Revolutionary Writing: Common Sense Essays in Post-Political Politics

In the* linning Was the Scream

•J

JONN

MARXIS SlIBVERSI AND

Destruction as the Determination of the Scholar in liserable Times

CRITIQU

H .Marxian itegories, !e Crisis of ; pital and the , Constitution of Subjectivity day HARRY

•

vsa

JjR

The rdism of t h e ^ Regulation School man Practice d Perversion id Autonomy d Structure,

IURRECTIC OF LABOUR AND GLOBAL CAPITA

The End of Work, i or the Renaissance of Slavery?

^

Development and eduction DALLA

apital Moves

he Politics of C h a n g e

ITIOUE OF TH( U CA

WM ie Crisis of P o l i t i c a l Space NlORI

I"

SENS ESSAYS IN POST-POLITICAL CLITICS

• •

AGNOLl Capitalist • t e : Illusion •d C r i t i q u e

From the Revolution Against P h i l o s o p h y To t h e R e v o l u t i o n inst Capital

appropriations of Public Space stituent Republic r i9N

'

^^H!?^

AUTONOMEDIA COVER PHOTO: N I C K K O U D I S COVER D E S I G N : J I M F L E M I N G & CHIEKO SATO

781570l"27l335

CLEAV ALLA COSTA

HOLLOWAY

REVOLUTIONARY WRITING COMMON SENSE ESSAYS IN POST-POLITICAL POLITICS

EDITED BY

WERNER BONEFELD

AUTONOMEDIA

CONTENTS

Foreword Werner Bonefeld, Derek Kerr. Bnan Md ! Preface Werner Bonefeld Acknowledgements

PART I

1.

10

O P E N MARXISM: SI

3.

Anticopynght ©2003 Autonom-

An POB 568 Wilhamsburgh Brooklyn, New York 11211

A

on

Printed in the UmteH States oi Am

5.

15

n as the Determination in Miserable Times"

Destruction as the Determination of the Scholar in Miserable Times Johannes Agnoli

25

an Categories, the Crisis of Capital and the Constitution of Subjectivity Tocw Harry Cleaver

39

"Human Practice and Perversion: Beyond Autonomy and Structure Bonefeld Wei

73

PART II Websile: http://www.auionomrdia.org «aii in(o@autonome«iia.org

D CRITIQ

'In the Beginning was the Scream John Hollowav ditor's Preface to "Destn

2.

<S\O

THE INSURRECTION OF LABOUR AND GLOBAL CAPITAL

"A Critique of the Fordism of the Regulation School Ferruccio Gambino

89

he R< rget ment and Repro ariarosa Dalla Costa

ion

135 FORE

ipiu

a"

T

.' • i H

The

*ng«" erner I

The (

s of t >nu PART 111

189 KJTIQUE O F THE P O L

\L

The Cap!* Illusion and Cntique Werner Bonefeld "Fron olution Against Philosophy to the Revolution gainst Capital" e Rook "Reappropnations of Public Spat Negri Editor's Preface to " Q "Constituent Re} Antonio Negri

J01

. 219

231

uent Republic 2 AS

he present volume draws on contributions to the now-defunct journal Conw The journal was published between 1987 and 1999 With vas devised as a means of cr operated "against the currer cal inquiry into the class struggle The aim was to reflect on "the relationship between revolutionary theory and pr and keep each "on the bo; ars ot Common Sen. This volume provides a snapshot o: He her does thi ume do justice ne scope and variety of what mnu There is no b> published, nor does it represent the best of something as if it were a top-forty actr - there is only cntique Cam Sense was bounded against the backdrop ot the anti-poll tax campaign in Edinburgh. Scotland, b mrad om the L and the Unemplo\ >rkers' Centre. After the defeat of the poll tax. the journal transformed from a more-or-less local discussion forum into a "proper" journal. We kept its heterod< Varxist perspective but "international In t and not ot in Britain, it was a rare journal; it published the articles that the academic mdusdoes not approve of and which, in the late 1980s and early 1990s were most difficult to obtain. ommon Sense was a platform for heterodc jrxist publishing — for a Marxism that takes itself seriousiv and does not entertain the academic indus as a means to an end. The journal collapsed in 1999 The reasons for its derr are many This is a tact and nothing more than the vill be reported here T\ olume keeps alive and available some of the published for the struggle today ar morrow. The book is neither a resum* nor an m the acadenv anthology. There is no resume One hears in the media and learned commentate hat the Utopia of the society ot the tree indi and equal, has run its course There is nothing odd about this view: such decl and express their cUi larations are the business of the bou Th lumt ated rent task It doubts that the misen wt me amount t aJI worlds and agret hat all relatio? aken. despicable being hai cA] is a debased, enslaved mid oi to the insight that theoretical erthrown Besides, wh mysteri nd their ra* lanation in human p and in the comprehension of this prac

jec eds

through, this the espousal o l d e m *d in death, The prefer lume is de\

ntentn a demo ut« huma

and sul

d|

^ ne

{ual, where purpose and n EDI > BK

,R,\\L

T

he present volume differs i

derai

om the originally planned format

n.*f anthology. This format would \ had the advantat for a c th a varu om the mcluding mat fterent articles dealir, luld have proZapatistas to the working class under Although vided a more accurate reflection of the material published in Common & >lumjre of argudisadvantage seems clear been ments and concerns. Besides, some contributions whi ns. This volume, then, included could not be used because of copyright re accour me of the cenis designed as a focused, rather than represent* tral themes ot foM& For this reason, some contributions that had originally been selected had to be left out and some have been included which had in fact not appeared in apters on the si^ ance The volume is in three parts PART I include Open Marxism: Subversion and Cntiqi \RT and character or "cntiqu The Insurrection ot Labour and 11 examines contemporary developmen Global C a p i t a l ) and PART 111 contains contributions on the emancipate dimension of Marx I work and its contemporary The I iue ot n a heterodi I perthe Political) Although all contributions argue spective, the volume does not speak with one Instead it offers an interting of distinct The shared basi ntnbutions is their gentern of bourgeois categ« This critique is not a eral critique of the entn sake It is a determinate < ue. a critique which detercritique for mines the forms of capital as perverted form of human relations In short, the ue o: al economy is realised in contributions are agreed that Ma id equal its negation: the Hopefully th lume will be only the f 4 many, to allow the circulahave not been included here. tion of those additional contributions v Wl

;R BONE

ACKNOWl Willi il

ibutjou

publi thtd in

REVOL! HTIONAKY Wl
Folio "A ( fit' wore I

the •

"I

-I '"

t.il M

Ih

i Publi*

let"

I

I I ll>

19, I99(

l pul i pul

he I i

I >

*Iar in T

was nlut I

s" was first pub

in

I'lnl

ulioi Ih

lli.

ii.il,

'The

'

I in I "Mu

'I'-

ll,

t pul

"M

I 1. I'WI

<*, th wav

publ

ition ol I in l

-t. 1''

. fil Publi

Uislt

w

I '' , '

//

M

s IN ) | | | K

S

PART O

OPEN MARXISM: SUBVERSION AND CRITIQL

IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE SCREAM

John Holloway

I

n the beginning was the scream. W h e n we talk or write, it is all too * forget that the beginning was not the word, but the screai iced with the ream of hoi destruction oi human lives by capitalism, a scream o f s a d n ror, above all a scream ^f r e The starting point of the. A reflection is opposition, negativity, struggl T h e role of theoi to elaborate that scream, to e rength and to through so^ and c o n t r i b u t e to its power, to show how the scream resot to contribute to that resonance. m, but presum That is the origin of Marxism, not just oi of o u r o w n interest in Marxism. Ti peal .m lies m to be a 11leory of struggle, of opposition on But that is not wl m has become. 1 than the Today Marxism is probably more discrc bourge in the universities, but neory ol struggle 1 he experacial in tht pec t. rience of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe has b< al ideologv ol the state has meant th. the identify ation ol Marxism aa the o thr struggles against the state have taken th m n< aggies in a r Marxism," as was hoped by many in the so long, but ol strugBut it is not only in the East that the statification gles against Marxism ai I Marxism has led I »n. In the West too, the surge of Marxism in the universities m the late I and early 1970s has led in some degree to its ition. B o n n into the universities on a wave of working-class struggle, de Marxist th* has tended to be sucked into the general separation of theory >m practice w h i tenses the university as an i ition. As the wave Marxism, has ebbed, many Marxist of struggle, which provider! the bas idemics have completely a b a n d o n e d Ma U even worse, perhaps, many *m with them as they adapt to the ins have not. but have carried their M Often this is not tutional B tures a n d professional pressures of the univei

n

John HolLiu the result of conscious choice, but rather the result of the dynam >j nonchoice; work in the university has its own dynamu which constantly tends to from a >oliti< al base. The result is often a Marxism separate theoretical v which more sophisticated, hut no less dcU-rmtnist, than the old "orthodo the communist parties. In both cases with the state ideology of the East or the sophisticated acaof the West. Marxism has lost its scream Class struggle remains a oiy, but the simple statement at the start of the Comma* U.imf<: ol class struggle. It is little w o n d e r that ruggie feel little attraction to who are actively involved in anti 'such Marxism And yet a theory of the scream is more urgent than ever It is more urgent than ever because capitalism is both increasingly fragile and increasingly terThe scream will continue as long as capitalism does, but there is a real danger that Marxism as the language of the scream, as the theory of protest, ild get lost. Marxism as a th mnism i an ideology of the discredited, but it is more urgent than ever to develop Marxism clearly ory i uggle. There is of course a long tradition of emphasising strugas gle as the central element m , a long tradition of what one might call "lelt Marxian but it is a diverse and often sub mean tradition, without very clear continuities Many of those w h o politic ally have insisted on the self organisation of the v mg class have retained theoretical concepts that work the articulation of the power of labour (as in Pannek> discussion crisis, lor example), and m a m of th e made important t h e o r

In the Beginning U'.i.- >b

Btributi tothi mg working class power have adopted often ambivalent political i ons in practice (Adorno, lor example). The i oi tl regimes of Eastern Europe is, or can be, a liberation ol Marxism from much baggage acquired over the la ntury, but it is very important to try to be 1 Marxism clear about the foundations of this 1)1 he most obv point to be made about a theor uggle is that its basis e understock terms o uggle, then there is is uncertainty II the world i , kind. Struggle In definition, is un no room for determinism ategories which eptualise it m t understood aa open too The determini \s m riumphalist moments (such as the end of Section munut JLm . Chapter 32 of Vol. I t tal or th 59 1 ol the e" whu h is so important for t! lox" Marxist tradition) musi as must o| historical and a final inevital m, As Adorno put it. alter the expenen n, it is no I to think agression et* longer possible ul it • ing with communism he in ble ne^ i of 1 n W :ilv think ol the dialectic as being a negative dialectic, a dia ition with no t nthesis In a world of untruth, the only coi I truth tl isnegati fhere is no certain t\ in M m onl\ ra to truth is tin- lorce ol i k on untruth This leads perhaps world Jorno 1990. ' I >. but the d not in th ion l>ut in the rcalr ^rld hurtling \\h< >ws where. rhe dia negai >g class, [n a world no neutral is the \ ive of our strn gle. As Tronti put it in • In. Ii provided one ol the st ig |>.>mt> !<M th, » tl king class" (1964 I On begin ning . il. ow nega As Rosa tha -truggl irgput »t. "The Ui IIK-U.A ol ,,t i apital m th mt ol * ol ita transcendent "it ii

It

II without that, th untv I

mgless. irgeois theory a ,nt H

the

'

bourj

the.

usumption ,ml

m, the po in. tl

B

John H

ry

It is essential to retain the idea that t ting point must be the struggle of the working class Linton Kwesi Johnson has a wonderful expression when he describes the violent r group ol blacks to police harassment the bile t oppression was vomited" {Fnr Niffktd cf Blading)* If we are to avoid the structural-functionalism th. araeter much o\ Marxist theo tant think of our work in those terms: as a vomiting ot the bile *ssion. H en there is a difficulty here, and it is a difficulty presented b lot of left theory The focus on the struggle of the working class leads very easily to a conception of the working class as purely external to capital. From (corre ' emphasising the subjectivity of labour and the antagonism between labour and capital as the starting point, such approaches easily move to simply counterposing the subjectivity of labour to the objectivity of capital, thus reproducing the concept of the objecti capital, The one-sided emphasis on subjectivity (voluntarism) although it appears to be the opposite of objectivism (determinism), is actually its logical complement. Both operate with the assumption that there t distinction between class struggle and the laws of economic development: the difference lies only in the primacy attached to one or the other Alternatively, all notion of the "logic of capital" is abandoned and capital is seen as a purely external subject, manipulating and controlling labour Class struggle is then seen as the clash of two opposing armies, as a battle that goes back and forth, to and fro. At this level there is no history, or rather history is a formless thing, without shape, without tendency Marx's conception is different: in the clash of the two opposing armies of and labour, there is something that gives direction and shape to the struggle. Tha ; he fact that the two sides are not in fact external to each other: capital is nothing other than alienated labour, the objei y of the "real world" is nothing than our own alienated subject r The basis of both sides of the truggle is the same: the power of labour. Capital is nothing other than alienated labour. This is the basis of the labour theory of value, which was seen efore Marx, by both the radical Ricardians and their critics, as an asser>n of the power of labour. At its most basic, the power of labour is the power to create, and therefore also the power to destroy. When Marx distinguished between the worst architect and the best bee b ving that the former pla the construction re executing it, he might also have added that the architect is also more likely to fail in the constr >n. The power of labour is the power of uncertain creation, the power of that w not, the power of nonidentity (Adorno). of the Not Yet (Bloch), of the working class N o (Tronti) hen labour and capital confront each other, this is not an external conontation The power of labour meets the power of lai» but in the lorm ot its antithesis. C uliction "n< lentity under the aspect of identity

In the Beginning Wat tkt vdorno) negativity under the u p *

m of

ipitd The substance ol J 18 the power of labour; the power of labour exists under the aspect of capital it assumes the form of capital, the fetishised between capital and labour is seen as a erform of capital Once the rela. nal relation, then the question of form becomes crucial. Unlike the Ricardians, who were content to show that the substance of value v lD our, ' concerned with the form of value, with the question why the product of labour orm as being the took the Form of value - and indeed he saw the que crucial dividing line between his theo. nd bourgeois theory, for h the hit is question of form is meaningless (Capital 1. BO) The whole of Mar study of the (more and more (used) forms of the power of labour The jal "pivot" for an understanding of the different forms of social relations i existence of labour as concrete and i act labour, tht that con« useful labour takes the form of abstract labour, tl hat useful, creative labour confronts itself in meaningless, alienated forn II capital cannot be understood as external to labour, it cannot be unci stood as something economic The movement of capital can only be und od as the movement of the contradiction (internal t< ) between and labour, the movement i uggle. The notion of "Ma »ne of the most unfortunate creations of the "orthod aditioi. as it suggests a separation of capital »rom struggle, must be abandoned. But it the movement of capital can only be understood as the movement of struggle, the movement of struggle can only be understood as a in id-a£ pital. The notion that you < an understand the m tent or of society in abstraction (rom the particula: hit h it I he notion that underlies the conce] "M also be abandoned. (The ence, an ide ted by Poul absurd notion of a Mai not even be mentioned Discuss rm(' n appe *d >m an\ political concern, 10 it ia important to emp1 pt of r important oping Mai theoi uggl<- The ci issue is the articulation and recognition ol tin. \ concept tl niggle, but sees struggle a* ig external to ogm Iv one aspert ol the power of labour It he he sc resonance ol the tm within < It sees the DOv labour ,ura strikes, in demonstrations, in arm* in l i " en prod11 id mon I. in th nnolnon b« ogy or in the internal disorder ol th er of labour in the aggies, but do ee il in ce response ot th due as an uncontrollable it th* al It ia the pi ol

In

l

I"

I, ar. " g lOtial r

c

go

m (ti m of

ruggle* hall ol i in/ens. struggle ma .

,M ur (

n form and •* an m

beg

,lo

» tht

*t th

the our

ii

titionaJ non adei the Forms of capin other words

i be*

n ter

and nple

II

contained within it

then n

is neutral things), then there po$

eith

vorkin

hin t

•n — the unci ve p

»ol — or el ing in the int

gu

ome

n th'

Bu

and-bt

possible ,herl does n*

ass struggle does not simj ight

tn ol

tea not simply exist within cap

•rflo

U. Cap; l]

labour

UH

and thereLabour

• simplv tl

labour

the \

ess

he movement ol the overflowing-art <» movement

ntainmen

tion / d

»n.

theoretical, although th

rerlt r

*~ ns are bro-

i is the process b y w h i c h social i n t e r c o m *

i

' process-

in the sense ol a lin

in-against-and-beyond ca

uain

g^l

n is clearlv i aJ It"

riot

thing

g line Labour

ung labour, n

Th<

ie sense i

it e\

ipital

>n between

n is th .ml the the-

id th ment of th.

n c>

n. on the containment of a

ling line between in. against and be;

\ clear

hich

— a point empha-

neither external nor internal it is both but with no clear dn

througl

n, n

as a strug*

>nd it. The relation between labour

nd become ii

t in th

'x>ur (the "impo-

erred to> as a

Capital's reproduction depends on

ts in

>rm

ol poli

ant to see the

T h i s is not to say that ,n

bour as con-

hich the comp

in other words, class struggle

• see th

the dual

permeates not only the workplace, but the sised but without i entiation in tl

Was

>cess ol fetish]

int more genera

crete and a'

tit sees the only pos-

ol resolving this dilemma, the dilei I the-

ike tl

tndable but

flowing, an in-again

then

Oi

in with no

s no out

surrounding the

hroughout the world, and in the equa and "crimes' agair

unpr-

tfl

mat hil

l e , in all the con!

struggle that always goes

flism is total and the w o r k i n g class cannot see through

th

relic

ur

m,

ng class becomes theore ipo&sit'

thai Strug

as it is sometime

rstand Marxism

ng human t lent struggle The

ies a cc<

turns," then it is in

. • J for the w

the

command of mone

, fUHJt

tute themselves, n

ocial

ol mone

n, bu! constant! The Dame

L To

rnple, is not simj

ietrable

It is the decompos movemei

al refh

he working

he movement

I

mtt

fe

Jle

irking claw tne

^8 °* motheri

the assurance that "things are so." Defetishisation is the unleash ir

tne

bn Hflikmay lv truth is that things are not so. that truth

tne

lv n< sm is •

'he theoi ver of labour in-agaim the theory ol the si \ which shows thai tht -am does i what is usually called "class struggle* h u t that B much, much more p< tu! than that because it reverberates in the ^.- n n es in the deepest silent everyday lil n Kwi puts it:

EDI I

PREFACE TO J O H A N N E S AGNOLI'S

" D E S T R U C T I O N AS T H E D E T E R M I N A T I O N O F THE S C H O L A R IN M I S E R A B L E T I M E S "

In u ears are the many wailing cries of mis Inside our bo the internal bleeding or stilled volcanoes, Inside our heads, the erupting thoughts of rebellion. How can there be calm when the storm is vet to come? i Sides of Silence tilled volcanoes" inside our bodies, the "erupting -rnal bleeding of rebellion" inside our heads, the existence of non-identity under the aspt [entity, the presence of the I the Now, the power of labour in-again .d-bevond capital are the instability of capital, its constant tendento c sis is the mam ition of that power and for that reason the cenm,. ( s is the eruption of the power of labour. Tl

ES

Adorno, T.W DuiL (Routledge, London). Gunn, R. (1987 m and Mediation," ( Stnte, no 2. Hali (198 Realignment for Wha ; >ecember. Johnson. L K (1975) Dread Beai Bogle L'Ouverture Publications, London), larx, Volume 1, (Progress Publishers. Moscow).

