I agree, with the qualification that these "early phases" have actually been going on for quite some time. My own view would be that what you call the industrial system has only ever been a substructure of capital, albeit a dominant substructure in the 19th century and an extremely important one through most of the 20th century. I would date the decline of the industrial system as a guiding force as coinciding with the final breakdown of the Bretton Woods system, 1968-71.
The fact that capital has thrived for over three decades as a floating signifier without even a nominal link between money as a unit of account and as a store of value could be some kind of hint that the store of value thing has been seriously downgraded if not entirely displaced.
The Sandwichman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The fact that capital has thrived for over three decades as a floating signifier without even a nominal link between money as a unit of account and as a store of value could be some kind of hint that the store of value thing has been seriously downgraded if not entirely displaced.
The Sandwichman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, . . . yea . . . we supposed to know the enemy. What is on the death bed is the industrial system as a historically distinct mode of production. That is to say a distinct configuration of human labor + machinery + energy source, as it evolved from the previously existing manufacturing processes. This thing called the industrial system is giving way to a new mode of production - without quotes, and we are in the early phases of the reconfiguration of the infrastructure with partial advancements across the world of production.
Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos
