Re: [Pen-l] Ann Davis(nib) Now maybe the left can pay some attention to technological change....which has been out of style among Marxists since the 1970s....alas.
^^^^^ CB; Not out of style with all Marxists (smiles) http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism-thaxis/2009-October/024497.html http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism-thaxis/2009-October/024507.html CB: The leaps in communication and transportation through computerization, satellites, robotics, containerization allow the scattering of the points of production geographically, globally. In _Capital_ Marx's analyzes the fundamentals of modern industry , machinery and cooperation here: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm Part IV: Production of Relative Surplus Value Ch. 12: The Concept of Relative Surplus-Value Ch. 13: Co-operation Ch. 14: Division of Labour and Manufacture Ch. 15: Machinery and Modern Industry The modern factory system that Marx analyzed there concentrated workers in one location , co-operation the classic Leninist giant factory site, and employed machinery both to increase the rate of surplus-value, relative surplus value. The developments in communication and transportation of the last 35 years allow the negation of co-operation ( big factories, and industrial cities and regions, like the US Midwest) _without loss in production of surplus value_ . This is a dialectical negation in that one aspect of the contradiction , machinery, developed through comuperiztion, robotics, satellites, containers, just in time production, et al, such that it allowed the negation of the other fundamental aspect of the contradiction, co-operation ( concentration of workers in one plant and industrial cities , like Detroit where Henry Ford of "Fordism" was, and regions, like the US midwest.) The points of production can be scattered around the globe without loss of production of surplus value, and with the added benefit of separating workers from each other. Recall that Marx emphasized that the concentrations of workers in factories and certain cities was important in their sensing their potential power and helped with communist organization. The capitalists are glad to scatter them and separate them from each other. I'm thinking computers in truck driver cabs is an advance in the unity of mental (symbolic) and physical labor in one worker, and thus an overcoming or negation of ye olde antagonism between predominantly mental and predominantly physical labor ( workers of the head and workers of the hand). Overcoming this antagonism, this original specialization, is considered an achievement of the coming communist society. So, were cb radios, but this is even a bit ( in the computer language puny sense) more than cb radios. It increases the socialization, division of labor ( in Marx and Durkheim sense; organic solidarity) and cooperation of labor. Labor is already highly socialized in capitalism in the 1800s, early 1900's, mid 1900's. This increased the interconnectedness of workers , in their technological location, so increases the socialization of the labor process. Walmart's increased efficiency is increased socialization and cooperation , too. Just like the Fordist assembly line and truck and train connected factories with telegraph communication , then telephones were. These electronic communication systems increase cooperation of labor that is not face to face or within one building , plant, or city. It allows the points of production to be more scattered geographically/in space relative to prior levels of development of the means of production which are communication systems. Computers allow the likes of just-in-time delivery. World cars, for example, are produced from computer coordinated globally scattered points of production. Workers of the whole globe, unite ! On 12/9/12, Eugene Coyle <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thanks to Tom Walker for noting this. Krugman is clearly making a > transition from a single focus on the stimulus to ... well, he'll have to > end up advocating cutting working hours. If education won't reduce > inequality, which he acknowledges in this piece, and the stimulus won't > restore full employment -- which he doesn't quite get to yet -- then cutting > working hours must be in the policy mix. > > Two cheers for Krugman. > > Gene _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