J

ohannes Agnoli's contribution first appeared in German in 1990. Against the background of th^ fall of the Berlin Wall, the context of Agnoli's argument is the institutionalisation through parliamentary politics of the so-called new social movements of the 1970s during the 1980s. This "normalisation" and •onsibilisation" of the new (West-)German Left was accompanied by what first sight appears to belong to a different area of controversy the Historians Dispute of the 1980s. This dispute was provoked by Habermas' reaction to neoconservative attempts at normalising German fascism. According to them, fasrifled as a defence of the European middle classes against m \\ Bolshevism and the extermination ot millions merely a copv-cat of the original Gulag. Habermas reacted against this interpretation of German fasm and proposed that, in contract to the neo-conservative attempt of providir national pride and love of the German fatherland, that the ing a nevv lv patriotism possible in German is constitutional patriotism — the love of the constitution. The institutionalisation ol the previously unruly new social mstitumovements and the historians dispute connect in Habermas idea o u.il patriotism, that is the espousal of the liberal-democratic state and its values ol equality, justice, and freedom, as the best of all world Instead of entiI liberal-democrat r what it is. the acceptance ling the constitu d entails the acthe values upon the "politic al game" entaih whu h it is based, transforming the «}ue of the state into a constructive cr >m that while aiming to better tate, leads to the strengthening of the UCtUl il power. Agn lata and compares the constructive attempts al movemer better the state with tern theory's the erstwhile nc itain and new social forces into the inception ^ how Structures of power — this not to change but rather to strengthen them. The ntegrat Force that the norm "responsibility" entail essay sh< seer.

the proponents of state power as a useful resource for stabilising tl ires of powt Lgnoli • ludes Ins essay b mg that it was wntt< r German readers. Indeed, the essav deals with Germai But it does so in .i lys-

22

and this n

fus argument n

la theorei

l / n t s Qr

n bt

the essay is essentially ab the relationship the I rtt and the form o\ the a argues h rastii inflict) to d e i t r u c t r ique (and ritiqi nA dt inds firmly on the di hat it \ rightful | u> destroy horrors. In he sh< hat hone :eanin^ ritique L «d pt the vt ns through which horror suf implication ol Agnoli *rument i t the Left, it it takes itsell seriously, has to be a destrucid tl t Let firmly on the side of h u m a n emancipananctp i entails that the Left a b a n d o n s its illusions about the on The world t a world w h e r e humans are s a means of lib purpose and rid of human dignn Human di£ it requires patten

>es n rid n

w e cheap. It

2 DESTRUCTION AS THE DETERMINATION O F THE SCHOLAR rN MISERABLE TIMES

J o h a n n e s Agnoli

>urage. M o r e important-

pub ion of Afc essay in lish in Common Serve no. 12, d by W e r n e r Bonefeld and Byrt Klammack. It contained a numerrors that have been corrected in the present translation. T h e re-translation benefited from the publication of a revised G e r m a n edition of the essay published in his Der eiterr Scbriften zur Krtiik derPoldik, (, -lburg, 1995. The article appeared first in Krnkret no. 2. February 1990.

T

he determination <>t scholarly work as destruction originated with J o h a n n Gottlieb Fichte. Holderlin dr ttention to the m ot the j Fichtes determinatio is based on the beliel in the emer^ new era; misery that he asked Holderlin, in contrast, lound the period to be one « himsell '.vhat role, it any, was leh tor a po In our time, misery remains Strang len and appears stru^ reconstruction of here conformist values, the dign ture is unearthed toge is Mora and uble rem. on the ^ O n the ontr °* the institutional t& *, th< nofl dthecommunicatn nuofinl Iv engage ,orm

id hie-

lid the et

me vease

nplifj the world oi thing* through temic red

Detfrtk mitnic the 1

rful I ng

i tlu It ii h<

i-ms i immun ! inl

<>! '

n. Because

hand-in-hai the mush oi the soul. TIR- latl | not 'er disturbing that tin- new proponen |le 3

ei ir

ny reason its I role i iny i time, provoking n and e , whether it be from church, s des- or ai Tn of rule, as Voltaire hkrd to sa It e that th< loiarly world accepts the seeming lack of ruptures un ed historiography and its failure to interpret terms; Habermaa sed Nolte and his discarding nan son; TugenJ — in constit; terms according to the — Ha be ran riendly critique of Nolte.-* Nevertheless, a co in the ied order is widespread. ns of constituted power Those who do mistrust especially the existing re I d en role to lead humanity to emancipation, 6 and who ala and shun a constructive engagement with polido not make pc find then |uite untntent !l\. in conflict with the stipulated norms Constitution according to which scholarly work has to project constitutes below ) The mi me that the successfully stabilized structures of power I in alternative social projects have e at all levels — even those e m Imed from se >ntent — this misery demands destruction. The ter' ru< I, trust has to he undone, and, instead, the ubt ha ce again to b >red to its rightful place so ower i >rld changes, and that, in the face that at the soothing image of a taultle^ irrent dram developments, the symbols of the positive, the g< ind the rtunat reentry only West-German h. Meanwhile. German seems to remain a country where c >ssoms always in constructive intinuout, uninterrupted German term Is tl intelle* traditi

Tl The gr somstatemen me t

proporo he Enlightenment teaches us tht l nt. Kai true, regar MuJ his own noble I jr, the moral code in our hearts as a useful kd he admired th Anything else, however, tl mind hi the sical unity ol the world, the objec-

tlv

y the Dtttrmb

holnr


I u1 I le role: it is the role of philosophy to enlighten th hara of the constitution Ate of orders to J it What did I understand by the true character''" Kant in n« meant the well known gap between constitutional norms and constitutional hereby it Id be the obligati. n the part of pof till and schola; he damage. Kant did not differentiate between "good constitutional norms' and bad const, tutional reality." Kant's emphasis on the true character of the constitution focused neg. on the rottenness of the norms themselves. I ed the right of philosoph destroy all constitute illusion.and e the hc, rep. native body as, in fact, a reality of domination [// called all affu mations of the constitution by one name: "Deceitful publi, /the Faculty. Konigsberg, 1798). (

:

rmut

ition of the determine

i of the did i main with* mt found it into I legel's concep* the con.s edom — ng Hegel (ii itraat t< ni. w h o became wiser with age) subsumed n« m under a , oncil th the I Hegel was a poor I a much better Student The ^ uident followed n hed e Hegel's reconciliation. M a r x wanted constr >r affirm He wanted primarily to negate. Like Heine, he was tradition-bound to the historic duty of decomposition. He went, however. urther: into the depth and into the bf M a r x was not s. i merely exposing the true cha or of the constitution. Beyond the oi the constituted deceitfulness of the constitutional state and reaJi e, and that is its funcafter exposing its true chara tion, had to be revealed. He destroyed the illusion of the pretty form of the rm that hides and yet organizes an ugly com In this w a y the abs< a mode of production on which bourgeois purposive-rationalii profltabiht ed, exposed. It stood naked. All w h o live heir labour and the sale of their labour power "find themselves directly opposed to the form in which, hitherto, the individuals, of w h i c h society conthemselves as individuals, they must o v e r t h r o w the state." Bakunin on Asia? No: M a r x and G e r m a n y {German L^Mogy, M E W 3, p. 77) Negation and destruction are therefore not missing form the German holarly tradition. O n the contrary, it has its classics. T h e i r destructive reason has representatives even w h e r e common wisdom a n d the e d u c a t e d middle ild least expect. O n l y a few in this c o u n t r y know, for example, who Benimm-Knigge real! LA: 'tree M i s t e r " Knigge was a radical J a c o b i n understood the tcrreur and who, thinking about "Qa ira," criticised the G e r m a n condition, lamenting that in Germany, the nice l a m p p o s t s are standing all so unuse

ED

i;

Is this tradttior lly that of the "other G e n which has historically hed aside by mainstream, constructive G e r m a n y ? t — are still In reassurance: Knigge's lampposts — w h e t h e r pretty 01 ,te \ light only for the streets. F o r the scholar, on the other i. there still remains the Kantian duty and the M a r x i a n project a n d that is, to ue the philosophical-political destruction of this powerfully protected misery that is blessed by consensus. By continuing this project, however, the lars are lik to live in the s h a d o w s . General goodwill 28

removed h«>m thei I they make themselves suspe I Hut they must acce .i .Linger it they an ?ake tl. crmi nation and th. Thisthi agar II official o r d e n (jB >d°seholars are left with no alten the edom that I e" EgVj orred to the structure of po< close the fragiln When scholars orientate the: on Kant he special order e then they appropriate Kant's wisdom t King) and deal with the constituted liberal-democratic order and the stru of power in a two-told and rig rnou The ittempt to com eal the true character of the constitution and tl g th, ork ie with the ZcitgeLttA' The 2Zctitin.it creeps in I om the con mination tead to p. m the building one Iv work, and choose firms existing conditions and norms, then the dep! ate o s loses ible accidei The responsil >r its reality and transforms into cor rnmg these with th« ting the markc of power, and of j iment The first manifest the ZX f undoubte JLS critical, but does not recognise its negative determination which is a dl and principally "de omnibus dul im" lbt eve Tlv dimension ol the Ztitgcul ia zed by the p mg quest for the s supposed to V ngood; that is, just equality and t lorn The g< iknesses. But the coi constitutionally guaranteed, despit c gr< order is I und viction that the liberal-ci al mfillr. ol hi n b» th necessary, rend phy a pu edit building In II enlightened pi >n to d to i se ng r a m m e th mc d the uni t through which all political mi realize t! hum BuJ even lo ted From tionalil deal >ethe Haritni danger, caught on th ge of th* I dr. into the posi becomes ti «al il through edit red an ol 1 all mch remains d h that lies b tl adverse bi -m.l for n I! nitial enlightenn n not lenie ambles into d i\l tead something o ualitj I oal I the word, has run nt t be i

n a

nags

dly

n

unpleasant things heavx indigestible I t t t f f t k ,n

rem

th

philosophy

II pa,.t its

Sc||-U

>mes harmless, observable. the love of tl

< *>NSmi kwru,

l U

hea its

I a f f i r m a t i o n : edii

Const r

,on

therland a n d proclaims, instead, its love of the

re

n this r

ngels" observation is c o n f i r m e d m the

the w o r l d , poi.ti

r exph nal

c« w i t h the O

insists on the rule o f l a w and on the

orckr

r and constitution is not sul

In G e r m a n y , however, obedience to it -

one is also r e q u i r e d to love them

For fear o f u n d e r m i n i n g the political c u l t u r e a n d o f r a i s i n g n e w uncernties about p r o v e n institutions, reason, once tree a n d p r o b i n g , becomes ind dissolves in a

old m a n n e r : first in g e n e r a l a n d second

In the late middle ages, philosophy h a d f r e e d itseU r r o m servitude — the destructive force o f n o m i n a l i s m . P h i l o s o p h y d i d no longer

due in pa wit

I remain in the role of an ancilla tb< eonstn

ttitulionv.

J servant autonorm ob

he institutional norms — these are n o r m s o f p o w e r a n d d o m i n a t i o n

— w i t h suspi the

philosophy a f f i r m s e x i s t i n g c o n d i t i o n s a n d its defence of

tutional o r d e r provides the office for the p r o t e c t i o n o f the constitu-

tion, that is the security service ion. T h i s d e v e l o p m e n t is in

th the m u c h d e s i r e d ideological legitima-

th

:essi>

ol the J a c o b i n t e r r o r has l o n g sin December I

ith G e r m a n /

intentions. T h e een tr

— to use a f a m o u s phrase

revolutionary

o r m e d into a consti-

cor

>n lies in th

it th<

tnoughts about it, any i structure

ver becom a s<

acter ol t

rtluou . d.

ons i;

'3. already saw

onflii i 17 [kit he also declared that contlicts must be

confined w i t h i n the bounda H e r e it is not U

ve endorse-

>n. h is seen as the most s

ical f o r m . Rather it i:

ndation of the poll'

/. Conflict is accepted as a stabihzit

tern, providing it with structures

he

ecunng its success. I

ever conflict manifests itself in constructive or lu ment does not remain absent Confli

ever, wher-

nal forms, tht

la-

hout critical ideas amount to me

s h a d o w - b o x i n g and so lose their functionality. Critique seems, then, to be a systemic condition of political stability

But this presupposes a pai

praised a n d emphasised quality ol

jue —

t must retrain I r o m d e s t r t

iar, mu

bandon its nee

I opera

itique — yet another tautology* of the Z

tractive stantly makes p<

e

proposals a n d seeks to improve and consolidate existing conditions. In so far as itique opposes any attempt at demolishing whi

the aim ol destructive critique, con e critique1

ol destr

UCti

i. thought —• lacks n the

|UC is also a ci

tew fbi

also w i t h sevei cocesses, m

on the p measured. A th.

ate and sees the state as

Being' or


This is ients, fa*

-e

ionalit) ol d

yardstn.k against whi

o r y w h i c h is devoted to ti

they alsi

ting conditi

itique — looked at from the i

tth grc

-r the positi

stitution is t r u e . C o n s e q u e n t l y , any lural p r o n o u n c e m e n t s , a n y destruction ol the

inisterofCorp

veen

guarantees for .lashes of interest and seeks to support them as long is they are

m

In this manner, K a n t has been stood o n his head", the t r u e

require the p l u r a l s

the consolidating quality of strikes. Besides, the German constitution provide^

Law, A r t i c l e 1 8 ) . I 5 I n the mean-

r hole

ns and inten

ment in system theory which emphasises the constructive nature of conflicts and

R o b e s p i e r r e ' s speech on the

t i m e , love has become a satyr's g a m e : the n e w C h a u v i n ^ stands g r i n n i n g it tht

the so.

rent activities c o m p a r e d w i t h the a c t i v i t i e s of those whose holds honest c o n s t r u c t i v e

Does it

>givings about this.

through law, not provoked. This clever notion achieved <

ntellectual scolding o f this office. H o w e v e r , w h e n d e a l i n g w i t h supposed inspires qui

has sorr.

contained w i t h i n the limits ol the system; in general they must be regulated

ntrast to a n o t - s o - d i s t a n t past w h e n there

real enemies o f the c o n s t i t u t i o n , the s e c u r i t y service's i n s t i t u t i o n a l love

ed and edification approves itself.

h>rm not need the conflict ol ui who was It..

By refusing the possibility o f a destructive

hin society that searches tor e m a n c i p a t i o n , a n d b y refusing to

«

groups and six ial partr

a n d r e g a i n e d its autonomy,

e manifestations d r a g p h i l o s o p h y b a c k i n t o the role of a

e endeavours are widely m

T h e other positive manifestation of the Ztilgaji D o e s

jtiot

e*

date.

n.l that is, it maint

the phase o f edil<

d|1

hi>l*rLn

'h love but

s we know, within t'

em all field

nd persons not

1 imi

anothe neshed n«

For c o n s t i t u t i o n a l patriotism, the

k th

scep<

Should one mesh tail, and tht d

. an u n k n o w n i; lip into the n e t w o r k , then the

omo rela

on n

ssert itsell

wer on and

le m<

ting th

ll8|

Bu selv.

thai u hat facilitates m r It is not called !• I undei It.n n

theodlC) Ol the state

died respon

>blig

1 *r " t.-nall; lai

ol cow ) tnsurr-

H tl responsibly, they leav >tential a n d contribute instead to the

political j tht*

»Up I th

ihc capat

ga

*rn |

lm

liberal-democral

tl

|, and lastly u

bed by th

rules and

he

.supplies the means « % « *

rial For in his time, G o d certainly l< i ver

inle.

ion it lized in a constituhe neo-Leibnizian proo I secu^ 1ent _

d high level But this theodicy does m

but he also v

nd them-

ution ,s not misled

the best of all possible v

d u l l y the haphazard evil of man-kind ir

ins and mete out final punishment

const.tut.on , annot do withou

\litionsf nentary dem<

-

m

M

com

pi\n(io/u
o enter mt

in the i

Living and h contribute

lx>ve of tl

rid and

resp.

ures o f p o w e r on the I nd not m

veistheba gether again in the end

A love that p n

he

itrol. It is for this limple reason tl

w h o are lovingly tolerated are alst

I those

ematicallv kept under surveillan*

its previously unruly

it becomes a firm constituent element

tuted

SOMI

d lorces transform into Ki

tion and thereby \

o(

n the end. neither the nice A

r m tht

temic function

Vollmer nor the destructive J .

t h d r a w from this mechanism ol integration that is so much

In the end. there should be some constructiveness after all. " W h e r e is the positive 7 " In the miser;

-ur time, we find it only in negation, in the nov\

— the so-called Utopia In fact, th. all structures of in-

W

m the* ) in as

Jan

object ( t h e constitu-

It

n

as the heirs of critical theory — that i nally. «t even

the sake ol f o r m

only possible

mistrust but it does so

F o r i?

is precisely the opposite.

) gene'

tionm u c h serv

the c<

destabili.

nsumn

the founders of th» a I hun

Po:

n in tl

r m a n constitution idiom. N t

m tl

.n T h e \ luring a p

imenl

were

remove . res>

i he

i of freedom

eedom but simultaneo

v ho

battles

ng

i

The w o r k o f t ! A'er

the fore

concluding problem how can furort] |

:\ij the

I h.i\

i this I

«erm

id

pie w h o m one must take seriou e enlightenment with resp

e the lestn

olar without the furor teutomcus | ' The mcl

vill entice the ossified re

0 dam e, needs the basso continuo of irony — that is the most secure dt

of w

Rl!

G e r m a n read*

conflicl

h as the c o n s t n th tl

tbihzation has to be restored. The defence

n as the determination of the ig

sen ie cc

«d it must be released from all constitutional k r

iimself" (Geymonai>

D o u b t come

heless. sy

• id, in thi strust —

m its svs-

ystem theoi in the "constru

I do not [

>n that looms on the bori-

n is identical with the defence and rea

u\iti-

today the

[er-

I n ess*

ntending

-bhlizing functio

Its historic dignity as a ton

is. It detests destructive critique and mines the

out from the impending obht.

claims earnestly to wa

g u m e n t a t i o n th h g g i n g un<

rdination and power — this utop

F o r the scholar, this means that social conflict must be free

terni-

and lov-

| emerges from the destruction

e against th. tortuous and misguided path of constructive thought TRANSLATED BY

BOI^

Ixtnnt Dutrtu turn (u> the Dctrrmuxatun

Th

tes have been compiled bv the t They are meant to guide tin reader through Agnoli s argument and to suggest further reading. l For a J ed assessment see Agnoli T h e Market, the State and the End ol H in Bonefeld, W and K. Ps\ pedis (ecU) The Politio* ofCbam Palgrave, Lond 000 Agnoli refers here to the regressive transformation of consciousness into forms ol technological and that is functional rationality Agnoli refers here to the growth of occultism, spiritualism and esoterism during the 1980s. Agnoli refers here to the Historians Dispute of the 1980s The Frankfurter Ri hiiu is a national liberal-left newspaper. See also Agnoli's Fadctynuu >ne RevLHsn, Qa ira. Freiburg, 1997 tor an an is of fascism and critique of attempts, including Noltes, at normalising fascism and of according blame for fascism to the working class. An introduction of his book to an English readership can be found in Bonefeld "On Fascism,'' Common Serine no 24. See also BolognNazism and the Working Class/' published in Seru*e, no. 16 5 See Kant's definition of the Enlightenment as humanity's exodus from sell imposed immaturit; 6 Note that the article was first published in February 1990 when the upheaval in East Germany was at its peak f Kant, I. (1868) "Nachlafi," in Sdmmtllche Werke, G. Hartenstein edition, vol. 8, Leopold Voss, Leipzig. 8 Agnoli refers here to the Radikalerurlaft of 1972. This Erlu/S barred people with supposedly anti-constitutional opinions from employment in the civil service, including teachers and postmen. See also footnote 10. 9 Adolf Freiherr von Knigge, 1752 to 1796, was the author of a book on how to behave "Benimnv Knigge" translates as "Be have-Knigge 10 Art and science, research and teaching, shall be free. Freedom of scholarly work shall not absolve from loyalty to the constitution" (Basic L*iu't Art. 5, 3). By the late 1970s, at the height of the new social movements, University Professors were, under pressure of dismissal, forced to sign statements declaring their loyalty to the state. Unless scholarly work accepts the contut lonal order, it would otherwise place itself in legal jeopardy and be subjected to police surveillance and persecution. The following quote from a Constitutional Court judgement of the early 1970s might clarify this: "The normative right ree speech and free expression of opinion is restricted il

34

„/the Scholar fa MwrabU

Turn*

the expression of opinion is in opposition to the liberal dem« ic ground order The legally protected right to express the opinion that there is no freedom 0 mon in the Federal Republic of Germany casts doubt on the validity of the constitutional value of the liberal democratic ground order Because of this, the opinion that there is no freedom of opinion in Germany is not protected by the basic right of free opinion" (quoted in PreuB, Ltijatttat and PiuralumuJ, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, 1973. p. 2A). On Agnoli's conceptualisation of the Rechh.'ttuit and liberal-democracy, see his Dw Trai motion ikr Dtmokratu urn* andtn SckrifUn zur Kntii- Jer Poldik, Qa ira, Freiburg, 1990. For an introduction of this book to an English readership see, Bonefeld "Constitutional Norm versus Constitutional Reality in German; apUal t$ CLu* no. 46, 1992. 1 1 Kant's reply is published in 1 mflwL< of the Ity. In his reply to the King's order to abstain from denigrating Christianity. Kant argues that since he did not provide an appreciation of Christendom, he could therefore not be a c c u s e d of degrading Christendom. His reply, in fact, emphasises the importance of Christendom because of its moral force to secure good and honest b e h a v i o u r In short, Kant's reply agrees with the King and it does so in such a w a y that makes the ossified relations dance. Kant replies with irony, determination and praises the existing powers in a careful wa Praise of existing p o w e r s is not a punishable offence. Yet, like never ending applause, it can work like a destructive fort l ^ Agnoli is referring here to Habermas' notion ol nal patriotism that he offered as an alternative rational source oi national identity and as a m e a n s of securing the liberal-democratic values of justice, equality and fr< rn. 13 Article 18 of the German Constitution declares that those w h o make an u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l use of the basic liberal rights enshrined in the tution, lose their basic rights. S e e also footnote 10. M T h e term chauvinism derive m a French comedy in which the character o f N i c o l a s Chauvin playi ihe role of an ardent veteran of Napoleon's. C h a u v i n i absurdly extravagant national pride and sense of national duty repeats ittell as a c o m e d y m the activities of the s e c u n B against s u p p o s e d e n e m i e s within (see footnote 15) ere to th* vities of the security service m the federal I 16 Agnoli r of Ix>wer Saxonv. It became k n o w n in 1986 that a b o m b that had exploded outside the walla of ft prison in the town of Celle. where persons convicted o f terrorist off. I were held, w a s not detonated by a terrorist g r o u p as ,t w a s alleged, but by the security service itself T h e person n ble for the bombing w a s a convicted murder w h o had been

