Best regards, Andrew Stewart - - - Subscribe to the Washington Babylon newsletter via https://washingtonbabylon.com/newsletter/
Begin forwarded message: > From: H-Net Staff via H-REVIEW <[email protected]> > Date: September 20, 2020 at 6:57:31 AM EDT > To: [email protected] > Cc: H-Net Staff <[email protected]> > Subject: H-Net Review [H-Socialisms]: Schmidt on Munck, 'Rethinking Global > Labour: Towards a New Social Settlement' > Reply-To: [email protected] > > Ronaldo Munck. Rethinking Global Labour: Towards a New Social > Settlement. Newcastle upon Tyne Agenda Publishing, 2018. 288 pp. > $30.00 (paper), ISBN 978-1-78821-105-5; $90.00 (cloth), ISBN > 978-1-78821-104-8. > > Reviewed by Ingo Schmidt (Athabasca University) > Published on H-Socialisms (September, 2020) > Commissioned by Gary Roth > > Global Labor > > Writing about global labor at a time of escalating nationalism, trade > wars, and anti-immigration policies seems like bad timing, unlike > during the heyday of neoliberal globalization when some currents in > unions and pro-labor academics pondered about labor's possible > contributions to an alternative globalization. Many contributions to > this debate saw globalization as the trigger of a race to the bottom > in which nation-states lost their ability to intervene on the side of > workers. A final showdown between Seattle Man and Davos Man, to use > Paul Krugman's memorable labels, seemed imminent. Less dramatic > interpretations pointed to states as architects of global governance > structures in which capital could operate without interference from > tax authorities, safety inspectors, and unions. According to this > view, states were by no means powerless but, under pressure from > corporate lobby groups, had chosen to turn from welfare state > expansion to neoliberal rollback. If this was so, many adherents of > this view concluded, labor, possibly collaborating with other social > movements, could build countervailing powers to regain influence over > the state. > > In _Globalisation and Labour: The New "Great Transformation_," > published in 2002, shortly after the dot.com crash, Ronaldo Munck > offered a synthesis of alter-globalist and statist views. He > recognized that states play a role in driving globalization forward > but was skeptical about the possibilities of building countervailing > powers on the national level. In terms of strategy, he sided with the > alter-globalists but rejected the race-to-the-bottom thesis. Instead > of viewing market forces as creating a homogenous global workforce, > working under equally deplorable conditions everywhere on earth, he > saw globalization as a process of remaking divisions between workers > North and South and between different segments of the workforces > within the North and South. Uneven and combined development poses > greater challenges for global movement builders than does downward > convergence as it invites segments of the global workforce to seek > advancement at the expense of other segments, rather than uniting > with all other workers of the world. Which is exactly what happened > since _Globalisation and Labor_ was published. Ongoing wars and > recurrent crises have destroyed the widespread belief that markets > would coordinate individual economic activities efficiently and > distribute rewards in a just manner. > > Disappointment that markets did not live up to their promise, > inequalities, insecurities, and a growing sense of powerlessness > allowed a new right to prosper and government policies to turn to > more and more protectionist measures. Under these new circumstances, > the challenge for labor and other social movements is no longer to > seek a more socially just kind of globalization and/or a return to > the welfare state but also to fight back against the new right--a > good reason for _Rethinking Global Labour: Towards a New Social > Settlement_ indeed. However, there is not much in this regard in > Munck's new book. This is all the more surprising as in an earlier > book, _Globalization and Contestation_, published in 2006, he makes > very clear that _"_the new great counter-movement" could come from > the left but also from the right. His latest book is more update than > rethinking. For readers unfamiliar with the debates around labor and > globalization from the turn of the century, this is valuable enough > but certainly not sufficient. The good heirs of Seattle men and women > are not only up against the bad World Trade Organization, > International Monetary Fund, etc., but also against an ugly new > right. Munck does not offer any clues in this respect, but his book > does help to understand how neoliberal globalization created highly > fragmented worlds of labor that can breed alternatives from the left > and the right. To this end, the first part of the book provides a > brief sketch of the history of labor in different parts of the world, > while the second part portrays the fragmentation within the working > classes of the Global North and South with a special focus on > precariously employed workers all over the world. Against this > background, Munck discusses the challenges of migrant labor, social > movements other than labor, and internationalism in advancing a > global strategy for labor. > > In his historical sketch, Munck points to the complementary > developments of the nation-state system, global capitalism, > industrialization, and colonization. This implies that primitive > accumulation is more than a phase leading to the polarization between > capitalists and paid labor. Instead, it is a permanent part of > capitalist development, which means that labor under capitalism > includes not only wageworkers but also slaves, coolies, and > indentured laborers, in other words, workers just recently forced off > their land or out of independent artisan production without being > free to contract with capitalist employers or to earn the right to > unionize and vote as they see fit. The making of these highly diverse > working classes included migrations, on the local level from rural > areas to emerging industrial districts, but also, as in the case of > the slave trade, across continents. This sketch does not offer > anything new to readers familiar with global history but might still > be a necessary and useful corrective to widespread images of factory > workers, mostly male, muscled, and white, representing the age of > industrial capitalism, and an assemblage of service, household, and > agricultural workers, mostly female, nonwhite, and sometimes unpaid, > epitomizing globalization. > > Contrary to such views, happily spread by liberals but also fairly > common on the left, today's diversity is not the result of liberalism > overcoming the uniformity of industrial capitalism, created by big > government, big labor, maybe even big business, but a remaking of > older forms of diversity driven by big business seeking to escape > whichever fetters unions and governments had imposed