However, if we look at that very issue from another perspective, the concept of irreducibility of the religious model is also at stake here due to the definition of the notion of ideology, which is rather hard to put in explicit terms. In a situation, when Marx utilizes his notion of specters, he interprets the paranormal nature or the becoming fetish of any given commodity, or commodity at large. Various analysts that study his works ought to emphasize the consequences of Marx rhetoric, different phrases and paragraphs, which appear to be dependent or simply able to persuade by influencing the persons imagination and fantasy. 3 Even if that were precisely the situation with Marx, those analysts would still be obliged to interpret and analyze their efficiency in every particular case. They would also have to consider the immense power and the inherent strength of the ghost effect. They would have to find an answer to why it scares or influences the persons imagination, what is its very subject, how to better interpret the terms fear and imagination, etc.
Definitely, a place exists in which the values of value (and we really have to distinguish here between the use value an the exchange value), clandestine, air of mystery, enigma, obsession, as well as the notion of ideological, construct a chain in Marx's works, and it is actually possible to indicate the spectral movement of this particular chain. The motion is situated in a place in which it is an inquiry, specifically, of creating the idea of what the stage, any stage in that specific case, takes away from peoples blind eyes at the time they open them. This notion is created with regard to a certain haunting, as Derrida tells the readers in his book. 4 Probably every person that has studied Marx and his works extensively can remember the opening moment in one of his most prominent works, Capital, when Marx elaborates on a topic of a supernatural character of the commodity, the incomprehension of the very thing itself as well as of the money-form that the commodity's simple form is the germ. Marx intends to interpret the correspondence whose mystery and supernatural character only influence the bourgeois economist in the complete form of money, gold, or any other materialistic value one can think of. At the beginning of Capital, Marx illustrates that the supernatural essence has nothing to do with the use-value, as suggested by Derrida.
5 The question is, is it a mere coincidence that Marx shows the principle of his interpretation by causing a table to turn? Alternatively, it can be the act of recalling the ghost of that particular table. For those who studied Marx and his works, that very table is a known concept, it can be located at the beginning of a chapter that discusses fetishism of the commodity and various mysteries associated with it. From the first glance, impossible is made possible; one must observe something that is not usually observed, the invisibility. Definitely, after everything is already observed, the only thing left unexposed is the invisible.
The most fundamental mistake of that first glance is to observe without noticing the invisible. However, if a person does not surrender or let him / her be deceived by that invisibility, the commodity appears to become a very simple thing that is evident to everyone. Thus, in order to make people accustomed to that concept of invisibility, Marx suggests in his works that the commodity is actually not that simple the ghost that he refers to is already starting to take its shape. 6.