J

A

rhe bomb attack ^ as used as a means <>( intcniiJ n 8 B and of infil ng tf .mo i\w ^ the search for te scene as a The constitut referred to by Atiu n, the new u\ in as an follower ol I der n state terrorism. B quo bas rhis section analyses t tnbution (em theory to the stal>i j 0 n Qr p al f r The important proponents are Luhman and Parsons ork plays a significant part in Habermas' reconstm ri. , n ol crittheon >r a destrtn tn itique ol Habermas, see Reich* Jiir£en Habermas' Reconstruction of Historical Materialism/ in B . |,j W. and The Pola Palgrave, London, 2000. I >n Italian fascism's acceptance of social conflict as a constructive force that supports the stability of political power, see chapter 8 of his Faacbumtu ohnt fevkt&n, op) rder to claj his point, see for example the current debate on globaii sation where well-meaning commentators argue that globalisation leads to nev* >arbansm if its lo^ tnnot be arrested through the creation of new forms of liberal-democratic intervention at the national and transnational level Tf '"gument charges that the Left has to abandon its negative critique of capital and its state because the misery created bv globalisation requires urgent action and intervention of a radical reformist kind. Globalisation is said to have rendered obsolete the ability of anti-systemic pposition to effect change. In order to avoid the dreadful consequences of globalisation, the I>eft is called upon to make positive constructive proposals. In short, dest ive c ue of capital and its state is rejected as socialirresponsible. It provides no positive proposals for the avoidance of barinsm and for this reason, by implication, is seen to be complicit in capital's pre of neo-Iiberal globalisation a detailed discussion, see •nefeld < rlobalisation and Democracy." in Comtrwn Strut, no. 22, 1997. The idea >mmuT ive action in spaces defined by the absence of power Habermas \ jue see op. cit 'llmer ar th were representatives of the G* llmer) and fundamental I )itfurth) I The realist faction called r a policy of ecological realism and favoured to join the Social Den «»« Party in a coalition government. The fundamentalist faction represented a n comprehensive r m oi 'he established pa
k DtttrminatwnoftlxScboL

junior partner of a coalition government led by tht Party

imcd

! Democratic

Agnol. refers here to Habermas and Offe. the two best known representatives of the second generation of critical theory. H i t federal parli. ,t can only pass a vote of no-confidence in the Federal Chancellor by the tl >n. with an absolute m ty. of his suceessoi {HiUHi Law> Article 7, \ 23 Agnoli quotes here from Geymonat s La Ubtrta. Geymonat is pre r of philosophy at the University of Turin, ha

Johannes Aan. Destruction MS the Dettrmuxatwn of the Scholar m MuerabU Time*

released froi>m prison. The bomb attack was used as a means of intensifvin the search for w terrorists r r o n m and MIU of %n infiltrating u u u u a a n | the incconvict eonviciinto theheterrnn scene as a contact. The constitutional corned' d to by Airnol entails, then, the new Chauvin as an ardent follower of law and order of constitutional status quo based on state terrorism 16 This section analyses the contribution of system theory to tl ibilisation of political power. The important proponents are Luhman and Parsons Parsons' work plays a significant pan in Habermas' reconstruction of critical theory. For a destructive critique of Habermas, see Reichelt, "Jtirgen Habermas' Reconstruction of Historical Materialism,' in Bonefeld, W. and K. Psychopedis (eds.) The Politics hanqe, Palgrave, London, 2000. * On Italian fascism's acceptance of social conflict as a constructive force that jpports the stability of political power, see chapter 8 of his FaackUnuu ohru

Revision, op. < 18 In order to clarify this point, see for example the current debate on globalisation where well-meaning commentators argue that globalisation leads to new forms of barbarism tr its logic cannot be arrested through the creation of new forms of liberal-democratic intervention at the national and transnational level. This argument charges that the Left has to abandon its negative critique of capital and its state because the misery created by globali sation requires urgent action and intervention of a radical reformist kind Globalisation is said to have rendered obsolete the ability of anti-svsterr opposition to effect change. In order to avoid the dreadful consequences of globalisation, the Left is called upon to make positive constructive proposals. In short, destructive critique ol I and its state is rejected as socially irresponsible. It provides no positive proposals for the avoidance of barbarism and for this reason, by implication, is seen to be complicit in capital's preof neo-liberal globalisation i >r a detailed discussion, see Bonefeld "Globalisation and Democracy." in < U€f no. 22, 1997. The idea of communicative action in spaces defined by the absence of power is Habermas'. For critique see, Reichelt (op. « 20 Vollmer and Ditfurth were representatives of the German Green's real (Vollmer) and fundamentalist (Ditfurth) I ms. The realist faction called for a policy of ecological realism and favoured to join the Social Demo* Party in a coalition government. The fundamentalist f n represented a more comprehensive rejection of the established party system and were reluctant to enter into government with the Social Democratic Pa Note that Agnolis essay was First published in 1990 JV member of the fundamentalist faction left the Green Party in 1991. The Greens are currenti

junior partner of a coalition government led by the Social Democratic Part 21 Agnoli refers here to Habermas and Offe, the two best known representatives of the second generation of critical theory. 23 "The federal parliament can only pass a vote of no-confidence in the Federal Chancellor by the election, with an absolute majority, of his successor" (Ba**w Luc Article 7, 1) 23 Agnoli quotes here from Geymonat's La Liherta. Geymonat is professor philosophy at the University of Turin, halv

MARXIAN CATEGORIES, THE CRISIS O F CAPITAL, AND THE CONSTITUTION O F SOCIAL SUBJECTI\TTY TODAY

Harry Cleaver INTRODI

>N

This article does two things. First, against post-" ism and postmodernism, it recognizes the crisis of Marxist theory posed by the crises o tlism and socialism but argues both that Marxist theory remains essential in the uggle against domination and for liberation and that at least one tradition of Marxism has developed in such a manner as to be useful lor these purpose Not only does the theory of that tradition grasp theglobality of the problem and provide the means to understand the separations and connections whi account for our weaknesses and our strength also provides a framework ithin whi oan recognize and analyze the emergence and autonomy of ne 11 subjects supposedly beyond the purview or Marxist theory. Second, the paper discusses the limits to the ability theory to conceptualize il subjects and and provide positive theories appropriate to those emerging therefore the need to develop revolutionary theory by taking account ot the opment ol ideas within the struggles of emerging social subautonomous i jects. As an example of the kind of assessment we need to do, the second part the paper examines, with a view to discovering common ground as well as id ig differences, one feminist attempt to construct a theoretical alternate^

the Marxist tri

The intell

f labor.

illenge posed »t theory by the recent evolution I thought, i.e.. the proliferation of post-modernism and po

//

' ttv and th<

,n ideological rnornei more profound hist .1 , hallenge ,n (including th< <»f the traditional workers' nt and Kialism) It is also a moment of the associated torn n; new social su( vtties which are mfy undermining the domination i J but crafting new, alternative projects of s institution. R historical c« J, brougl political recomposmon ol the working involved lor Marxist theory in e that it fi rnplied transformations m the qualitative organization th the capital relation and thus the need to rethink the scope and redefine the content of Marxist categories so that their interpretation remains adequate to understanding changes in the dynamics of the enemy and to the elaboration of working class strateg; But prior to such processes of theoretical adaptation, within the crisis the ve mtingency of the confrontation with all of its rupture and possibility of social mutation. Marxist theory has al\ <-d both its verification and its limits The venfu n can be seen in the ( brought on by our struggles. The limn n be (bund in the theory's ability to grasp their new directions movement On th m approach which rejects the abstract generaliza>n of Marx's analysis of the dialei tic of capital into a cosmology (dialectical m. tlism),! we must recognize that the social transcendence of capital also involves a transcendence of Ma m. In other words, in so far as our struggles go beyond our efforts as workers against capital to the elaboration of alternative ways of being, i.e., to become processes of "self- valorization," to that degree we must develop new theory beyond Marx's theory of capitalism. oreover if communism is not a Future social order beyond capital but just such on-going processes of self-valorization, then w e should be looking for new v of thinking and "theorizing" in the present Simultaneously, of ows, we may also find innovative course, as the history of past struggle ig recuperated within the capitalist dialectic, and thus aborted in th» utonomy Thus, w e have agenda that involves two interlocking projects: first (I) to continue the adaptation of Marxist theory in order to understand the changing strategies of our common enemy (and the best ways to figh in terms of our own self-activity, and second (II) to seek out and ideally evaluate new, alternative categories of analysis. The former project requires th the current content of the class struggle and of the adequacy of our current interpretations of Marxist theory. The later project requires the explor i of the constituent power (and limits) of emerging pr ses of self-valorization — and their self-conceptualizations. These pr ourse, are not completely separate because understanding capital's at domn n requires understanding the working class' its at lib-

ud

eratton and these latter involve not merely the positive creation of alternative iys of being but also the resistance to domination.

I One thing is certain: in spite of justifiable post-modern objections to mases, simple self-defense requires that for any critical social theory to ter nan be useful in the struggle for liberation, it must recognize and comprehend not only different forms of domination but the world-wide and totalizing character ol the capitalist form. We can recognize how capital seeks the total on of to replica ich tendencies in either society within itself without attempi social relations or theory After all, one aspect of our struggles which tend to rupture such attempted totalizations is our theory which can be as diverse as ovelopments other aspects of our projects of self-valorization. Contempora of Marxist theory must provide a methodology which grasps the totaht;, of ital's project without reductionism and with appreciation of the complex particularities (including theories) that re the totalizauot

G\.

ITY AND PARTICUI-ARITY: T H E T

\SS COMPO>

IN

In the past, of course, there have been various Marxist efforts to grasp the totality of capital as well as effon recognize and analyze the particularities that oppose it Three examples h en: (1) the Hobson-Bukharm-Leninist theory. !i.*m which visualized capitalism in terms ol conquered, vided and redivided by competing na il blocks of capital. I tpeny theory which similarly sought to understand the global order ipital in tc of a hi< hy of development and underdevelo thev which ha.^ used on the global interconnections through which capital has knit the world into its own kind of totality Unfortunately, in all three cases the manner in which the theories were developed — starting from a focus on capitalii ization — led to the displacement of the analysis from class confii to nation-state conflict and the relative neglect of the particularities of class conflict In all three cases there was a failure to grasp the totality of capital as I attempted internalization of a diversity of class conflicts whose dynamics account both for ththe relationship and the direction of its movemei Because of the top-down orientation of these proi nowhere has there been an attempt to grasp the logic of capitalist development in terms of the autonomous self-act of the people struggling against it It has been this fail-

V/

fLirry Cleaver Mormon I

e that has \

hese theories open to the "master narrat itiquei ern emphasis on the diversity ami ditlerences among

social movement surely, despite the validity of such critiques, such theories must retain a certain app< se the globality of the I relationships of capitalism has ne been clearer than it is in the wake of the rtluow sialism in Eastern I nd the Soviet Union. Today, global capitalism spearheaded by iing the institutional stru the International Monctan Fund (IMF) if transl tures of the ex-social, ountries inf lations of lamiliar Western s. and at the roo both the collapse and the current efforts at nultaneo •nmation. the similarities between the struggles of the working classes of Central Europe and those of the West are becoming more and more obvious, see them more clearly and recognize the parallels not only because ir institutional framework is becoming more familiar, but because with the !lapse of the traditional \ o East-West communication their struggles ning. As hitherto barely visible reservoirs of resistance and selfand ours ar on link with their Western counterparts through face-to-face encounJ.J of environmental actr ) and autonomous computer networks (e.g., asnet — Peacenet, etc ) the commonalties of struggle resonate and new common directions are being elaborated. Thus, ironically, just as the ideologies of post-modernism have trumpeted the radical incomparability of contemporary ocial conflicts and have demoted the Marxist analysis of class and class conto the status of one-issue-among-others, the development of those very onfhcts — East and West — have produced such an unmistakable uniition of the institutions of capitalist power that no matter how autonomous t repression must force octal conflicts the omnipresent menace ot the recognition of a common enemy and of the continuing usefulness of Marxist of the crisis "will analysis. Perhaps, with apologies to Marx, this char. I rum the salience of class into the heads of the upstarts of modernism." However, at the same time, the criticisms do highlight the failures to grasp it just a the particular in such Marxist attempts to theorize the whole. N question of developing an analysis of the particulai omplement the analysis the whole — as the evolution of the debate over dependency and world-systems theory shows .2 Rather what is required is an ability to grasp simultaneou the nature of th< tality thai < aj lias sought to impose, the vity which has resisted that totality and the evolution of o( the othe oreover, what we need is a theory that articulates each in t< all this Irom the pmnt of viev Stance to capital's totalization (as opposed to what we might call bourgeois theory which deals with these things >m the point of view of capital) and of the i I to move beyond it. The <]ues42

rorie& and tb< t

Capital

tion then is whether there are any traditions or developments within Marxism that provide such a theory, or important elements of such a theory. re is a tradition of Marxist theory — one which I call "autonomist Marxism" — which has evolved in such a way as to answer the post-modern demand for the recognition of difference and the Marxist insistence on the totalizing character of capital. This is a tradition which long ago abandoned the simple reductionism of that deterministic orthodoxy which post-Marxism usually takes for its rhetorical target In place of a narrow conception of the working class (as the waged industrial proletariat) which ignored or sought to subordinate other oppressed segments of society, we have had for several decades a complex the. f clou compo.*ttion explicitly designed to grasp, without reduction, the division! and power relationships within and among the diverse populations on which capital seeks to maintain its dominion of work throughout the social factory — understood as including not only the traditional factory but also life outside of it which capital has sought to shape for the reproduction of labor power. 3 This is a theory which inverts, from a working class perspective, Marx's analysis of the composition of capital and constructs a theory of the changing "composition" of working class power A Thus the concept of working class is seen to include all those lives capital has been able (to one degree or another) to subordinate to its own logic while, at the same time, appreciating the differences and conflicts among them. This theory explores how various sectors of the working class, through the circulation of their struggles, "recompose" the relations among them to increase their ability to rupture the dialectic of capital and to achieve their own ends In response, over time and according to the dynamics of that recomposition, capital is forced to seek a restructuring "decomposition ot the class — which may involve the repression and/or the internalization of self-activity — to restore its control. Such analysis has involved th tematic reworking of all concepts within the changing histc Cal < ot

nd has generated • comprehensive analysis of the evolution of

Twentieth Century capitalism. O n e central example of the recasting of key Marxian concepts in the light of changes in the class relations of capitalism has been that of Marx's concept of the "coll< e worker" elaborated in Capital* Volume 1 Historical examination hift from skilled craft labor to relatively unskilled mass production labor led to the theory of the "mass worker" in the Fordist-Keynesian pen o d > That reworking produced analyses of the complexit new constitution of the working class in ways which h brought out both the autonomy and intercoms tess (complementarities and conflicts) among sectors of the class — m, lulling the various parts of the waged proletariat II as groups traditional ed as out that class such as unwaged housewives, students, 43

rr

>eaaantt a n d u r b a n

marginal

a a l y s t s o f d i v a r s i t y hat period into thr

,nAse

itaiii

has p i

r a l the w e a k n e s s *

engi

anc| | i m i

t the

mg

he la

msurgen

A\

(1

r u p t u r e d t h e s i n e w s ol

the m o goism.11 The

mini

struggles

ng those

itj

rs. e

interconnected

tsants. s t u d e n t s , w o m e n , i n d u s t r i a l w o r k e r s ,

h succeeded in r u p t u r i n g the p o s t - W W I I structures of

global capitalist power,

i i r d i s r n - K e y n e s i a n i s m - P a x - A m e r i c a n a . In other

grant

n of

r e s p o n s e t o the

ety o

.vn d i r e c t i o n s . 9 S u b s e q u e n t l y , in

alist c o u n t e r

> l a u n c h e d i n t h e 1970s a n d

t h e r e o r g a n i z a t i o n or i n t e r n a t i o n a l m o n e y t h r o u g h t h e use of m f l a n a n d det

indu

tnd I

i has d e l i n e a t e d b o t h o u

I r e s t r u c t u r i n g , t h e t h e o r y o f class c o m es t o c o p e a n d t h e s o u r c e s i

If c o n t i n -

• g strengt O n the nega'

quer*

n in large part due t o o u r inal | the successful d zed h u n g e i

mployment

ease hrougl

and falling real incon he

An

I stare

counter-

ind n

rust

ce r e p r e s s i o n belt,

«•••

ghettn

hose o f us e n g a g e d

i s i v e s h a v e s o u g h t to u n d e r s t a n d the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n ? t h r o u g h

w h i c h p e o p l e h a v e b e e n a b l e t o resist c a p i t a l i s t assault a n d c o n t i n u e t o b u i l d their o w n autonom I n t e r n a t i o n a l l y the p nian u obvious

'is(e.g., of

o f the N i c a r a g u a n r e v o l u t i o n a r i e s o r o f the

la t o assert a n d d<

I t h e n o w n p r o g r a m s has d e p e n d e d i n

>n i n t e r n a t i o n a l n e t w o r k s o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s w h i c h i n h i b i t e d b o t h

the A m e r i c a n a n d I s r a e l i g o v e r n m e n t s i n p u r s u i n g t h e i r p n

toward mil-

e p r e s s i o n . T h e e x t r e m e l y r a p i d d i f f u s i o n of i n f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h s u c h n e t w o r k s , w h i c h ha

m n e w s p r i n t i n t o c y b e r s p a c e , has been essen-

the mobilization of n

reposition to the d e p l o y m e n t of

ti

a g a i n s t the S a n d i n i s t a s ( t h u s the r e c o u n t

bl

d e ) a n d to the b r u t a l i t y d

American

he c o n t r a s a n d e c o n o m

Israeli r e p r e s s i o n o f P a l e s t i n i a n s t r u g g l e s ,

m i l a r l v the a m a z i n g l y r a p i d m o b i l i i

I m o v e m e n t against the p o s s i b i l -

lll W a r w h i c h t o o k place i n t h e A u t u m n o f 1990 -

despite its f a i l u r e

p r e v e n t t h e w a r — w a s based o n t h e a b i l i t y o f those o p p o s e d t o t h e m i l i t a r y

level,

he 1970s

.ility to i m p o

to d e s t r o y o r c o n t r o l e x i s t i n g

o u r o w n a u t o n o m o u s p u r p o s e s . S u b s e q u e n t w o r k o n the t a i l u r e s o f c a p i t a l ' s

ig d i v i d e d a n d c o n i r p o w e r . At a global

nines o f A f I M'

avoid

it a I s i n a b i l

>as h e l p e d l o c a t e o u r a b i l i t y t o resist

o r t o p r e v e n t t h e f u r t h e r f o r m a t i o n of l i n k a g e s

w e h a v e s u f f e r e d o v e r t h e p a s t t w o d e c a d e s o f crisis

impos*

eks o n m i n o r i t i e s a n d i m m i g r a n t

O n t h e p o s i t i v e side, t h e the<

o u r w e a k n e s s e s , a n a l y s e s b a s e d o n t h i s t h e o r y have

the d e h ha

a u t o n o m y . S u c h o f f i c i a l state v i o l e n c e , o f course, has s a n c t i o n e d an

d skinhead

p o w e r at the same time they were

m o v i n g m o r e o r less a u t o n o m o u s ! , i n the

) r u g W a r s a i m e d at a l r e a d y g h e t t o i z e d

n ol p r i v a t e v i o l e n c e a c c e l e r a t i n g the i n c i d e n c e o f rape, g a y b a s h i n g

w o r d s , those w o r k i n g w i t h i n this f r a m e w o r k have s h o w n h o w these struggles uted a political recompo

f o r s i m i l a r a t t a c k s o n racial

b o t h i n d e s t r u c t u r i n g t h e m e c h a n i s m s of c a p i t a l i s t c o m m a n d a n d i n p u r s u i n g

m o n s t r a t e d h o w t h e c r i s i s of c a p i t a l ( w h i c h is a t t h e h e a r t o f the viated b y a cycle o f v a r i o u s

rights,

ons a n d h r the o v e r t r e p r e s s i o n of the c i r c u l a t i o n of i m m i -

such attacks in

b e g i n w i t h , t h e "class c o m p o s i t i o n " a n a l y s i s of t h e l a t e 1960s a n d e a r l y

i — sexism, racism a n d e t h n i c j i n -

o f such i d e o l o g i c a l a t t a c k s b e i n g t o m o b i l i z e s u p p o r t f o r II as w e l f a r e

w h e r e t h e y h a v e f a i l e d c a p i t a l has

ssful i n its c o u n t e r a t t a c k

reaction) was pre

the w o m e n ' s m o v e m e n t

j u r i d i c a l a n d legislative attacks on gender

uggles a m o n g themselves a n d to o t h e r s e c t o r s 8 W h e r e they have succeeded

ler

especially those w h o s e d e m a n d s a n d struggles

d e o l o g i e s o t h u m a n div

>me t h e i r i s o l a t i o n a n d d i f f e r e n c e s a n d c i r c u l a t e t h e i r

t h e y have g a i n e d g r o u n d i n the class w

•

i n p a n t h r o u g h the rr, 0 Jn the U.S., c o u n t e r ti

i l l y across n u m e r o u s o t h t

n t e r a t t a c k w h i c h has s o u g h t to

i n b o t h phases t h e k e y issue has b e e n t h e a b i l i t y o f d i v e r s e s e c t o r s o f the

been s

'

t

I i m m i g r a n t s e l l - m o b i l i z a t i o n ) have i n v o l v e d f u e l i n g

i n o r d e r to r e s t o r e u s o w n a b i l i t y t o s u b o r d i n a t e ;>ocie-

k i n g class t

J ar

*&*•

it t r a i

r k i n g class w h i c h , t h r o u g h a p r o c e s s o f

nmand, and (2) a i pose d

ana|

o m p l e x and interrelated

r e c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e s t r u c t u r e o f class dc

1

en e x p

ears i n t e r m s or t w o phases i a broad!

populations A commu

u l a t i o n o l i n c u i t s o!

n i.l

the class r e l a t i o n s of c a |

n t i n g the m o b i l i z a t i o n o f o u t s i d

1,1

I ' o r d i s t - K e y n e s i a n s t y l e coi

-,d d e v a s t a t i o n

rt G u U ) ( t h e success o f these t e r r i b )

l have depende M

p o w e r or c o m m a n d .