on it during the > age of welfarism and developmentalism. Blindness to older forms of > working-class diversity, or fragmentation, also means blindness to > forms of working-class organizing that do not fit the male, muscled, > and white image pinned on industrial unionism. Munck presents the > mutualism of artisan workers moving from job to job and often across > country and co-operatives as examples. Mutualism played a significant > role in organizing the First International, and the culture of > solidarity it fostered was markedly different from the exclusionary > practices of much craft unionism beginning around the same time. > Co-operatives existed in many forms in many places around the world > but fell very much into oblivion, though, arguably, they constituted, > next to unions and political parties, the third pillar of labor > movements in the past. These are just two examples of working-class > experiences of the past that could broaden the outlook on building > labor movements for the future. > > Writing about work and workers today, Munck shows that the triad of > relocations, reorganization, and automation exerted massive pressure > on wages and social standards around the world but did not lead to > the near disappearance of work and downward convergence of wages. > Against the deindustrialization thesis with its narrow focus on rust > belts and high-tech clusters, he shows that, on a global scale, > industrial production and employment have massively increased, not > decreased, over the period commonly associated with neoliberal > globalization. Although import-substitution, the developmentalist way > to industrialization, was dropped, partly under pressure from > corporate elites in the capitalist centers, partly because the class > alliances in the South that had pursued import-substitution fell > apart, industrialization per se did not stop. It turned to production > for world markets. Most notable in this regard is certainly China's > market-turn. In this regard, Munck reminds readers of the doubling of > the labor force available to capitalist employers following the > collapse of Soviet Communism and the subsequent turn of Sino > Communism. His brief discussion of the failures of bureaucratic > socialism that led to the Second World's disappearance adds to the > understanding of neoliberal globalization and to the debate about > advancing alternatives to it, not in the sense of bringing back the > good old Soviet days or bemoaning missed opportunities of making them > better than they actually were but in the sense of an urgently needed > self-critique of today's left that cannot escape its past. > > Munck's critique of the precariat as a new dangerous class can > certainly be understood as an effort to overcome the delinking of the > present and the future from the past that imbues a lot of left > theorizing and strategizing. This thesis, according to Munck, only > makes sense against the background of the so-called golden era of > welfarism in the West that saw rising real wages, shorter hours, and > social protections for most layers of the West's working classes. > However, as is clear from Munck's historical sketch, these > improvements were the exception rather than the rule. In other parts > of the world, despite some progress that developmentalism meant for > workers in the South, working and living conditions were precarious > for most of the workers of the world during the golden era. And even > in the West, workers--mostly women, migrants, and ethnic minorities > employed in the lower tiers of the labor market--did not enjoy the > incomes and protections gained by upper-tier workers. Using the > upper-tier experience as a benchmark against which precarious > employment today can be measured is misleading as it leaves > precarious employment during the golden era, which might have been > inextricably linked to the happy few working in better paid and more > secure jobs, in the shade. Moreover, paired with analyses that see > globalization and automation as outcomes of more or less iron laws of > development, golden era welfarism does not offer much hope for the > future. > > Despite only benefiting some segments of the world's working classes, > welfarism and developmentalism were at some point seen as a threat by > capital. However, the same institutions that locked in the gains that > these segments had won turned out to constrain workers' efforts to > fight back against capital's neoliberal offensive. These limitations > were even more obvious in the Second World where capitalists had been > pushed out of power. The ruling bureaucracies that replaced them > caused plenty of discontent but were resilient enough to ward off any > grassroots movement to the point where the economic system fractured > and allowed the restoration of capitalist rule. Another limitation of > labor's partial or complete integration into state structures is that > these structures, by definition governing limited territories and > demarcating them from others, are an impediment to global organizing. > This was the starting point for alter-globalists' efforts to organize > beyond the nation-state. Munck reviews these efforts, adds to them > experiences from the new social movements that mobilized around > issues neglected by most of the statist labor movements and also > earlier labor experiences that were not integrated into state > apparatuses, and then suggests a strategy for global labor that is as > diverse in terms of issues and organizing practices as the fragmented > working classes of today's world. He does not suggest that > rank-and-file organizing beyond nation-states is the alternative to > state-oriented organizing, and is certainly not blind to the fact > that new social movements ended up in top-down structures when they > moved from a period of grassroots mobilizations to NGOism, but he > does insist that such movements are necessary complements to > state-oriented unions and parties. In terms of strategic vision, he > casts the net wide but also remains fairly vague. Successful > organizing certainly needs to be more focused, but to determine > promising foci it might be a good idea to start with the net wide > open rather than stuffing it into one small pond. > > Citation: Ingo Schmidt. Review of Munck, Ronaldo, _Rethinking Global > Labour: Towards a New Social Settlement_. H-Socialisms, H-Net > Reviews. September, 2020. > URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=54897 > > This work is licensed under a Creative Commons > Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States > License. > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#1771): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/1771 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/76971320/21656 -=-=- POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. -=-=- Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/1316126222/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
