I see a continuation of the discussion about the basic deception that he has revealed in Heidegger’s ontology. This is the deception of being, as the origin. This false ontology extends into, or perhaps manifests as, false needs.
Social processes are directed toward needs, both intellectual and material, but need itself is open to critique. So we cannot be sure that the social processes are directed toward true needs.
The human being is more than just a recorded participant in society, one has real needs. Material needs are real, and even the ontological need, which is the need to understand the need of human beings, to “know or recognize the necessity which alone rules their behavior” is in some sense a real need. The ontological deception being discussed, leads to a false understanding of need. Therefore it does not satisfy the ontological need.
So:
The false consciousness of needs aims at something which self-aware subjects would not need, and compromises thereby every possible fulfillment.
Needs are extremely complex, involving inversions of the subject/object relation, and inherent contradictions. Truth and falsity in some sense co-exist in need, in the way that truth is what is needed when falsity prevails.
The thought without need, which wants nothing, would be nugatory; but thinking out of the need becomes confused, if the need is conceived merely subjectively. Needs are a conglomerate of the true and the false; the true thought would be the one, which wished for what is right.
Modern ontology is an “ersatz”. The “culture-industry feeds the masses without the latter ever quite believing in them”.
Deception has no borders there, where the official cultural canon places its goods, in the presumed sublime of philosophy. The most urgent of its needs today seems to be that for something solid.
The “something solid” is actually the exact opposite of what the deceptive Idealist ontologies provide by way of an eternal unchanging principle as “something solid”. It is more like freedom from this deceptive ontology.
It has its right in this, that one wishes to have security, to not be buried by a historical dynamic against which one feels powerless.
But the existing social-forms block this with invariant structures of omnipresent terror, “the vertigo of a society threatened by total destruction”.