F o r the p e r i o d b e g i n n i n g w i t h ti

mpose w >ama, the !'•

l e d t h e t o o l s necesaa.

air s t r u g g l e s as w e l l as t h e

t s t o res»

mand, th

Waihlllgl

cum

utilize global j> O

e

in.ilk-. n m o v t

k

ms o f c o m p u t e r c o m m u n i c a t i o n

(especially

c o u n t e n n i o r m a t i o n t h a t w a s used f o r local o r g a n i z a t i o n . h u t m o r e p e r s i s t e n t l y the a b i l i

the S o u t h A f r i c a n l i b -

K out o f its i s o l a t i o n a n d m o b i l i z e a w o r l d - w i d e a m i -

//

tr I

racist n rnent against apart hen I dm, ig bi nd disinvestment) was t >tal to its ability to the recent changes which h*v« widened its struggles Perhaps most dramam ally, the instantaneous the po#sibilil the images of revolt from COUntT) to country, played a funda. ment ie in the wildfire like spread of political revolution against Soviet-style ommunism in tral Europe. In the U S . such linkages have been multiplied a thousand fold and account lor both the powe. resistance and the power < institution in arena after of American women to the "backlash" arena of social conflict. The r rd liberation and autonomy, that of the old to the against their progress I attack on social security and healthcare, that of the gay community to the neglect of the A I D S epidemic and that of parents, students and the poor to reduchool lunch programmes and food stamps are examples of struggles in the 1980s and which stymied the Reagan White House's "social ager ometimes to abandon its efforts, sometimes to have recourse to priate or local initiatives (e.g. the attack on abortion rights, state legislation, media ridicule of feminism and exposes of welfare cheats and street crime in the ghettos, the push for privatization of public schools) or even to make further con ons against its will (e.g.. more money ior A I D S research and outreach, more money for food stamps). 1 3 ^^ The persistence of pro-active struggles (beyond mere resistance) among k u c h groups can be seen in the continuing drive by women, gays and racial minorities to extend the spaces and opportunities for self-development in ^ s p h e r e s such as education where as students and professors they have forced f the creation of courses and whole programs of study to provide opportunity and time for the elaboration of new kinds of self-understanding and jtonomous projects — from the exploration of the hidden history of women o that of Alrocentrism It has been the strength of such and sexual diven^ struggles, the pervasiveness of the critiques of contemporary society which they i in pushing forward their have produced, together with their suautonomous agendae that has produced an audience for the emphasis on dit ference characteristic of postmodernism as well as the most recent ideological backlash against "political correctness," diversity and multiculturalisn

THK At TONOMY OF N E W SOCIAL SUBJI-

SELF-VALORIZATION

The theory of class composition insists that patterns of these evolving conflicts are materially rooted in the character of the class relations as they have evol through these struggles. Among the most interesting aspects of the aracter of class struggle (as well as the movement analysis of the curreri 46

v .mJ the Cruu

il

beyond it) are the efforts to grasp the way in which the constitution of the working class has become increasingly autonomous < pitai , designate a tradition withir I have used the term autonomist" M which there has always been a tendency to recognize and valorize the ability o workers no \y to resist capitalist ex pi ion and domination but to act in their own interests. In terms of the theory of the working class the main implications of this orientation has been to recognize and theorize both the self-activitv *>f workers vis-a-vis capital and the self-act.\ity of various sectors of the class vis-a-vis other sectors, e.g., of women vis-a-vis men, of blacks vis-a-vis whites. The study of skilled craft workers emphasized, in part, the autonomv of those workers in the control of the production process The study of mass workers emphasized, in part, the autonomy of those workers from the labor process itself. The study of the cycle of struggles that ruptured the Fordism Keynesian period emphasized the struggle against the capitalist imposition of work in all its forms, from the Factory floor, through the nee paddy to the schoolroom and single-family dwelling. The theory of class composition has explored many areas of the "social factory" to reveal the particularities of domination and those of resistance and subversion. Thus, Mariarosa Delia Costa. Selma James, Silvia Federici and others have examined the hidden fabric of gender relations that convert the daily lives of women into housework for capital, i.e., into the production and reproduction of life as labor power. At the same time, they sought to idem the sources of strength through which women have developed the power to resist such work and explode the capitalist subordination of daily life. In all of these cases, the degree and quality of that autonomy, it is suggested, not only explains the of capital and the quality of its reaction (both its specificity and its violence) but also the concrete possil for I i be ratio i In the course of attempting to grasp the connectioi ween autonomo character of workers' struggles and those possibilities of liberation, some those working in this area began to differentiate between those struggles (or those aspects of struggles) which resisted capitalist exploitation and those that sought to move in new directions beyond it One way of conceptualizing the latter movement is in terms of the autonomy and self-liberation of desire — of the •rt analyzed by Gilles Deleuze and 1 elix Guattari in their two volumes on ca dism and schizophrenia M Another wa conceptualizing such movement is embodied in the term "self-valorizat as it developed within th i.an New Left. Whereas Marx often used the term interchangeably with capitalist valorization, referring to the self mding chat r of capital. Antonio Negn suggested that the term be used instead to designate the self- determination of the working class Thus Negri's auto-Pokm* « refers to the ways in which

Iftir

r ;/

:nous sul .

|UJt

,he„,

n tn.

$cp

-nee. Ithough .( i i ill pi

,nents of i

(in|v

e often dill,, u | (

those efforts or the em.

rkinj B

merel;.

' •Misiiiuimg a new world

e r a has been developed in a w a y that conceptualizes working -non n<

unified but as di

lation of the I

thin

recognize and accept diversity the dt

of recognizing the ous sectors o f it. To both

In this

n ' from capitalism to c o m m u n i s m in terms o f the elabo-

ignition o f the autonom

>rms of sell-valorization. 15 the n e w l y e m e r g i n g social subjects,

the diverse paths of self-valorization that m a y be f o l l o w e d , the theory of iss con

tion differs radically from other M a r x i s t efforts to understand the

contempon

ment of class relations — efforts such as those of the

^ts o f the labor process or of the economists of " r e g u l a t i o n theory " In

>th cases, the [ n the capii

n of fundamental change is clear e n o u g h but the focus manipulation o

ange a n d the r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of its com-

mand. In terms of the contemporary pr

Limitation and modes o f capitalist r e g u l a t i o n . B o t h think of

changes in terms c

vement f r o m " F o r d i s m " to " P o s t - F o r d i s m " — a

rms which bespeaks their focus on capital. T h e .1 Pf

the

imnv r

theories i

ely apparent in its very

k'ng < n the autonomy

us on the i haracteristics of the

of w o r k n

suggest tl

it the h»

ol conti ;

I that sul l,nuc

form

a new k i n d of w o r k i n g class subjectivity w h i c h has emergeu

Pre«

d

M , t 1 ,

« "lybyundi ty, w h i c h r u p t u r e it suhordn.

sts of

trucl a "|

lllbject whose self-a. t control.'8

n all moments of lift challenges the fab-

M a r x i s t s , N e g r i has sought to ide "socialized worker."

ench and

Italian

the evolving characteris

pica! ol the w o r k ol the theorists of w o r k i n g clay

position, he and his co-workers have sought to go beyond the sociology analyses of the newest forms of capitalist command, to discover the ne forms of w o r k i n g class self-act n

n the p

>us period of the mass w o r k -

er or of the tribe ol moles, the object is to identify th« inherent w i t h i n the capacities of sell

s o f liberation

Thus within the interpersonal

interactions a n d exchanges of information that the the< asso

ith the "computer and informational so

believe to have identified an increasing! >l ov(

ol i Negri and compan

e appropriation of (i.e., con-

rnmunication." Tl

is runs as Colli

was characterized by radh

whereas the period of mass prod

visions between and within mental

labor ( b o t h w i t h i n and outside of tl

omm

ol the class i spatial and temporal recomposition

u n d e r m i n i n g that division. O n tl educing the roh

I manual

on to a small minorit

skilled w o r k e r s (e.g., enginee ggle has increasingly

»n

I limited daily participation ii

any k i n d o f collective system ol int<

tr

n

k

ion has been dra-

implc manual labor — increasingly in the "ser\

e" sector as well as in manufacturing. At the same time, the needs of glob

w i t h i n , against a n d beyond the

lass com (

Another char

i on how the crisis of the social factory has been generated pre-

ni

i r e s t r u c t u r i n g , the empli

o f capitalist d o m i n a t i o n has led some Italian a n d F r e n c h tl

emporary and

I n recent years, in collaboration w i t h a variety «

e m per-

Hve at the heart of these d i f f e r e n t social d y n a m i c s . ^

W ith respect to the current period ol

t h

workei

ass composition a n d self-valorization is inv»

the underground economy, creat

me

acterization has been that of Antonio N e g r i , w h o used the term "socialized

capitalism, the sociologists are

hile the regulation theorists retain their o n - g o i n g fascination

tl> regimes

m

-outs, part-time worker

hanging autonomous zones of social life that Forced a fragmentation of

h the increasingly flexible w a y s capital seeks to organize and lab<

s

a loose tribe of highly mobile

ric of cap

t notions of post-capitalist unity and

,non from the present into the future o f t

so

ever

the peoples capital seeks to d o m i n a t e , implies a whole poli-

les the "trai

^

isis in the mass-worker organization of the social factoi

If-valorizatibn, rooted like all other acti\.

__ one which rei

s

moles" -

<•• ii provides a theoreti

autonomist M

autonomy not merely oi the w o r k i n g i L

m

h is si tually seen as a d

students, pa

throuj \SLSS

ion. O n e early charactenza-

ties) was given by Sergio Bologna in the 1970s w h o identified a new "tnbe ol

>mes a revolution* but

>t possibilities of \\\

'his new

nd sell-valorization, the distinction

he notion that the

ip Hal

coo!

mental 1

mg ever more job

ol information Bo

intelligent

mg w i t h i n p r o d u c t i o n , independent m m i ,,,

u n d e r s t a n d either

n have expanded not onlv the role i

but its collecth

the man

ol

l i n g tht sitive o n t r o l a n d con

ition and continuous inn

nctv

reatii

' T h e two forces

I require

i informer ind the c o o r d i n a t e .tomation and commu-

have even contributed to the b r e a k d o w n of this traditional

•*rween mental and manual -

es{

ml not kiniqu< nt.al point is tl

I the J level, these

Harry CUawr developments embody the adaptation oi capitalist command to the emergence of an increasingly independent collective subject — "the socialized worker" — whose self-organization of essentially intellectual work and play repeatedly outruns capitals ability to limit and control it. The analysis of this emerging collective subject has suggested that it has begun to impose its hegemony on the class composition as a whole, much in the way the "mass worker" dominated the prior "Fordist" period of capitalist development In other words, while during the period of the "mass worker" (Fordism) neither all nor even most workers were employed in factories on assembly lines, nevertheless they formed the paradigmatic core whose organization influenced all others. The argument is that, in the present period, not only are the new attributes of this collective subject (interlinked intellectual cooperation, appropriation of social communication, constituent of differentiated communities with new values, rejection of traditional politics and labor organization) increasingly coming to characterize the class as a whole but that subject has taken on, more and more, the political role of igniting, solidifying and linking social struggles. This grounding of the collective processes of constitution in communication, it is argued, is a common characteristic in the development of an array of new social movements" which have been widely seen to be the most important components of social confrontation in this period. Let us look at some examples. The Autumn 1986 French "student movement" has provided Negri with one concrete case of the appearance of the "socialized worker" and one in which the 'truth' of the new class composition appears most transparently." 21 That students are involved in cooperative networks o\ intellectual work" is obvious. 2 2 That their collective work has been increasingly disciplined by a labor market which demands "productive" education, and that such "productive" intellectual activity (in the university as well as in later waged jobs) has become increasingly central to the organization of the global work machine is fairly widely recognized. 2 3 The degree to which capital succeeds in disciplining and expropriating that activity versus the degree to which students (and sometimes their professors) succeed in autonomously determining the direction of their own development was not only the central issue that provoked the Fall explosion, but has become the on-going central issue < "education" not only in France but throughout the world -— East and West, North and South. A subsequent study of student struggles in Italy, demonstrated not only the similar character of the conflict but the ways in which students organized themselves as a fighting collective subject through the use and manipulation oi ious means of communication. 2 4 Recent American studies of IMF plans lor "restructuring" education in Ai also show clearly how the fundamental aim

lln repression ol.1 theaub udents and pn 1 the redi: education to the prodiu tion ol lab To these example the well known |,,)0 which u Jed by those who seem to fit t! ' ol the new socialized worker: students and communication * from Chinese univei adj. (Trad, worke lon followed, not led. the movement ) Not only did tl> ad the movement inl the s but their form n int >vement and thu aggies wi 1 pre hrough the mobilization i >se c ristics attnbuted to the "socialized Tra< >rms of org; such as m imgs and strikes were c nted. in i in with their counterparts in other cour the masterful « irrually t m e logy of communication available, i.e . the i ol th» telephone, fax. radio, television, and compu >rks — not onto to mol rug^: Kin the lize international support but to build an The i ted to repr< Iblood e only after rei ed failures to cut the commui ol the nent he m ment circumvented the stat of ng in ,\e lines by linking M lax through third countries Outside the academy (although partly un as well* another set of self-constituting communities <>t mtelU *re ol "communication" as those working in or through the c puter networks. Originally tructed and o| ment ol iinology at the service o RPAN1 g, IN r, B1TNE1 not i n largely cons he stamp< tonoi collectivities which use them — and retain the mat* in their una dized and fluid technics - but t.tute a terr. of constant conflict between capi alle£ F most users to freedom of use movement ti he , ce they have created and The most dence of this auton undo! the class chai on involvi is t tween the hackers — who I ers to I movement created by capital in its attain ness se networks — and the state They mosth ame le in the *a result of the recent wave of inep upting and repre ing their activities.'^ Less visible but more import re the myriad pa rits of the networks who, operating from utilize the i state) entry p« workbut.nthepursint oitli U***n hat has been ,n king i the last has been th< 6 n

h

tb,

I lik

•II as the rr

rajni<

U nt n«

r ks like I

numbers ol | >re traditional

n thi

ithin

ling against exploitaissen state

Kin the lam sentences at hard lal

<\ i

tns

>puters —

•5 are v

»«rs

rks such as the Pi

ive

>thers

•IOI

, as

divers*

-s —

ill*4

as sh

»s as well as univei

building!

M

Yet, there

1

the sphere of reprodi

I wage hier

»is to ui\

re •mm ho*

line

h di

lents of both sexes w i t h i n the - h o w th-

n those It

the

um u

r po\ sed be!

*

vage

rear gree the a

t\.

•ther

expl

arxist th«

veil a

id to the an

ntemporaiy

elaborating

The openness ol the theoret-

I kind ol class anal

the individual p oris i

»n all

global con-

zmg not only the interconn

kinds of domination but the |

tive self-valorization. pr>

»ve diversity o l

ppealing Iramev

n rej

hem

me that we can see how the k i n d

hich I have described is in the p

ical a n d political pi

>se

hinkmg ab«

n and processes oi libei

the "personal" cornmore *

an a n y w h e r e else) has been the id m o b i l i z a t i o n linking

I pe<

omcnt'i r game

In

II

first genere v >g in'

rerpr en-glued ind

I the spread of c o m m u

*

lalyp

es w h i c h might I rdin

As sug£ ol class

•'»•

>t the outset, howt

no n

how appealing the theories

n u n and sell , , o n is

nets

tg in d r a m * ,tck i

ns

*s.

w h i c h has been carried out to date, it

emam

bceri

nposition

grasps the inter

W i t h respect to the kinds of examples ju

determ

nal clas

tl recomposition v

capable o f launching new ii

ids or personal and

e r e i oi lit

the inten

those on the move, those subject to the most a*

an understanding i

he w o r k place into liberated

^singly global, is to build,

identifying those being beaten d o w n as well as

i a n d reprodt

ined objectives and

hat we ne

>mprehensive anal

i

cers have subordinated it

the tools

ipital ve autonorr

-lermmes their role m the i

{

>ns

n

a si

hav *e a

ns

a m o n g all

i forward

re being crushed I

age w h e r e capitalist strategy and poli< es i

very different

have the pc

I repression and struggle bart

the i I and

campuses and high-rise office

aloriza

piece by piece

phei

s in rural

be no doubt that although some

•vn | ily irom

_« m«

>n the cutting edge ol high tech As w o r k

sitions ol the intern.:

•ill kinds

ts, occur und>

uggles ol peasant* v

[>e sses of se1

possible P

ew social

: ks a

Whil

e see

between the class* i to the the a e r a

their limr a the

I capi

t society

he thee

rhe relati-

it was

hin and

her designed for r

ia the emergi l rt ,t th. « help us understand something about

es at w o r k undermining capitalism It

as our an

fill fry

Marxian sulr

ion of th«

nl

tttinuei

unitiea «>f like-minded people in non-hieran (h.

« purel r

include n • inter Netv

mpul

bu

he g

ks such as the Progressive

I mam

emies, others such as

iropean Counter

Ive people in all kinds tlized work

the

i not primarily from

nnexed and integrated the sphere of reproduce d , commun jt

Mth the sphere of production (factor

mainl

om how n

temselves in such Womei

bjectivities have redefined and as to undermine such distinctions.

tome and eommu?

and students ol both sexes within the

n have come to recognize how their activities in those locations re

appose

to

be

subordinated

to

the

accumulation

of

capital.

ineously. they have sought to maintain or craft a subversive autonomy in those activi

h unden

labor power and contribute

the

then

waged workers have subordinated

W hat has been remarkable about I

idly defined objectives and life.

