only on terms which are favorable to the individual.
This is a pattern peculiar to the exercise of power. Power wishes to render subjective fields - which may contain entities with wills of their own - into objects with transparent functions, which it can discover and manipulate, while at the same time rendering itself as a continuous subject with a will that manipulates, but which cannot be manipulated itself.
This doesn't have to be the definition of power's exercise. This pattern only characterizes the exercise of power in our time, as when the powerful exercise power, they are seeking to accumulate powers of manipulation and a general expansion of the will, and a denial of the other, which provokes in the other an equal desire to exercise power for the sake of expansion, so as to counteract this invading power.
In other words, we cannot dispose of the concept of power and let capital be, because capital will not let everything else be.
So let's consider an alternate application of power: we are still seeking to manipulate the environment so that it is conducive to our aims, which in this era of the extreme extension of power means actually letting go of it so that it can revert back to its resting state. In a way, we can seek to exercise our power by granting the other power, so as to break the never-ending cycle of oscillating power acquisitions. If one is to study something so as to manipulate it, one can expect to be studied and manipulated in turn, and to banish one's fear of this is to subsume difference.
It is the extreme exercise of power itself which destroys the possibilities for its full expression, as to exercise power against the other - which employs a will of its own - is to antagonize the other into accumulating power of its own, so as to resist a reduction into slavery, or even pulverization. A sustainable exercise of power then would be to exercise it and relinquish it in turn, and let the other exercise it over oneself, under the same conditions, so that it is constantly moving, and paradoxically, stable.
Here we find ourselves in a bit of a bind. To relinquish power is to end the reign of capital on an individual basis, but at the same time, this exposes oneself to destruction, as capital itself will not relinquish power, nor will its competition. We see a return of the old communist problem: it seems that power-sharing itself requires the exercise of power, against capital's invasions, to sustain itself. This would be the establishment of socialism, or a dictatorship of the proletariat, in more traditional terms.
This also means the running away of this stabilizing process, in which indefinite dictatorships must subsist to constantly fend off antagonized capital.
But perhaps there is a solution yet. Or at least a pseudo-solution. Because now the problem isn't merely capital, but the total expenditure of energy, and the manipulation of the environment, all of which is implied in this power game.
The basis for capital's existence - the accumulation of powers of manipulation - is contradictory not just to itself, but the entire totality in which it sits. This provides the opening for the real establishment of an alternate political community, so long as the community itself rejects the power dance with capital in fighting over possession of the objects of desire, in this case, material goods and comforts.
Desire is of course not reducible to these things, but if one can procure one's needs outside of the market, while sharing power and allowing the environment and the general other to run its course, one has a shot at a stable political community, which can resist the extreme turbulence that will doubtless be caused by capital's long and arduous fall.
All of this is pretty fun to write and think about, but really how it works out in reality can be summed up by: just keep your head down, be a decent human being, and try to do your community/gardening/energy-shedding thing.