>roliferat

more e

s — not \\

n the cutting edge of high tech. As work

on the struggles ol peasants and urban marginals has shown, it flowers in rural villages and urban barrios as well as umv

uses and high-rise office

buildings.^ 8 Yet, there can be no doubt that although some, at ver positions of the international wage hien

rent

, have the power to push forward

nd repression and struggle bare I

ausi

n age where capitalist strategy and pol

ist

survive What we need today, in tre increasingly global, is to buii

piece by piece, a comprehensive analysis of the international class composition and the processes ol political recomposition which grasps the inter, nong all sectors of the class, iden

ns

\g those being beaten down as well as

those on the move, those subject to the most abject expl<

on as v

s those

capable ot launching new initiatives. W i t h respect to the kinds of examples just cited, and to the analysis of them which has be

irried out to date, it seems to me that we can see how the kind

of M a r x i s t theory which I have described is in the |

The openness ol the the-

kind ot

sis on alii

figurations to the individual psyche determin

ess ol elaborating such m glob

eizing not only the interconnc

is of various kinds of domination but tht

lective self-valorization* prom repress

n>l-

n appealing tnd process*

or thinking about tL

>f the "personal" com

In striking conti

e of social being into screen-glued and

purely reactive protoplasm, the modem and the spread * a growth of rolle m this anal lized worker,

immunii ation nets

social being in dramatic al su

II

to the first gc

style computer games, which were widely interpreted as con-

Y the

diverse ol

anywhere else) has been the v,

people and movements

I as •

ta-

ry within the family and therefore seek to escape through all means possible Process* the elaboration of new ir under the mo

emai

nto a gateway ol communication and mobilization linking

ig tl

u

ts

>m the Fordist assembly line and sta

ical and political proje

her sphere

f u t i n g (like teh

f|on

»nal form

titution ol new kinds or: personal and

to the realization ol more

en directly rela

ll

tion

high tech

of people ^re still struggling ag;.

an understanding of contemporary so

ned to some degree the activities in the w o r k place into liberated ai

vast nur.

ol th

role in the creation and reproduction

ussed below Simila too

.ties within the m

it.

their own projects of self-valorization, others are being crushed I

truggl

The

if ancient as well as the rr;

^ p i t C tfo

their hie si dori:

ollectivities are workers

hile sorn-

1

(the

that these networks pants in tin

m

I all kit

ia|

- those who like to play w i t h computers —

luinv

Pe

vithin

vork

thin Li mphasized h< tuted merel

networks like PeaceNet,

n .tlso radical n<

Pro^'

nt

immonalty o|

through i

I lass compos OMtion is S thi between the

tivities w h i c h might be

we must keep in mind that th

ping within a global population whose subordination t

As suggested at the on

!i s t

er. no matter how appealing the the.

sell

". they have their limits The I ol i

a theory of the relationships w

*ty. h wa» "eithei ' S n e d For n o r theorization ol the emergence of post-capitaiisi al relation 1A1 the. Ui help us understand something about

e social forces al work undermining cap

m It am focus our attention on

h

\rr

(}, nents within the working class and thus SUR. gest the need (or • politics ^ allian gainst a< irious movements ons. But. it does not \ idt us with an understandheaded in dil in e movt new directions or patrns being the th 0&/1 concentrate ir artenti tivity of the Lg I lass, on how, for example, In. mg labo! >e evolving into a revolutionary subject capable of casting oft the apitalisn ng itself from the vampirism of dead labor. But, does general concepts of this movement: its divt When we begin to explore the diversity of sell its autonomy of social relations under creJoru i in detail what we find are a utalism also escape our Marxism. n which b\ Whi e we md useful understandings of such s I relations, if not in In the spin Marxism uts opposed to the spirit of all universalizing phil> . I would say that we must look within the emerging movements themselves -'' .lust .is new movements of the working class have generated new pital and the neenew conceptualizations, so any movead ment wh uggling to craft social relations different from those of capitalgenerate nev uceptualiza re or less consistent with its own ch here are a multiplicity of movements, wre may expect to find a multipl oncept lite different from their analogs in Marxist theory. The need to be open to such possibilities is not merely intellectual but molecular autonomy and the diversity of immanent I v political The the« sel i impli alliance, as Guattari and Negri have argued the task rganizing new proletarian forms must be concerned with ithm a multi, of singularities — a plurality a plur hich] develops toward nal multicentnsm. r'1 Whatever "machines j;gle" can be constructed on the basis ol h plurality, they argue, must lovement each ol if -mponents, and in absolute involve the i resp< heir own times — time \\ -mprehending or refusing to comprehend. time to be unified or to be autonomous, time of identification or of the 2 As they recognize, such a politics cannot most exacerbated d* kind* .ilogical unifl n" — including consensus around the mt

ig or importance o' it the terms and dynamics vith the diversity oi ideas constituent parts It would also se« urge ttention are those whicl nous autonomous movempolitical alii;

d categories.^ 3 It seems obvious that of such alliances requires a direct conand values that prolifei within their lear that those ideas requiring the most tral to the conceptual world Viewl »th which one would most like to est 1'hus. once again, a double agenda: the

Marx urn

yorw and the Crvid of Capital

working out oi one's own analysis and the | ntical exploration of "neighboring" activities, values and ideas. If what we are looking for in such a confrontation are new ideas that articulate new realities transcending those of capital, then we have two tasks: first. juxtapose the new ideas being investigated with the (Marxist) ones we have already developed for the social relations of capitalism — to see if the new ideas e really new, and second, to the degree that they appear to be, to investigate the social movements which have given rise to those ideas in order to better understand what is new about the struggles involved (in order to decide how we want to relate to them).34

T H E O R I E S OF W O R K . MARXIST A^

UNIST

As an example or contribution to such efforts, I want to comment briefly on the feminist critique of the Marxist concept of work by Maria Mies and on her attempt to sketch an alternative feminist theory of work in her book Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scaled In terms of the two tasks just mentioned, I will limit my comments here to the first, namely to see whether and to what degree her work really does go beyond the concepts of Marxism and illuminates new kinds of social relations. Mies' work is not only interesting but has been widely influential in the feminist movement in Western Europe, in the Third World and in building links between autonomous movements in both Confronting her arguments can be done in a relatively straightforward manner for two reasons. First, she accepts the importance of thinking about feminist issues and politics in relation to global capitalism and on the basis of the autonomy of the various struggles Second, she came to these positions, in part, through the study of 'against it Marxist texts. In that study she shares with the theorists of class composition and self-valorization a common source of inspiration in the work ot Italian Marxist feminists. According to Mies' own account she, and a number of other German femists with whom she collaborated, drew on the theoretical work of Manarosa Dalla Costa and Selma James dealing with the relationship between housework and capital and critiquing traditional Ma positions Dalla Costa and James' writings, beginning with "The Power of Women and the Subversion of the Community." ftttan ked concepts of housework as "unproductive" and of the k fruitful place for women's struggles being in the waged labor force <7 On the basis ol letailed analysis of how women's activities in the family, home and community C e and I >duce labor power (i.e.. how they constitute WOl k foi i .tiMt.il). she argued the fundamental importance of that work in accu-

irr

uif i

he impoi a d PW ognuung how women's lives are exploited b mu and the necessary aur vomen's struggle* r unwaged work. AJI this and the subsequent "debate o Mies ulers to have been n important contribution to a feminist theory oi work."38 Concerning these aspects of work under capitalism, there is considerable agreement between ninism and the theorit* >nomist M.< m. Disagreement be^ er the concept of work thai she sees as prevalent b all cay st and socialist coui — one she believes is shared by Marx.39 l n ht that virtually omnipresent i oncepl n e of work as "a necessary burden h has to be reduced, as lar as possible, by the development of prodi ces or technology. Freedom, human happiness, the realization of our creative capacities, friendly unalienated relations to other human beings, the enjoyment of nature, of children's play, etc., all these are excluded from the realm
o be fulfilling, i n integral part oi aut nous self-constitution rhe em Itling witli nature' that Mar der communism, need intei | I negatively as a lim lopment peripti lill] . MAI tionsil nd appropi r their human nature usta -stlmg between hi .s m. i their mutual development (depending on th> so n h ini ith natun hin human a the con ten lienconstitution. In the 1844ManiucripU^ Marx re ion of w o r k unci n. a sk* unalienated 14 labor might be lik >rk as a life-giving o the worker's personality and desires, 4 A collective builds positn social relations among individuals, the sharing oi the resul ork as co: tutive oj social bonds, work as one link between individual and "being" of our ecies. In Ins subsequent anal of the di pment of lab« king clasi rx never returned to such a detailed discu how It might tra rm the charai of "liberated" Labo that develo] Nevertheless, as Negri has shown, the Grut le line bstract) argument oi how such development I nes an asin^ aUtonomou lelf-valorixation." In asv II see, some elemei of 11: lalysis are very close to Mi< tcm| trmul mmist theom 1 ory of labor. Even the well known passage she quot ommunist so« will make it p >r me to do one thii about h< today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the mornin h in the aiternoon. rt ier, just as I h * mind >kes sellin the evening, criticize alter I kinds of work. Hunting, fishing and husbandry are realization through se all forms of work ding to Manes resembles a "purely leisure activity The confusion in the kind of interprets »»ned in cnidl and m rooted in an inability to relate the quant din* sion of work. iruggles against .talist work, tl o reduce tl» exploitation ' king to the cm '* t n e lationi IK! md non-work mer sought the dclu tal el.mm »* h a s **en success in the redi turn I not onl\ ncreases in pi niggles t o transform the >rk di Uitatedqu and the relations between work non-work It was th itegy of the reft ol pitalist) work in the the qualit nges that have e the 'mass worker' bv the <»rke has more U direct control < trfe and more possibility to either appropriate it or .ge Mies pointl out. the H the same time, it is also true t h .

//,

trrv

^mer Marxian ( .itr.,<>f,ts <md tlx Cruy

orking mm nent, . ^ the reduc tton of unwagome In I she might a | S o I, peaking th tvemenl ol iu< h redu< tion along , the libera ^n and women from long y hours [ leJ onizat ee time, the creation of gen. iioolmg. home economics and most ol the other 20th Century instituti guarantee the imposition of unwaged labor H juence. the struggle for the reduction of work was gen eralizcd as unwaged workei «se work, i.e.. to liberate their apital. Women have refused the m the reaJ subordin r even mainly, less activity (e.g. fewer babies, less schoolwork, less ie dealing with p marketing agencies) but rather changes in the kinds of om work td to self-activity of other kinds, both work and ^rk t e g . , developing new kinds of gender relations, self-directed studying rnenting with innovations in traditional techniques). However, it is true th ist numbers, especially of the unwaged and especially unwaged women, being on the bottom of the capitalist income/power hierarchy, benefited less from the changes we have been analyzing and have been more vulnerable dist counterattack. While not all of those working within the tratlion of the Marxist theory of class composition have concentrated their work on the "underside of paradise/' enough have to demonstrate that this kind of st theory is not susceptible to the ;que Mies directs at Marx ami at Gorz. 4 7 On the contrary, there is a lot o nmon terrain, I would argue, on the basis ot ich we can understand each other well enough to work together. To further exj the degree o nmonality and difference, let us look Mies' alternative, femutut theory of work which she elaborates, in part, in dire n to her interpret Marx To begin with, it is important to rec ognize that Mies' minist concept of labor" not primarily intended, ai the-

vas, ue of work under capitalism (in which we i with el identify tendencies which point toward communism). In her book, and elsewhere, Mies has written a great deal about women's work within C« minist concept of labor" is primarily a theory of the kind of m but he

5*

work women should fight for (and what elements of current labor processes are worth preserving) and only derivatively an analys what is wrong with current work pr;t eft. Rather than the industrial wage worker whom Marx took as his paradigm, or the housewife who was the focus of Italian Marxist feminist research. Mies takes the mother as her model.48 For the mother, she argues, work is never just a burden but also "a source of enjoyment, self-fulfillment and happiness "** Similarly, she argues that for unwaged pmkuitix especially peasant women, "whose production is not yet totally subsumed under commodity production and the compulsions of the market" work has this same dual character oi burdensome toil and occasion for enjoyment and creative social interaction. Drawing on her experience in Germany and India, she evokes scenes of singing and dancing during periods of intense collective labor. What makes these work processes different from alienated factory labor, she argues, is that thev are "all connected with the direct production of life or of use values." Therefore, she concludes, "a feminist concept of labour has to he oruntei be product i. - as the goal of work and not the production of things and wealth' < mv emphasis) As should be clear from the earlier discussion of alternative readings of Marx, this proposition contradicts neither Marx's analysis in the 1844 Manuscripts of how self-determined work can be life-creating, even within necessary labor, nor the theory of self-valonzation which Negri has discovered in the GrundrLue. On the contrary, this kind of Marxist theory provides precisely a conceptual framework to make the distinctions Mies wants: between lifedestroying work and life-giving work In the case of mothers as in the case of peasants (and indeed to some degree in the case of almost everyone within capitalism) daily life is rarely a case of either/or; it is more commonly full of tensions between the kind of alienation associated with capitalist command, and peoples' efforts, both as individuals and collectively, to reappropriate their activities. Mothers, for instance, may — when they have the energy — seek to s but interact with their children in reciprocally life-giving (self-valorizing) the\ .ilso, all too frequently, experience the life-destroying pressure of capital on that interaction in the form of school demands that they police their kids' stultifying homework or of husband demands (sometimes violent) for work ns between indireproducing his labor power. Peasants live similar contrad vidual and collective attempts at autonomy (e.g., the kinds of intimate human relationships Mies describes) and the pressures of agribusiness or state repression that drain both their energy and their time. Which bnngs us to the second aspect of Mies' feminist theory of labor f time A feminist concept of labor, she argues, must have a different - by which she means that time should not be divided (either in the world or

59

Harry |

fff ' the c

;/

in t h e o r v ) i n t o b u r d e n s o m e w o r k t i m e a n d pleasurable leisure t i m e . A l t h o u g h she presents the a l t e r n a t i v e t o such a d sion o f

s the a l t e r n a t i o n a n d intersper-

times of w o r k a n d times o f rest a n d e n j o y m e n t " ( w h i c h seems to retain

the d i s t i n c t i o n i h e is a r g u i n g against) her p r e v i o u s a r g u m e n t a b o u t h o w w o r k >d s h o u l d be r e w a r d i n g sugg*

ter f o r m u l a t i o n . N a m e l y , that il var-

ious k i n d s o f w o r k a l o n g w i t h o t h e r sorts ol a c t i v i t y are o r g a n i z e d so as to be r e w a r d i n g i n themselves t h e n the q u e s t i o n of h o w m u c h t i m e one spends w o r k i n g at this o r that can l i n o m e one of personal a n d c o l l e c t i v e choice a m o n g an arra

have aire ed, is that to the degree that w o r k e r s are able to take comm a n d over their w o r k and their lives more generally, tl m the orgai ization of l a b to ove at such d e m b r a c e b y socialist managers ol capitalist T a y l o r i s m in the Soviet U n i o n ) may I M a r x ' s analyses o\ these matters but .t » w i t h M i e s ' o w n arguments. I

a l t e r n a t i v e k i n d s o f s e l f - v a l o r i z a t i o n r e q u i r i n g v a r y i n g degrees and

k i n d s o f e f f o r t . T h i s was c l e a r l y the k i n d o l t h i n g M a r x h a d in m i n d w h e n he wrote- the passage in The German Ideology a b o u t cattle r e a r i n g ,

fishing,

hunting

a n d c r i t i c i s m q u o t e d above. I f he h a d k n o w n m o r e a b o u t peasants he might have m e n t i o n e d s i n g i n g ^ d a n c i n g o r s t o r y - t e l l i n g as w e l l . 6 0 T h e t h i r d a n d f o u r t h aspects o f M i e s ' f e m i n it

o f l a b o r focus the

d r a w i n g o n her e x e m p l a r o f the m o t h e r as w o r k e r , a n d o f the subsistence pea

der. The;

co:

produ

human pou \

ill un<

for sensual enj '»t,

h inter

for

;uah

n d for er h the f

increase in v i o l e n c e against w o m e n . A g a i n u l d p r o v i d e an ant id

she reasons t h a t tlv

i n n o t be

pose," a "cha

b o d y ^\u\

I do not |

T h e p a r t s o l t h i s a r g u m e n t w h i c h insist o n the v a l u e of sensuously healths ol w o r k i n g h a v i n g a st

o f p u r p o s e is c o m p l e t e l y parallel I

no m

M

h i m , e.g.. A d a m S m i t h , the d e s t r u c t i v e c h . esp<

ly tl

i r k e r s a n d h o w the i

d e p l o r e d , like others r o f w o r k unti

the d i v i s i o n o f l a b o r leads t< u o n o\

J-

r i p p l i n g d e s k i l l i n g ol

>italist p u r p o s e is o n e aspect of l a b

tes t h e m f r o m it, T h e i m p l i c a t i o n o f s u c h A

n anal\

as I

itufra

houghl has not alv I the links I

1a W i t h i n i

spit&lism

o f the t l

lass

«>^t i m p o r t a n i su» h

kizoanalyi

ight

ol

< rillei

m ti

1 >»-l<

ilt has m M

the k i n d ol

has

In discussing the women's

and Negri

Iged the i m p

'Th r)t

Insi fi

ofecom

nent n that

kil

a* being at th*

the sense roducts.

bodies as

impossibili'

basis o f such recogr

o r v o l l a b o r co between

>li-

nvitv, as incai n£ in the

and

npts Id

mds 'int w h i c h Mies considers ess* ar

ns the redt »nsuni| n an

!

hregard I

ling tlv i m p t i o n can guarantee >le commune

»d di

she proposes, is

lulm

of w o r k she has describe embra*

i tlie in

lihei

seem t o be con The I

uce produc

w h i c h are " u s e f u l a n d n< work

I witl

•ression <

u n l i k e w o r k t h e y l a c k t h e "sense o l pur-

ig useful a n d neces

ol j

d that of self-valoi

n

hologie

ndm

ttul hut it has deepened our ..

gumentS that a t h l e t e sports and

o r s u c h e s t r a n g e m e n t a n d its

t i ol aliei

a| damage The i n t e r s *

1 vai

through

the tendenti

,t ol n o l i

alienation H T l

ed on the .

ular, all

ltd sexual s

H < l<

M a n tended

I phen

»n can w e r e t a i n a h e a l t h y physical

ngfy n

-g gen-

agan.l

th

I this a r g u m e n t she e x p l a i n s , i n p a r t , the p a t h o l o g i c a l n

turn's i n v o l v e d in men's I hobl

d, i n |

M l fbl m

lition i

su

m o l o g y w h i c h is " d e s t r o y i n g all .ng o f n a t u n

m

i m i ' and useful contributions to the

ton i

o r k conditions W h .

ling to

tent." A g a i n s t tlu> she argues that o n l y

l a b o r processes w h i c h i n v o l v e O n the ba:

tputei

.ed us nadir,

mgement ol w o r k

in the

th the M .

This developmei

she t h i n k s M a r x embraces w h o l e h e a r t e d l y , I

ition The uncritical organization ( e g tudied neglect i lga|n

mplement J u n g i a n theories o! individual)

ich i n t e r a c t i o n between

a u c t i o n rnetl

her. w i t h the appearance o f the

** are bit

der traits w h i l e emphasising the inc.

w o r k e r s a n d o r g a n i c n a t u r e w h i c h has c o m e w i t h the d e v e l o p m e n t o f the m a c h i n e a n d m o d e r n autoxra

ol

the relation

id sen-

ttter a n d l i v i n g o r g a n i s m s . " Clearly

it w o r k i n g the l a n d , she attacks the elirnn

m s

P°

uch

w h i c h accompanies the desj

vrk heitiii ><ethuwtu*ne*w, o f t h e w a y it c a n p r o v i d e a ' d i r e

sual i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h n a t u r e , w i t h o r g a n i

i^uments about the

i org

ng die k i n d

urprisingly, tl ial self-sulli

h leads I

Harry

Clfturr

[n this last point and in ht I on moti g and on subsistence agn, u | A tin »mll is beautiful" movement wfn I lies seems very much i , II scale, autonomous, traditional agrarian communities ami immediacy of social relations, i t th< usal of mediation — especially Qf e marker o dtst managers and of the state. These last characteristics have also been prominent in the workers autonomy' movement out of which theor composition and constitution have grown. The Ms of reference for the lattei tun e tended to be urban and large scale rather »n ot autonomy and the refusal of than rural and small scale but appre< med m are simiL critique of the computer which contrasts with the more positive assessment of its role in the development of subjectivity' would seem to i part from this difference in scale as well as from the historical gender specificity of computer use. There is no doubt that women have been more obvious I computers than men and more alienated from them.54 The scale of their inters i has tended to be limited to woman-machine (e.g., se ord processing and data entry) where part of the machine s capae., the ability to keep track of key-strokes per minute) is being used to impose an increased, indeed crippling, intensity of labor or where women have been put to work assembling computers also in crippling fashion (e.g., solder
Otk - nature/paaaive-< k m " w , l n m;

here

mp,

to overcome the human/active-sub,e..t .torn;, h Marx takes over n g e | and llightenment m.mst theory * she says place the predatory econom. nship of Man to lor re. >ne."*> Such attempts t hink the human-nature relal hip are extremely ,nt g and have been one of the most thought provoking aspe feminist and environmental mow | , s there Unfortunately, neither in her book nor in the ar any lubal 1 lor the meaning of a "coopetionship beyond a lac b < >l Both terms "cooj p roi aT imply the existence of different \ >er a n J a c t t o g , er in mutually beneficial v Hut in ense can we say non-human nature h. Hegel and Marx humans are thought to be difTerei >m other forms by having a "will/ In Chapter olume I of I lyzes the meaning of "coopi njman ^ork but id the concept to the relationship between humans and the res natui Today many persons iuding I as animal rights a ecologists. are willing to ide a gr r or I \ ill" m other 1 te. But what doe *opei mea h an inter >ntext? How do humans cooperate it apes, with wha ith rats and mice? And beyond animals there is the issue of the whole ecosystem ot mals, plants, rivers, winds, rocks and oceans. Ms cologir houc about what it vploitativ e" relat between humans and their environment might mean. Perhaps more of this might be brought to bear in our collective >rts to reconceptuali nge the nature ol v ept Moreover 1 would argue that we should question the ver ' ibor" itsel I not the to it. "Wor; an m a wide of concrete a -anal onl tkes sense in a ca. orld oi commodity product Cap* i very nature, n all human I e "produ as its fundamental mechanism ocial trol. Part ol the processes of sell orization through which we liberate oursel rom su >uld seem to involve reconcretization of activities we now call work — a nev. ding," to use Pc> rm, within contexts of meaning and social relanships Growing food, fat example, instead of being I one more form ot capitalist work through which workers and nature are exploited ai mmodity is produced, be one element in asocial pattern of non-ex hum. tion and meaning as we I tive hu with the rest ol natui ' metabolic process . inc ompl system within which hu,' e themsel is pa

J

nplt mulualK IU|

ntf

»ung *nd tl reason < at |?

lal

M h

W ^hemtelvti M limited t

"">•

m in In h

° cxl

th m to her to rede!j ne »l rcLitionshi i | ; g th eati | live I oi I uggests t h crt , but tal v it has gen that nsforms their ugh es in >mething richer than tl vork in Marxist theory. [) Inn >ns ol Mi , ho I think that her work ;ts that o ive sougl I ol the alienations of capitalist the « losest ested in the transcendence Itim s only amongst such ve ehforts that paths for-

t thr ing suggests, it seems to me, is that the ability to iderjtand emerging possibilities ot liberation through attention to the newest lass' recompo n an tive constitution (beyond class) juires the close the diverse directions different subjectivities may tl inter, n among them over their different as and \ politics oi alliance can minimize the possibiliI to divide ruju. enruating antagonisms (e.g., aggraI or ethnic divisions nly such a politics can make it posr the Marxist categories to keep up with the devel* ments ' uggles and tor us to explore the limits of their ability to grasp :il being

1

'

he work

This approach, which r Irom common among Marxi? l based on an x s own work and has n ed consi blc elaboration Besides being based on an interpretation of the content of his theory ol i n as class struggle, we can also i Marx's o w n replv to

the-

nUat ,e j l

ol ..II oi hii sbur

' edagem Lett* to the Edit November 1877. in S K Padc

ophical ZaaiA

E»gl< Hall 1979, p. 321-322 The temporar an explii n ,1 Marxist theor the working elabo class has included the work ol les Deleuze, Felix attan, Antonio Negri, Jean-A Vincent and others around the Parisian journal AnUrieu be basic thrust of such theory not only sees capitalist society as a social i ess conflict but grasps the dialt as the totalization capital seeks to impose on working class antagonism in order to conver into mere useful contradiction. Within this perspective, that antagonism appears as a e which repeatedly ruptures the dialectic and has the potentiality ol exploding it om J tor all. 2 One of the earliest and most telling Marxist reproaches to dependency and world-system theory was that >cus on the sphere ol jlation neglectof production, especially the existence oi rent "modes < ed the sph production" in the Third World. Such was the argument, for example, that Ernesto Laclau made against the work of Andre Gundar Frank. But as the subsequent evolution of Laclau s work makes clear, the neglect ol difference could not be remedied simply by paving attention to it. Once one does pay attention the whole theory — including the theory of the whole — must be reworked. Laclau's inability to figure out how to do this within Marxism led him to post-Marxism. Others, however, have shown how this can be >ne as I sketch below. 3 For an overview of the development of that theon me of whose themes began to appear in anarcho-communism and council communism, which began to take on its modern form in the U.S. and France in the 1940s and was elaborated and polished in Italy in the 1960s, see the introduction to R. James. Raya my book Reading Capital Politically. From insights t \litmt tm Bofhant into the need to Dunayevskaya and the editors c grasp not only the autonomy of the working class but also the concrete parrk of Raniero ticularities of specific sectors of that d a n through the Pan? uino Alquati. Mario Tronti, and Mariarosa Dalla Costa in systei ing the analysis in M ian theory and practice to more recent Ameril W1 and French elaborations he editors and fnends of the jourfk No** and Futur AnUruun the theory of class componals Ztsition has received both inter -lopment and extensive application. < For more detail on methodological aspects of this "inversion" see H. Cleaver, "The Inversion Perspt Marxist Theon. Irom Valorization to Self-Valorization." in W. Bonefeld, R. Gunn and K. Psychopedis (ed

Harry Clear*

8

1(1

OpenM mt Vol II London: Pluto Pres I'here appear to be , 0 n i c parallels between the theory of cl*U composition ami what M Lebowitz has in mind when he calls, in his book Beyan ,,,,/„/, for thf development of a "political economy oI wage labor" to complement Marx'j analysis of capital The development of the the. (the "mass worker" has recently been traced ergio Bologna. See his "Theoi id 1 listory of the Mass and analysed Worker' in '° ^ an< ^ n o '2. k moments in the adaptation of Marxist theory to the ever more inclusive character of the working class were Mario Trontis theorization of capitalist reproduction as social factory and Mariarosa Dalla Costa's work on the role of housework Within capitalism See: Mario Tronti. Operate Capitate, Torino Einaudi, 1964 (a central chapter of which is available as "Social Capital" in Telos, no. 17) and Mariarosa Dalla Costa and Selma James Women and the Subversion of the Communi 1972. Subsequent work on the capitalist character ot the work of peasants and urban "marginals" has been done by Selma James, myself, Ann Lucas de Roufignac, Gustavo and others. The crisis is thus located in the insurgency of the working class which occurred as it transformed itself into something no longer compatible with the Fordist organization of accumulation and the Kevnesian role of state management The term "sectors" is used loosely here to designate various subdivisions of the orking class which have mobilized themselves autonomously vis-if-vis the rest of the class, e.g., women, bta students, black students, black women, and so on. Although earlier European centered analyses of this process appeared in Italy in the late 1960s and early 1970s (scattered pieces hich appeared in translat in the journals Radical America and Tebd)t the first detailed American elaboration of this analysis appeared in the first issue of the jour rk in December 1975. The bulk of that first issue has been reis naJ Z 1971-1992 (Brooklyn sued as part o! Mdnight Oil: Work, Energy, W Autonomedia, 1992) by the Midnight Notes Collective. Watered down v 8 ol this analysis, stnpp evolutionary politics, have appeared ii the form of French theories of 'regulation and of Am. n theories ol naillation" - theories which have, as their titles "social structures of imply, shifted the focus of analysis from working class power to the require ments of capitalist imand. The llagrant state manipulation of the news media during the Gull War to prevent the barbarous reality ol the war from becoming apparent to the

tnJ the (

pit a I

world — which has produced an outpouring of critical a <;s in the U.S — provided an important public lesson on the day to day limitation and distortion of communication which prevents particular groups of people from their situation with others. recognizing the cornmonah 11 This fueling has been propagated from the highest political levels, e i the tse of racism, from the thinly veiled racism of a George Bush or Giscard d'Estaing to the more overt racism of David Duke, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Jorg Haider or Neo-Nazis in Germany. 12 In the U.S. this historical research has mainly been carried out by the contributes to, and those influenced by, the two journals Zeroworh (in the 1970s) and MSnigki Notes (in the 1980s and 1990s). 13 H. Cleaver, "Reaganism et rapports de classe aux Etats-Unis," in M-B Tahon mi A. Corten, L'ltatie: It philosophe et legenchirme, Montreal: VLB, 1986. H Gilles Deleuze and Fe"lix Guattari, Lanti-i e, Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1972 and Millet Plateaux. Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1980 15 On the reformulation of the transition from capitalism to communism and on the limits of the concept of socialism, see "Lesson 8" in Antonio Negri, Ma Beyond At Brooklyn: Autonomedia, 1991 and Harry Cleave "Socialism" in Wo!!gang Sachs (ed), The Development Dictionary: A < to Knowledge as Power, London: Zed Books, 1992. 16 This tendency of regulation theory to adopt the perspective of capitalist control rather than the perspective of the working class subject has been nes de la segmentaemphasized by Yann Moulier, "Les Theories Ami tion du marche du t il" et italiennes de la composition de classe' a or vers le pnseme des lectures fran^aises, Bahybne no. 0, 1981-1982; W. Bonefeld, "Reformulation of State Thee apilat tt Clo44 33, 1987; J - uggle, Hollow ay. The Great Bear. Post-Fordism and G a s • « 56, 1988 (reprinted in Bonefeld & Hollc (eds.), Post-Fordism m, London Macmillan. 1991); and G. Co and C Vercellone, "Les Paradigme t du Post-Fordisme," Future Anteneur no. A. 1990. Given the evidence of early regulation theorist tamiliarity with the thee oi lass composition, this choice has been quite conscious and symptomatic of its very different politic al orientation. See the discussion of Toperaisme" in A. Lipu r et Inflation, Pourquoif Paris: Maspero, 1979. 17 Sergio Bologna. "La tribu delle talpe*" PrimaMaggio no. 8, 1977. In English as "The Tribe ol Mo in Red Notes & the CSI orbing Class An The term "temporary autonomous zone taken not am) the Crisis, 1 from Bologna but from Hakim Bey's book T.i\ The Temporary eiutonOi Zone, OntoL by, Poetic Terrorism, Brooklyn Autonlia 1991. 67 *

M

18 The term alized worker ^vas coined by Romano Alqu and adopted by Tom Negri in the late 1970s. Ser \kjuati, N. Negri m j A. S o r m a n o Univtrvi ceto < ptvUtetiato intellect uale, Turin; Stampaton (1976) and A. Negri IKiU'Of Mama AU'Operaw SoctaU and b "Archeologia e proggeti" Loperaio massa e loperaio (j sociale in Macdina Tempo (1982). This last is also a ble in English as The Mass Worker and the Social Worker," m "Archaeology and Pro f*i London: Red Notes, 1988, Revolution Retries 19 See: oriat. LAtelter et U robot, Paris: Christian Bourgois, 199< 1 M Lazzarato. "Les caprices du Flu mutations technologiques du point de Future Anteruur, no. A, 1990. vue de ceux qui le 20 This analysis has been partly based on a study of working class self-activit in the Italian and French garment industr ried out by Negri, Maunzio rue Politique el Li Lazzarato and Giancarlo Santilli, Be net on et Scntur: L'l t Eun*peen, 1990. Notttflle L4h>penitum / ' ur LI 21 M. Lazzarato and A. Neg Travail immatenel et subjectivity'" Future A' , La 'PanthSre' et la communication," Future Antmatr, no. 2, 1990. Committee : lorn in Africa* 'The World Bank and Education in Afrit \*letter no. 2. 1991. Oth< interventions have occurred through juridical and police ii ntion in defense of "intellectual prop. the contt re >n of software) against the pervastv* 'id sharing ot

pit ul

programs The communist i tree redistribution of mnova.s apparant and has taken legal form in the proliferation of "shareware" able for downloading Irorn com r networks. 5u< h integration was ahead agnized in the the "mass worl ei I the 28 See the work i leaver. «nd I a mentioned above. Wollgan. e d > The I *ory, op. cit., brings together a v. <>f >rs whose woi ses on the conflicts between var path ,elf-valorization (although most oft ithor -uld not use th m i ) and development suggestion should even appeal to those d a) or historical materialists vi e that it is impossible to escape the diale only problem, ol coun the likelihood that no matter what they find, they will impute hale !" lojj II blind them to the I tence of other kinds of relat •"50 I s more or less consistent" because it m the hi t the orkers' movement, that a whole range oi pts i be generated standing in quite different reU hips to the dynamics of that movement Not only have the meanings of "socialise mmunism leIv. but so have those ol all the other oppnal i pts thrown up by the Uggl' 31

F. Guattaii and A. Negri, ( p. ior 32 Ibid, p [20 33 Ibid., p 108

Brooklyn Autonomedia, 1

derives from the intd d pn of 34 Th rmulation obviou tli politica ol autonoi the ther struggles and the investigation of the possibilities omplementan on regard whether those struggles thrown up mt mg new ideas or are based on <>ld famil nes. Maria Mies, f\itr mtrfalionona W lie, London: Zed Books. 1 36

Ibid., all <»l these themes are di I in the first chapter of the book. Her of autonomy is >ughgoing as that of ar t With respe ihc need for autonoii eminist mov ment, she wrlte^ io hi ial and uni.1 ideology! no formal leadership, the autonomy of the variou groups, collectives ia the OnJ un the dynamism, the as well as the truly humanist perspective, t ement." p A 1 69

M

he r.

and Selma James, Potere femnunde ,

'men W 1972 First published in English in ailing Wall Press in England. I., p

''lb* Community), ft

ale,

l\ul, Maj Feb l(>72 then I

ithout going tail it should be laid that her views on the fundamental similarities of 20th-cenl py socialism and capitalism are shared l n autonomist Marx ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^™ id., p 212 41

Mies quotes approvingly horn Schmidt's book The Concept of Nature in Marx, London. New I^ft Books, 1973.

42 She is relerring to Gorz's 1983 book /*v dentin

paradis — a book which

dra n unacknowledged fashion, on autonomist Marxist thought but twists it around to Gorz's own purposes. See also Cocco and rcellor: "Les Paradigmes Sociaux du Post-Fordisme," op. cit., pp. 90**

Vol III, pter 48 on the trinity formula. See below for a feminist ntique of this division and a response. AA Because it is important in the discussion of feminist theory below, let us note that Marx's view of the -giving" character of human labor by no means disappeared in his later writings which focused more on evolving forms of Lj ilist exploitation. His oft repeated use of the vampire metaphor to cJ nze capitals relation to living labor is dramatic evidence of his view of that labor as a kind of "social life blood." This view was rooted in the very anthropocentric view which he shared with Hegel of what made humans different from the rest of nature: their imagination and will which allowed them to create/give-birth to newness in the world. chy an< nulati na World Scale, op. cit . p. 217. 46 This evolution occurred in Italy in tandem with the development of the struggles. Tronti's early, but fairly bare bones, recognition of the social character of the factory was only given flesh when the explosion of autonomous women's and student struggles focused theory on the real life content of the "reproduction of la power." Compare Tronti's "La fabbric a e l a society, Q trni &>. io. 2, 1962 and "II piano del Capitale," C -rm no. 3, 1963 with Dalla Costa's and James' "Power of Women" cited earlier. I 47

In the first place, I should say that I include Dalla Costa and James within the Marxist tradition of the analysis of "class composition" — Dalla Cos own thinking developed within the space of autonomta (or workers autonfies of the omy) m Italy and J a m e s ' work was rooted in earlier related a<

70

n(

' the <

Am* m Johns' est Tendency and its offsho In the second place, much of the research some ol us have done on various sectors of the unwaged \ mill directly on their work, especially work on peasants and students. •*« This is an interesting « hoice given the history of feminist rep ns of the mother as the appropriate paradigm for thinking about women and of women's struggles to have the nght to refuse to be mother ^ The section of Mies' book from which this and the material lows is drawn, is that on "Towards a feminist concept of labor" in the last chapter, pp. 216-219 60 What this description evokes is the inversion of the tendency of capitalism to convert all activities including those that take place during "leisure'' into alientaed work Here we imagine unalienated work as a moment of an unaliened life. 5' The parallels are striking between Mies' argument and that of the Jung) an analyst Robert Johnson in his recent book Ecstasy, dealing with the absense of joy (Dionysios) and the destructiv additions it produces. 52 Deleuze and Guattari, AnU-Qeihpe (1972) and Millet Plateaux (1980) op. cit. 53 Guattari and Negri, op p. 44. $4 In the workshop on computer networks in the circulation of struggles, held as part of the "International Meeting" of some 2.000 grassroots activists in Venice in J u n e 1991, the vast majority of parti pants were men. They noted the absense of women but had little of use to say about it 55 This orientation of Marx's seems to have been constant in his work, from the early 18JJ'Manuscripts to the later volumes ot Capital — compare his dicussion in "Estranged Labor" where the human works on passive nature to give it life by incorporating it into the human world and that in chapter of Volume I on the "labor process" where the three elements are human labor, tools and raw materials, with the latter treated as inert and passive. 56 See her interview with Ariel Salla Patriarchy & Progress. A Critique of Technological Domination," The Fifth £•/ate. Vol. 26. No. 3, Issue 338, 1992. 67

pp . 8 - 9 , 17. [Editors Footnote] Since Cleavers article first appeared in Common Sense no. 14, significant publications have appeared on the topic of his article Hardt, nx, see M. and A. N e g n (2000) Empire; D l>yer-Withford (1999) Cype> also Negri's and Dalla Costa's contributions to this volume. Cleaver refers extensively to the French journal Futur Anttruur. This journal is now defun and its concerns have been taken up by Multitudes in France and Passe in Italy. Further work by Cleaver on cyber space can be found in Holloway, J. '98) Zapa »d in his on-line papers on this top and i Pelaez (eds

71

Har

n his w

htrp:/A

rr

co, utexaa.edu/fac8tal

his "Subersion of M Marram Money in the World Hollowav. (ei

LV

er/index2.hl I

-as-Comrnand m the Current Crisi th published in Bonefeld W mat Statt and the Pohitl

r autonomist M a i n. and re-compo

ssments o f g l o b a l m o i

m d doss d

4 HUMAN PRACTICE AND PERVERSION*. BEYOND AUTONOMY AND STRUCTURE

Werner Bonefeld

INTRODUCTION

Marxists agree amongst themselves that class struggle is the motor of hi us* of class struggle vistory. However, there are sharp divisions as to the a-vis capital. For example, class struggle can be seen, as in icturali approaches associated with. AJthusser, Poulantzas as well as Hirsch and Jessop, as a struggle which unfolds within the framework of the capitalist structures. Or, as in autonomist approaches associated with Negri, Tronti and others, class struggle can be conceived of as an ongoing struggle by capital to decompose onceptions ot *s struggle labour's revolutionary existence. These distin are founded on the differentiation between, on the one hand, the objective chl acter ol I." and, on the other, the subjective character of class struggle. This p. sess Ji.tl iton« I approaches uggle. The assessment inded upon an understanding ot the internal relationsh between structure and struggle. 1 shall this intc emph sising "labour" as a constitutive power. This emph is developed in terms il relationship between integration and trans lence. These two a diale terms connote the revolutionary power ol labour (transcendence) and its mode vithin the perverted lorm of i apital (integration

THI

PR<

.m i

uralist approaches accept the economics-poiiti. paration inscrib (tee Poulantzas, 1973 sop, 1985; and Hirsch, 1 and in bourgeois so< igmem as distm gion propose an analysis of each of tl sociaJ existence. Subsequent historical con analysis has to introduce, as 72

Werner BontfeL*

plified by the post-fordist debate, the historically specific combination between different regions so as to show the modalities of their interaction.! By .king for granted the fragmented character of bourgeois society, these theories neglect questions of the social constitution of the fragmented character of socieand stratn to integrate class struggle into their analysis As Aglietta (1979, p ^) sees it, class struggle is beyond "any law." "Capital" is not conceived as a social relation in and through labour. Instead, "capital" is seen as an entity which has its own logic, a logic which stands above class relations. Thus "capital" is not ass struggle because capital is the subject" (Jessop, 1991, p. 150). Class struggle is expelled from the analysis insofar as a proper understanding of the conete, empirical, conditions of class struggle needs to be based on a specification of the capitalist framework within which class struggle obtains and unfolds. Consequently, structuralism emphasises the objective lines of capitalist development. Structures are the only subject recognised by structuralism. Class struggle is treated as a derivative of structural development. The dynamic of capitalist development is located in capital itself. Contradiction is seen as internal to tpital and capitalist development is a result of these contradictions. Unlike the theoretical suppression of class struggle in structuralist approaches, autonomist approaches place at their centre the self-activity of the •rking class. Class struggle is seen as primary. The emphasis is on labours revolutionary power. Autonomist approaches take as their starting point the Marxian notion that all social relations are essentially practical. In that emphasis lies an important difference from structure-centred approaches. The diffiIty inherent in autonomist approaches is not that "labour" is seen as being primary but that this notion is not developed to its radical solution. Approaches predicated on the notion of labour's self-activity tend to divide social existence into distinct spheres of, on the one hand, a machine-like logic capital and the transcendental power of social practice, on the other. The emphasis on "labours self-activity* is founded on the "inversion" of the class per This inversion was advocated by Tronti who argued that rather than focusing on capitalist development, the emphasis should be on the struggle of the working cL As Tronti (1965/1979, p. 10) put it. capital uses exploitation as a means of escaping "its de facto subordination to the class of worker-producers " Such a formulation contradicts the insight that labour is a istitutive power This is because capital is conceived as a subject in its own rig! I capital" is construed as something which not only reacts to the self-act nI labour but which also "lives" by cajoling labour's self-activity into serving apitah use, In other words, the inversion of the class perspective is dependent upon two "subjects": there is the sel' ol labour l a d capitals cajoling power The emphasis on "inversion" does not raise the issue that em

Human Prat tice and Perversion

labour" is the producer of perverted forms Instead, labour tends to be seen as power whit h exists external to its own perverted social world: the constitutive power ol labour stands external to its own perversion This perversion is lied "capital " Labour is seen as a self-determining power at the same time as irtue of its "cajoling capacity." Thus hich capital is a perverted power Negri's ( I mphasis on capital as a "bewitching power" The emphasis on the struggle component of the relation between structure and struggle cannot me their theoretical separation. The question why does human practice e* n the perverted form of capitalist domination is not raised. Minus an interrogation of question of lorm, i.e. the specification ot the social form in and through which the constitutive power of labour subsists in a contradictory wa notions of labour's autonomy Irom capital an amount only to a romarm ocation of the revolutionary subject's immeti ionefeld/Gunn, 1991 Merely invoking labours revolutioi immediacy tends to externalise structure horn sul so leading to a subjectivist conception which is the other side of structuralism's coin. Unlike structural >proaches, the emph;< on class struggle, a struggle which remains, however, external to its ol Capital remains i onstrued in terms o! a log h lies solel\ Kin itselt and whose inconsistence lone, and in abstraction Irom the contrad are constitutive of the capital-labour relation, provide points of purchase lor revolutionary autonomisation. The tal-labour relation is understood merely in terms of a repressive systemic logic counterposed to subjective forces in a dualist and external wa; Structuralist and autonomist approaches understand the conti tory constitution ipitaliam in term two externally related things: in structuralism the cont on obtains in the iorm of structural inadequa^ ind/or dysrum tionalities as between dil nt regions such as the economic" and poll! cal"; in autonomtsm the contrac; ns between the autonomy of the revolutioi subject and the I Neither autonomism nor structu m see the contradict haracter of capital in and through th utive pow | labour, a constitutive power which ts in and against and beyond capital. Both the theoretical suppression of labour, as in structuralist approaches id the theoretical subjectit in of labour, as in autonomist appi ul to reconcile ol> vity with subji « e versa

LABOUR A N D CAPITAL

. . k and hose invoking the immedia. Contra , structw .I,M anpnpr rAoa -r h eM and S ^ ^ ^ of the revolutionary sub|ect. the task is ace ou VWx 1983. p. 2 etween sooal phenomena, so M to estabhsh

t M

of their re I t out tl wei connection bn en si ise the human ci social real: s interconnected, as compl< >rms difFerent from, but united in, r to theorise th terconnection. the tl I apj _h has to spc* the makes social phenomena different h other in unity I rent pi inena exist in and through eat h othc h phenomenon is the presupposition of i ther I his means that one cann« rentiate between an abstract construction of lor example an economlogic and a political logic, and an existence of these "1< ' Jessop, 198 in a real world, a world merely mediated In i lass struggle. Nor can one divide the social whole into i al logic and subje. ture and struggle involve each other as moment? of one proI )iverse phenomen ich as ts in practice weiende existing abs i Social relations are practical relations. The notion that social relaons are founded in and through practice implies a quite different starting point from that taken by those who advocate notions of a fragmented social world. The starting point is the social constitution of the historical movement < labour. The historical development of labour holds the key to the history ol society. This key is contained in the abstraction; the human content which, in fs in a mode of being denied. In every so human beings play the role of producers. However, in capitalist so the simplest categoi e. labour, takes on a mystifying character because the material elements of wealth transform from products oflabour into properties of commodities and still more pronouncedly they transform the production relation itself into a relation between things. The productive power of >rm due. The "objective," or usocial labour exists in the "pervert* al. existent capital" tan thus not be taken as a conceptual starting point This is because that which asserts itself to the economic mind as "objectivity," or "of ve logic." or "objective bein. in Marx, understood as alienated sub (as specified in Backhaus, 1992). Labour is an alienated subject by rtue of its social e> e as a producer perverted world This means that the pr cal a ity of labour exists againtl iUtlfa* it.*elf"\n the form of tl rishised world of capitalist T h e constitution ol the world occurs behind the back the individuals; yet it is their work" (Marcuse, 1937/1988, p. 151). In other words, the reality in which humans move day in and day out has no invariant is, something which independent! <m them. It

76

r wh,ch ' constitutes, suffuses and contradicts the v e r t e d world of al.srn Ufaour does not e external'' to perverted forms. Rathe. rverted form," including capital's "cajoling power." i .,,„! th. h labour's socal pra< Thus "subject and object do not oppose each other, but rather are caught up in an "ongoing process" of the "inversion of subjectivity into a m J ^ c c v c r s a » (Backhaus, 1992P 60). Understanding the constitution of perverted forms in th makes it possible to see the generic as inherent in the speand the abstract as mhe ent in the concrete (see Marx, 1973, Intro.). This view involves a ol th.r ing v i moves within the object (i.e. the social-historical form of human relations) of its thinking. Dialectics does not proceed to its object from outside but from inside. Dialectical thinking attempts to appropriate conceptually the contrad, de of existence constituted by, and constitutive of, social pra< Dial* .1 thinking conceptualises itself within, and as a moment of, its object (Gunn, 1989, 1992). Such a conceptualisation of social existence seeks an understanding of the apparently isolated > of life as comprising a mode of istence of social relations. Dialectics emphasises the unity-in-difference as between structure and struggle. It does so on the basis of the understanding that "all social relations are essentially practical" and that these social relations comprise the constitutive practical-critical activity of labour. Any conceptualisation of "capital" which focuses on its seemingly formal logic (as in structuralism) disregards the distinctiveness of Marx's theory and espouses, instead, the reified world of capitalism as the obje d purpose of theory. Further, any conceptualisation which focuses merely on labours autonomy from capital disregards the historically specific form of labour's existence and espouses, instead, an ontological constitution o! being, aconsntution that can be found — apparently — in the subjectivity of being which has escaped the grasp, and which threatens a revolutionary disposal of "capital It is the contradictory unity of the relation between human pra< ommodified work in and through class which constitutes society in terms of a continuoi ment and reconstitution enchanted and perverted world" of capitalism (Marx, 1966, 830). The constitution of social practice as capitalist reproduction presents the concrete substance of class antagonism The removal I LpifeT into the museum of I m go forward only through the revolutionising of labour's extei s the alieI subject which produces capital. The social relation v constitutes the mode of existence/movement bf lab , n capitalist he relation between necessary labour and surplus labour, that he class antag capital and labour which constitutes the social working day. The capit mode of existence of labour is characterised by the , untmuo impulsion to revolut e the relation between necessa

«

fh

>/J

eaac

I i *Met

lue. an

fhc

hegl

and t h r o u g h

| L • possible

l^ai

a n d t h r o u g h labour Tfc a<

e as a

b

*•

,n

lakl

i C O m m <

ts against

|aDou|/

ldbour ;

< movem« Trans.

aasantag *mct

**

n the ntegration dt

"ocess f lte

«r

,] constitution oparatelv, but

' n d e r s t a n d i n g class a n t a g

between

B

tinuwn

^ m c poles of a dialectical continuum a c o n t

•niggle

I *ga

mme

oka

** * ^

nd. also, as l a b o u r s sodaj

as the m o v e m e n t

™ *

and separ.

« f) "Allto-Vl

m i s \\ taJ as t

<

es

,h

J pow,

s open to . movement n c e p t u a l . s m g social

modend mode of motion , ntagomsm that labour it neither mternaJ nor to capital L a b o u r exists in al r

>icgn

ing

be moulci , tne

i D

h,

M* and safeguards the spa the v «sg 10 the exploited 'lasses. In sum. au^ ,n is the prodi n and reprod» iabour as the subject (see Negr a p p r o a c h presupposes I here are spaces in so< eternal to the uss reL I and in which experiments in '"auth* age and provoke * disen ted world This approach neglecu orms in and through which labour exists in i m The essentialisation of the subje tins abstract insofar as its social existence obtains OL Phis is because the notion "labour's aui r> supposes tf of a space already liberated from capital There ts thus a dualism as between two presuppositions * stand external to each other at the same time as each these presupi ion is supposed to render \erer e two presuppositions are: the presupposed freedom of the social subject and the p r e s u p p o s e d logic of the capitalist svstem No answer can be provided as to the and capital's cajoling power The on! constitution oi both l a b o u r s sell a n s w e r possible is the denunciation of capita] as subordinating labours autor omv and a study of the changing composition of labours re\ tivity which is seen as being in opposition to a presupposed log= :apital In sum, the internal relation between capital and labour is I rormed into a relation ol mere opposition, thus reducing the internal relation between form and material) nple juxtaposition ol opposition Thereb;, labour is taken as a one-sided abstr n At the same time the essentialisation of the su* goes hand in hand with the fetishisation « C o n t r a r y to seeing th« uion between capital and labour as a social rela

methedange 'he

oher-

-ur's sell in be found in the '!<•

'

. >ment

the ui t,

itionary su sell (labour

, M a n ,ts

'

,, -al.sm betv.

^ ^ ™

qit
(see Negri.

.f labour a s . i machine-like

^ace

rin l a w s w h o *

subject, tnt

~

I revolve

Cap

lt$

* as a conas reported above.

*mes a

rlsurrev

hc

.ind struggle is m ts a relation uptr ^>or J the u ng J m ss causes disruption and crisis to which in turn, capital responds I

thus, bee

lon

^

,log,,t the . n o

Wtrnrr fame I

aga

mtal effectively says that labour does not exist outside capital. The

lass struggle exists only in and against the forms in and through which the constitutive power of labour

ftUL contradiction. O f course in a sense the

lass struggle exists in the form of revolutionary separation, but it so exists on! as one extreme pole of the diah

ntinuum of tran

dence and integra-

>n, the development of which is open to the class struggle itself. Autonomist approaches disentangle the internal relation between transcendence and integration i

>nstruing social pr

e solely in terms of transcendence.

O n the other hand, approaches which stress that labour exists merely " m " .pita! dismiss the antagonistic character of capitalism, neglecting the contradictory relation between transcendence and integration. Instead, capital is conceived of as a one-sided abstraction at the same time as social practice is sa< be

mine*

I the class struggle

reated as a derivative of this

"tW«8 I '" s struggle lies in the circumstance that the msti tutional lo i dynamic m needs to be overdetermined by an "economu rlass struggle in whii h the balance of class forces is moulded by mai tors I

rid the value form itsel

lessop. 1983, p 90)

lie form defines the coherence of the

In other words, the

talist mode of production, a coher-

ence which is achieved, in pi a. tied through the contingent forces of conflict in the "real

world. Structuralism and voluntarism are complementary

(see

nefeld, 1993). Structuralism depends on a distinction between structure and struggle — each ol which, however, is supp coherent. Structure is seen as e

render its contrasting term

ing determinism because it is qualified by

agency and agency is seen as escaping voluntarism because it is qualified \

n the altar of scientism These approaches are structuralist-functionalist

"structural constraints. However, the intelligibih

e what for them really counts are the inescapable lines of tendency and

ing from agen

-re is seen as den

ice versa. The dualism between structure and struggle

direction established by capital's projects. Labour no longer exists in opposition

thus sustained only through a tautological movement of thought. Adding togeth-

to capital but is, rather, a part

er, eclectically, two fallacious positions hardly amounts to a theoretisation

apitaJ s own project. Structuralist approaches

contend that the reproduction of capital is not simply given by the logic of cap-

wherein either one of them can be redeemed.

ital. Capitalist reproduction goes forward through class struggle. Structurally

In sum, the problem of autonomism and/or structuralism arises from a con-

predetermined views of social development entail a conception oi the subject as

ceptualisation

merely (but at least) the bearer — Tragcr — of social categories. The subject who

(autonomism) or merely /// capital (structuralism) Structuralist and autonomist

bears categories must, at the same time, be the subject w h o transforms them. But

approaches are complementary because both depend on the notion of "capital

on a structuralist approach, he or she can transform them only by reproducing

as a logical entity. While structuralist approaches emphasise capital as an

them. The contradictory' logic of capital requires "human agency."

autonomous subject, autonomist approaches emphasise capital as a machine-

^ ^

The conception of human practice in terms of "human agency" is based on the notion that the abstract nature of capitalist laws stands above class relations.

that sees labour as existing either merely «;.

like thing. Both approaches depend on a determir as capital is perceived fetishista-ai

/ capital

ew of capital inasmuch

an extra-human thing.

The notion of labour as existing in and against capital does not provide sim-

Class struggle transforms thus from a struggle for human emancipation into a is seen as an

ply a middle way out of the problem as, for example, implied by the notion of

autonomous subject and labour exists solely within capital. Class struggle

"objective laws but also class struggle." This notion, which is central to the

becomes subordinate to the internal logic of different social structures such as

po

the pol

opment causes societ

sociological

category

of

capitalist

reproduction.

Capital

I economic, leading on to a conception of class only via volun-

ism Structuralism asserts the subjective in the form of a voluntarist concepn of class, i.e, a conception of class as a structure-reproducing agency. For

debate, construes capital as a one-sided abstraction whose devel-

ete as providing "emj

in terms of social confli* I This view sees the conJ indicators" of underlying (i.e. general) tendencies.

In this view, the concrete is seen as an expression of more fundamental laws

example, in Jessops approach, class conflict "does not as such create the totali-

whose existence is logically presupposed. In other wor-

ty nor does it give rise to [capitalisms] dynamic trajectory" (Jessop, 1991, p.

between the supposedly inner logic of capital and the historical ana

154). This is because the "conceptual identity of classes is given by the cap

italism. H u m a n practice stands external to the fundamental laws of capital

relation itself rather than being constrained by classes which shape the relation

>ther words, Jessop conceives of "capital" as a self-relation

whose internal lo£ words, clas^ internal log

ital

ructures tl>

>ss struggle in the "real" world. In other

iggle is firmly located within the framework established by the apital. 4 Hence, "capital

SO

is seen as some-thing which deter-

action is made ip-

Units between structure and struggle is realised not on the fundamental level o f the formation ol a t t r a c t i

^pts but on the contingent level of historical

development within the liarnework of objective I understanding, the notion oi labour as e the internal re I

In contrast to such an

ng in and against capital stresses

n between materiality .md social form. The presence of

81

Werner BorufeU Human Prm /

labour in and again ' is understood as labours constitutive power that exists in a mode of being denied ill thi I ap.talist form d UH ml reprodi The notion "mode of being denied" stresses the social constitution of whaj asserts itself r social relations as mere thinghood; a contradictory unity through the presence of labour which is also a presence in and against capital The notion of labour as e n and against capital makes it possible to understand the contradictory mode of existence ot social phenomena and t« conceive the movement of this contradiction as one of the transformative power f human practice. In other words, the notion "in and against'' does not entail an externality between two complementary perspectives: in nd" against. Rather, it emphasises the circumstance that obje tv and subjectivity engage with each other in an internal, nonetheless contradictory, way. I offered the notion of 'alienated subjectivity" to emphasise this point. This notion means that, in capitalism, human relations exist, contradictorily, in the form of relations between things The critique of political economy amounts to a critique of "economic categories' eiiommah* In other words, the critique of fetishism does not entail a division of a social world into appearance (fetishistic forms) and essence (human content) Rather, human relations subsist in and through these forms. They do so in a contradictory way I offered the notion of an asymmetrical constitution of the capitalist class antagonism to emphasise this point.

CONCLUSION

Structuralism finishes up by invoking precisely the romanticised subject celebrated in approaches which counterpose the virtues of subjectivity to the alleged fetishism of structures. Equally, approaches predicated on the notion of labour's autonomy" finish up by invoking precisely the untheorised object celebrated by structuralist approaches which counterpose the virtue of structure to the aJleged existence of class struggle outside any law. Whereas the structuralist version of the subject entails the inescapability of capitalist reproduction as it merely seeks an empirical testing of preformed categories, the notion of labour's autonomy," muuu the idea of an internal relation between structure and struggle, entails the revolutionary testing of a reality which it is unable to comprehend. Both approaches beg the question of the objectivity of subjectivity and, conversely, the subjectivity of objectivity. If one were to integrate form and content, one would be able to analyse the asymmetrical relation between capital and labour (i.e the notion of capital depending on labour but labour not depending on capital) as a relation of class struggle, a struggle which is constitutive of social reality, which is a constituted social presupposition and at the same time a constituting social practice. 82

--,

I

e d t h t term, "integration" and transcendence" so as i eptual.se the nme1 relation between capital and labour The dialectical continuum of integration and transcendence emphasises the idea ol • pra orld in which the integration of labour mto the capital-relation and the revolutions transcendence of capital are neither logically presupposed nor historical determined. The notion of "integration/transcendence" connotes the idea th structure and struggle stand to each other in a relation ol diflcrence-in-uniNeither are structures identical with labour's constitutive practice nor do structures exist separately from labour. The dialectical continuum of 'integration'' and "transcendence" is founded upon the notion of a "perverter ir ld in sts — as itself — contrad' which the constitutive power of social pr torily. It exists in a mode of being denied. In sum, structuralist approaches see society as an organism which develops according to its own immanent laws. Labour is seen merely as an aspect of this organism. Structuralism sees social practice as a sociological category, so treating human activity in the letishised form of a commodity. Structuralism presents an apologetic theory ot capitalism. Structuralism and autonomism, while complementary to each other, stand to each other in an asymmetrical way. Structuralism depends on a voluntarist understanding of social practice as a structure-reproducing entity. Autonomism depends on a revolutionary understanding of social practice as a structure transforming human a Autonomist approaches emphasise the transformative role of human prauv The emphasis is on "transcendence/' i.e. the revolutionary transformation of a society in which humans exist as commodities. Therein lies an important difference from structuralist approaches. Indeed, autonomist approaches are much more alive to the contradictory unity that obtains between integration and transcenden The emphasis on "revoluti* ubje< supplies ao"anticipatory perspective" or the revolutionary transformation. Thus. mist approaches focus on the revolutionary liberation of transcendence" from between integration "integration." Rather than conceptualising the dial* and transcendence, they pose the question of political power {Mack), They do so, however, in a way which contradicts their own ical perspective. As v argued abo n autonomist approaches, the subject is perceived ver which stan rnal to its own perverted world. However, the critique of political econom n be made manifest in practice only when 11 has seized the masses; when, in other words, the masses are seized by the understanding tl it is their own labour, their own social practice, that produ I world tl oppresses them (cf. Mar> 76, p. 182). Rather than presupposing the revolunary immediacy of the social subject, autonomist approaches need thus to be 83

Werner Ji<> Human

the social(fence of k d contradii -rveriol fbrmi

stitutes, suffuse

r as a power which ,

Mar. use. H (1 1988' 7 A ! ree Assi

K I:

volume Bonefeld/Hollt> tnd Gam bi n o t contribution to this volume. )n t* ^ee, i and his contribution to this volume loulier (1! on this inti >n of Negri's worI r a simil. jm* ol I i n i| ar critique of Poulantzasysee Clarke (I

hiloi

and ( | l^ndon

pilotVa\ ill. i

\\ M '

Pr,

J Th hart

in

r<

M

H

n

. Penguin. Hani C

^nt

[ntrodu

Hegel's Phil &v

vo\ Inti l

r*gri. A. I

king Ciaj

•

he Class \Y

Id, 1 II, Pki!

I K I n.

I The

M

Backb

HG (1!

I,ondon

Italektib

Beii

ed.:

hen I

uhri

1l< • unn \i *mi! Boi Bo

ink!

lose

id J

sa signifies

Hell

c

m

inn,

ml K P

ol II.

in.

I IM11 l

in, R

unn. R

( Pluto London II

.)

•

Holli

Han uggi II

n Boi. iill.ii

|r

W, * 1

w

^'*

M titu* L <

! mefeld, \ Lot

I R GUJ

< 1l

Pou I

<>ks, in I'

n.

PART TWO

THE INSURRECTION OF LABOR AND GLOBAL CAPITAL

5 A CRITIQUE OF THE FORDISM OF THE REGULATION SCHOOL

Ferruccio Gambino

I NT I

»N

Some of the categories that people have used in recent years to de >e the h as Fordism, po changes taking place in the world of production Fordism and immaterial production, have shown themselves to be rather blunt i "Fordism" and instruments 1 Here I intend to deal with the use of th "post-Fordism" by the regulation school, which has given a particular twist to the former term, and which coined ex twve the latter The aim of my article is to ool h help break the conflict-excluding spell under which the regul succeeded in casting Fordism and post-Fordism. the writings of Michel From midway through the 1970s, as a resul Agli< (id then of other exponents of the regulation school, including Boyer, Corud and Lipietz, Fordism began to take on a neutral meaning, due in to legree of slipshod hist* raphv. but also to the rmovements social classes into mere abstraction When they use the term Fordism, the regulation school are r
I

W

mm****™

»ns of regulation It S uL

rhe per the vrai

ders

the

h the inventors se this is cru-

uttrompreL. hara >1 the latter I the 11 ganglia of the - »ts i v a period thai mably in the u g h wages ng as the nge the mass uimption ;mer durables assed throng! : the S* Id War, Fordism he i id in the the basis •s. wht lerpmnmg lor a regime, and table global social rej n, presumably from thu 1 of the K In the -m of prod >n is seen as reaching > ds the countries ol Wes e. and Japan. >e n penodtsahon, there! the high season of im actus to be rather brief, since it verges — albeit only m at about the er the l°*30s; then it becomes ?te rea it the start of the 195' ists through to the end of the irrc >ble s. In the that point sees the hrough which we are still passing — of post-Fordism. >e regula 1 justi^ im r the interpretation i the processes of valorization with changes ace ie socio-political sphe; e-versa It was to make this I de> >s on the apparatus and position it wr> mo< n the writings ol Hirsch ^B ossop in Br ling to Jessop, the regula!• > t h prist ns of research/ initiated by Aglietta, studies regimes < mul. d models of g 'heir economic determinations, and it irsl inter ve I 0 th nited States Other studies ns — sometimes to examine the sprea lar circumnehmes to follow the par •velopment — independent!;. m the question ol the insertion Rati thin the int nal econ ircui

vel1 a

'

,,!

fl

nplementar etw«en differkis involves examining su :h as the sion and/or e state and n ifn t h c economic tendencies to autarcl losure and/or intemation. open-

nes:-

*

inter d econ« mens the var,.^^ . . . - iar ^ ^modeU ^ ^ ^ of international reg us pa. »

s. Tne

ln

'

n

analyses the overall mode the social structures of lonal level Reproduction of society depends on an ensern hich guarantee at least a degree o: blc ol institutionally mediated pr correspondence between different structures and a balance of compromise between social es. This strand of regulationism de^ particular attention to t ies of state and hegemony, which i iers to be central eh ments of social regulation. The fourth strand, the least developed of the four s the interdepenthe basis dences of emerging international structures, and various attemptof a world order through international institutions (which the regulatiomsts call gimes' ) aimed at establishing or re-establishing an international order Now, even from this summary listing ol the regulation school's principal themes it becomes obvious that the centre of gravity ot its interests lies in the analysis not so much of the social relations of production, but rather of the economic/state institutions which oversee them. In ', the reguL itru*i fractures, ani* lend* to overlook human. the pernuuu happening to them with thc odm rti From the start regulationism has been fascinated by the g power tal post-1968. despite the United States' defeat in Vietnam. >rding US to the regulationists, in the period after World War 11 one has to grant the US "the dominant imperialist position":8 it therefore becomes necessary to underures and those of its allied stand how, am* thank.* to what uvtilu&W its si indu^ luntries maintained their stability Within this hypotrn here is an underlying assumption, in which Western institutions are seen as remaining solid remely solid in the case of the US), while not only the institut of movement, but also living labour power as a * hole appe;. the I inescapal nhiugated to the unstoppable march ol mulation in short, in the me Uld long term capitals stately progress is destined to >nue, whil I melt on the horizon Thus it becomes a question oi studying the lav M h Western J has succeeded in perpetuating itself Ii was from v n th. ork that Michel Aglietta'. book* emerged in the year following the first oil p.

shock, which was also the year of Washington s

political and military defeat in Vietnam 91

90

Ferruccio (iambi A Critique of tk

I

RTAIN C-ONTOi |

For the r e g u l a r

|

hool, post-Fordism is like a

Rpig

stal ball in which "1>

mg • the still not completely foreseeable COnaequen molecular and genetic technology" it is possible to read some signs of the future. Particularly in the nc rmation technology, in telecommunications and in data processtechnologies, all

h could become the basis for a hyperindustrialisa.

tion," they see a potential for revolution in the world of production. Radically

thr

l<

A c c o r d i n g t o the regulatioi the c o n s e q u e n c e s at the social level are e n o r m o u s T h e influence o f the state is reduced in s o o the state is par* b.< he majority sector of the non-privileged cuts back o n its standard of living in order t o o r g a n i s e its o w n survival; there is n o sign of n e w aggregations arising o u t ol the a s h e s of the old organisations a n d capable of expressing a colle )lidariry. F o r the regulationists, strikes, campaigns and contlu ts at the point ol p r o d u c t i o n are seen in terms of a pre-political spectrum w h i c h ranges , cannot be expe< b e t w e e n interesting curiosities (to w h i c h university res» ed to p a y a t t e n t i o n ) a n d residual phenomer,

arming work and Iragmenting the 'Ta\ lorist mass worker," the "electron>n" restratities labour p o w e r and divides it into a relatively restrict-

THE

I

in i VARIANT

ed upper level ot the super-skilled, and a massive lower level of ordinary postFordist doers and executors

In short, it separates and divides labour power

hierarchical I v and spatially and ends by breaking the framework of collective bargaining. 10 A s a result the rhythm of accumulation b e c o m e s more intense, and there opens a perspective of a long period o f capitalism without opposition — a tttrl>

itum

— with a political stability that is preserved intact. The

post-Fordist worker of the regulation school appears as an individual who atomised,

flexibilised,

increasingly

non-union,

kept on low wages and

obs that are always precarious. The state no longer guarantees to cover the material costs ol reproduction of labour power, and oversees a contraction of workers' consumption

In the opinion of the regulation school it

»uld be hard to imagine a more complete overturning of so-called Fore! consumerism, within which, it ions i

limed, the workforce w a s allegedly put into

ige employment which would enable them to buy the consumer

durables that they created.

and about iti incipient h J of the rule there v hing ol a fashion for Japanese authd with d hut easy expl ons ol th*

seems to derive from the failure of t w o essential conditions: the mode of cap) allure to adjust mass consumption to the increase

in productivity generated by intense accumulation. 1 1 In the "golden years fol-

a numbe growing hostilit at n th

II-

nl worki on Japs nomi », dc he Western J int« nd lubsequent gratuli ie industi n tht n the noma

w skilled labour, without the system being destab

1 by this polarisation;

lain i, iddi

>ry profits were produced horn mass consumption, which kept pace

with g r o w i n g investments. *2 As from the 1960s, these twin conditions were no ause investments in the commodity producing sector in the

ket outlets in the Third World 92

'

"» uted in the West ai the end ,ndu ruing

dts< ui Pally to the book l>

industrialised countries g r e w more than productivity, generating a crisis which i then attempted to resolve by seeking out production options and mat"*

the

ed in

Fordism mobilised industnal capacities at both the extremes of high skilled and

longer given

lie

In the 1980s the debate entered the public domain with the publi

lowing the S e c o n d World War, these t w o conditions had been satisfied,

sa

stJ* Mea ipphed th nth*-

tu

If w e then look at the discontinuity between Fordism and post-Fordism, it talist accumulation and I

T h e p r o p o n e n t s of the advent ol i Fordism discovered To; m as a variant -ost-Fordism tow the en the 1 9 8 0 s . l 3 In the 19* Vest ion o nese capitalism l 4 At began belatedly to take account of the ex; that time it was understood as a phenomenon which combined shrewd con J policies. 15 mercial strategies with an en
ein. tu,ah,

hwhile cofttnbu-

EtrruG

ambin A ( rdufut of the Forth

>ns had aroused les9 interest. According at. the lessons emanating fr the Toyota lactones introduced a new paradigm of produv tiviiv. whose imo those oi Ta\ lorism and Fordism in their time Th nee was comparabl mplete and h. turn come* into the Umtlight in tkcguut of a p&t-Fordum thai /e. Tovotism is seen as the fulfilment of a tendency to a new form of rationalisation, a rationalisation which had certainly dawned with the categorv of post-Fordism, but which, in the West, had appeared vague, not yet taking concrete form in a specific form oi production and a consolidated social space In T« ism however, we are told by Coriat, post-Fordism is realised not only as an ensemble ot attempts to rationalise and reduce production costs, but also as a major experiment in new and more advanced relations of production — j n fact of a new sociality which might prefigure new forms of industrial democraIn Coriat's book the West remains in the background, but if we transferred n Japan to its European our attention from the delicate balance of producti\ variant, the diffuse ve would find an informal Tovotism already operng there, based on individual work contracts. For example, in the celebrated i in the "diffuse factory" m industrial districts, we would find the empl< attempting to set up individual relationships with their workers in order to break down systems of collective bargaining. tern of productivity emerged According to the Toyotist vulgate, the nev principally as a result of endogenous demand factors during and after the boom s "just-in-time" production, and thus in large of the Korean War (1950—5" lead times and cut the workforce.24 part as an attempt to re What is new about To essentially the elements of "just-in-time" pro duction and prompt reaction to market requirements; the imposition of multi-job bing on workers employed on several machines, either simultaneously or sequen bally; quali' »ntrol throughout the entire flow of prodi n; real-time informa tion on the progress of production in the factory'; information which is both capil lary and filtered in an authoritarian sense, in such a way as to create social embar rassment and drama in the event of incidents which are harmful to production Production can be interrupted at any moment, thus calling to account a given ry. Any worker who shows a work-team, or department, or even the whole I waged-workers indifference to the company's productivity requirements, and therefore decides not to join "quality control" groups etc, is stigmatised and encouraged to leave. From Coriat we learn that in the interplay of "demo and icism." the group may enjoy a measure of democracy, but the person stigmatised will certainly enjoy ostracism. In the interests of comprehensiveness, in nis wonders of Toyotism Conat?* devotes a laconic note to Satochi desci Kamata, the wnter who went to work in Toyota in 19 were reflected in the title of his book

wta, th<

lory of

Hid whose experiences

the RtguLltwr

Toyotism has a number of advantages for the regulation school as regards Western managerial perspectives, even though the Japanese advantage in productivity is showing itself to be tenuous, despite the propagandists aura that has surrounded it in the West.27 First of all. it is an experiment that is geographically remote and commercially successful, inasmuch as it defines a route to accumulation (albeit in conjunctures that are both pre-war and war-based, and not at all in conditions of peace, as the enthusiasts of Toyotism would like to h«V« us believe) In the second place, Toyotist methods seem to contradict the growing process of individualisation. which is often given as the reason for the endemic resistance from Western workforces to massification and regimentation. Thirdly. Toyotism is the bearer of a programme of tertiarisation of the workforce, the so-called "whitening" of the blue-collar worker, which, while it actually only involves a rather limited minority of workers, nonetheless converges with the prognosis for a dualistic restratification of the workforce which the posi I ordists consider inevitable.

PRK-TRAl'l UNION FORDISM

What was the reality* of Fordism for those workers who experienced it at first hand? Put briefly, Fordism is an authoritarian system ot production imposed "objectively - by the assembly line, operating on wages and working conditions which the workforce is not in a position to negotiate collectively Pre-trade union Fordism, with its use of speed-up. armed security guards, ph J intimidation in the workplace and external propaganda, in the 1920s I the worU and 1930s was one oi the key elements in the .'/<• lion aunfM which put out vs initially in Stalin's Soviet Union and whi would soon put out claw- m Nazi German the opposite token, even -n the US witnessed a continued, and even strengthened, during the Depi democratic grass-roots way of doing things which aimed at the building of the industrial union, and which laid siege to Fordism, and brought it down In the twen is preceding the unionisation of i in 1941. the company nagers and goon squads conducted anti-worker repression, with beatings, sackve will be able to be ings and public relations operations. One day pern.* more detailed than Irving Bernstein when, speaking of the main lord plant mcent. n camp that penod. he wrote: "The River Rouge, was a gigan^ mded on fear and physical assault."2* Th I is that the Fordist ma breaking down the rhythms of human am n order to crib and confine it »rldwide level was defeated m the United State* but m a rigid plan at th in the meai t had already m .ts way across to a Europe th. U m flames. One could argue that in the twentieth century the assembly line

Debits26 9*>

94

,,/

, n the i rr.

. an indu

this I

nation Ltion-cam

>l the origiimei perp*.

in th i pre-n anion Fordism, the. 't already contained in potentiality its m he not tl: perioni work "to. n Abraham Lincoln; nor th tstrucrioi IOindustrialun raw the fall ofth< m and male iminated ^ion of iabouj *n less the right to strike. Fascism and ism not in their origins the losing - ol Fordism, but were •d to I uh thanks to the nd working-cla b uggles of the •s in the United tes — struggles which had already stopped a ruling iat was set on a course of corj >s at the time ol the format Roosevelt government in 1932-o3. know, in the United emblv line dah >m way back. The process of series production of durable goods in the twentieth century was n by n the American ten ol Manufactures, the method ol prodi igeable parts which was air operating in US industry in the ninentur rds expenment in hi torn a crucial moment in this prod n, inasmuch as it applies it to a consumer durable, the motor in the early years of the last century, even car. which had been a luxury ol >rd structured an increasingly broad-based the United States. By so doin and pressing consumer demand, which in its turn legitimated among publn ritarian measures so al of the Ford factories in the perithe centu he eve ol World War II. od stretching from the early pai I use the word "authontan. edly to describe the Ford experiment, because in its way it was both more authoritarian and — especially — more grounded than the proposals that had been advanced by F.W. Taylor twenty 3 previously. The worker who works for Ford is an individual who promultipln ation of the points ol contact between individuals, 5 0 but paradoxically he produces it pr< thanks to his own imprisonoduction, where he is deprived of the ment for hours on end at the poir I hitherto unheard of, just as the woman right ol movement to an employed on his daily reproduction is bound to the rhythms of industrial prodi lile at the same time confined to the social twilight of domesi labour The worker is ed ol the right of speech, J use — in this disciplining goes one stage further than Taylorism — the rhythm ol his working d not so much by direct verbal orders from a or, as by a pre-oi ied tempo set by the factory's machinery. ommui on and con with his peers was minimised and the worker was e * mplv to reepi mtomatically and monotonously to the pace set by in productive system. By no means the least of the ors ol isolaa to*

96

ners wh " W i , c t h i '" ^ " immigrant workers brought as a gift to " , M l d v h l - h ll nta.ned and deliberately exacerbated lor four s o n cnd lt,,l r [ d« « E t » "comprehensions and d,visions. These were lessened only with the passing of time, by daily cor, between workers, by the eff« I i ession, and by the organisation. i the start, but nevertheless unstinting - or the minority who fought lot industrial unionism during the 1920s and 1930 As we know, right from its establishment in 1903, the Ford Motor Company would not tolerate the presence of trade unions: not only the unions or industrial unions, but even "yellow" or company unions Tra unions remained outside the gates of Ford-USA right up till 1941 Wages became relatively high for a period with the famous 'five-dollar day" in January 1914, but only lor those workers whom Ford's Sociology Depaftmi ipproved alter a minute inspect!. the intimate details ol th eir personal and family lives — and then only in boom periods, when Ford was pressurised by the urgent need to stabilise a workforce which was q< factories becaus he murderous levels of speed-up.31 The plan tor total control of workers and their families went into Vmericas entry into the war in 1917; thereupon surveillance began the more detailed use of sp n the ssion following on World War I, the wages of the other shop floor. In th companies were tending to catch up with wages at Ford, and Ford set about dismantling the torms of welfare adopted in the 1910s. In February 1921, more than 30 per cent of Ford workers were sacked, and those who remained had to be content with an inflation-hit six dollars a d. id lurther speed-ups. Ford's supremacy in the auto sector began to crack halfway through the 1920s, when the managers at General Motors u*ge part refugees from Ford and its authoritarian methods), definitn < ched primacy in the world of auto pn tion. Rather than pursuing undifferentiated production lor the "multi tudes," as Henry Ford called them, General Motors won the battle in the ruinu !unti\rne.<.< and individuation, broadening its range of products, diver i^g. and introducing new models on a yearly basis. From the end ol the 1920s, and up till unionisation in 194 1, the Ford Motor Company was to be notorious for its wages, which \ lower even than the already low wages in the auto sector in general The fac the company having been overtaken by General Motors, and Ford's financial difficult ere not sufficient to break pre-trade union Fordism in the United States it took, first, the working-class revolts and the ms of the 1930s, and then the unionisation o! heavy industry, to bring about the P al encirclement of the other auto manufacturers, and. finally, of Ford, to the point where it eventually capitulated to the United Auto Workers union following the big strike in the Spring of 1941. Pre-trade union

97

A

Fordism dissolved at the point when, faced with attacks by the company's armed security guards, the picketing strikers instead ot backing down increased in numb .cm ofl It was a moment worth recalling with the words ot Emil Mazev. one of the main UAW organisers "It was like seeing men who had been half-dead suddenly come to life/31 1941, not only did Ford line the signing of the first union contract up with the other two majors in the auto industry, General Motors and Chrysler, but it even outdid them in concessions to the UAW. Ford was then saved from bankruptcy a second time only thanks to war orders from the government. Alrea n the course of the Second World War it had been attempting to strengthen the trade union apparatus in the factory, to bring it into line with the M. As from 19*46, a new Ford management set about a longcompany's ob|< o coopt the UAW and turn it into an instrument of company inteterrn gration. Thus was Fordism buried. If, by Fordism, we mean an authoritarian tern of series production based on the assembly line, with wages and conditions of work which the workforce is not in a position to negotiate by trade union means — Fordism as it was generally understood by labour sociologists in the 1920s and 1930s — then Fort^m wot cLrnvuittt* thanks to the struggles for indusJ unionism in the United States in the 1930s, which were crowned by the imposition of collective bargaining at Ford in 1941. As for the dictatorial tendency to deny the workforce discretionality in the setting of work speeds, and the imposition of work speeds incorporated into machinery, these were far from disappearing with the end of pre-trade union Fordism; ii anything, by the late 1990s they become more pressing than ever, precisely in the face of the growth in the productive power of labour and the advent oi computer-controlled machinery — but that now takes us a long way from pre-trade union Fordism. We may or may not choose to see these tendencies as a chapter in a I broader movement of rationalisation which began with the American System of Mam ures and which has not yet fully run its course. In any event, the overall drive to command over worktimes through the "objectivity" of machinery^ was incubated by other large companies before Ford, explodes with the di* the Fordist assembly line, but is not at all extinguished with its temporary defeat at the end of the 1930s. In fact it seems to impose itself with renewed ulence even in the most remote corners where capitalism has penetrated.

GLOBAL POST-FORDISM AND TOYOTISM

As lor the category of post-Fordism, in its obscure formulation by the regulation school, it then opened the way to a number of positions which seemed to be grounded in two unproven axioms: the technological determinism of M

< the Riyulatum

&fW

small-series product., m whi. h. i i * B « ne 1960s, is supposed to represent a rna,or A with large leiiei produi don in the manulu. ture of consumer durables; and the recent discovery of the productive communication between whai they choose to call the "producers" in industry.& Th< t axiom derives from the assertion that material production in general (even in engineering - which is more discontinuous than How production) by small series, because, thanks to the increasing flexibility of machine tools, beginning with the numerical control machinery of the 1950s, it has become easier to diversify products, in particular in the production of consumer durables. This diversification makes it possible to meet the needs of consumers seeking individualiryxbut also to mould people's tastes and to i them the little touches and personalising elements that pass for expensive innovations. In short, this tendency is merely a strengthening of the drive to diversification which General Motors had attempted and promoted right from the 1920s, and which enabled it to beat Ford at a time when Henry Ford was s. ing that his customers could have any colour of car that the\ nted as long as e moulded the mas> it was black. Mass production had only in app er (a term which is used, but also abused, in identifying changing historical figures in class composition). In some departments of Ford's biggest )ry, River Rouge, the Ford silence was broken by the "Ford whisper," or by "discour hand signals, one of the elements of working-class re ince up until the de sive confrontation of 194l. 3 6 Despite the fact that workers had to wear identical blue overalls, and despite the fact that they were not given permission even to think, it was plain that the "producers" had minds which aspired to iniivu ation, not to ./ universal levelling. We were reaching the end of the levelling battle for an equality "which would have the permanence ot a fixed popular opinion."37 Towards the end of the 1920, Henry Ford found himself for the first time in serious financial difficulties, ng out of his insistence on the singlecolour Model T It is worth noting that in the Ford I ries, even in the dark years of the 1930a, there were workers willing to risk the sack by General Moto « Thus, within the auto industn. it was General Motors in the 1920s that invented and brou t boul a flexible production that matched the needs of the time Its div >ed vehicles were produce J by means oi a "commonahs.tion" ol BUM biw Is and ol the man. components of the finished auto. The I nomies of range was economies of scale. The advent of varie m . a s C Wright Mills was o n ciid no1 have to wait for To well aware in tl. ly 1950s, when he denounced the manipulating interplay between mass >d "personal touches'* in the products of hi Furthermore, i taken as real that Toyotism had already broke ordism" in the 1950s and 1960s, because it needed to be flexible in order i 99

A Critic auto prod >n to cope with a demand that v mewhat di\ Tied. Even the prime advocate nsm**1 m this clear, and a number of Western resear iding I propagated its myth. Th u that in the Var period, 1 as was the case with Nissan, was relatively inexperiit had begun production only in 1()36, and had enced as a producer < learned to build itself an oligopolistic position which contributed to the reneral Motors from Japan a bare three years later, '45, with the TON oda family still at the helm, the company focused on vge series prod >n, which was exported, and then also produced abroad. The continuity not with regulationist Fordism but with the U S auto sector turns t to \ r stronger than the Toyotophile vulgate would be willing to admit. A a difficult period of post-War reconversion, Toyota tried the path of the p run-about (the Toyotapet), and experienced major strikes in 1949 and 1953 It was saved principally by the intransigence of Nissan, when they destroyed the Zenji auto union, but also thanks to United States orders arising \d for a further twenty years to come, out of th >rean War Subsequent! Tc range of products, .\ni[ those of the other Japanese auto companies, as restricted to a very limited number ot models. U p until the 1960s the defective quality of these models meant that exports were not a great success Faced ith this lack of success, there began a phase of experimentation based on using multi-jobbing mobile workteams on machine tools with variable programming, and on attention to quality with a view to exports.42 It was the success ol one single model (the Corolla runabout) in the 1970s that laid the basis for a diver•*-versa; and it was a success that Toyota on of production, and no' was able to build on abroad as well as at home, where the market was far less buoyant. U p until the 1980s, the variety of Toyota models was prudently limited, and only in the 1980s, when the domestic market experienced a standstill, company e.\ I their range of production with a view to winning new the needfor a variety of medtb, hut the nwodisatL markets overseas. Thus. the a i hiftoric wrking-clcLM Meal that explain* . Hr Ohno's experiment.' The principal novelty of his experiments was that whereas General M m the 1920s had been itent to have several ranges of cars built on separate lines, Toyota created work teams that could be commanded where and when necessary, to multi-jobbed labour on the production of a variety of models along the same assembly line. As for "just in time" production, this had already been experimented with in its own way, by the auto industry in the United States in the 1920s, and even

of tU I

« <>f the Regulatu

auto union in the United States.^ In the 1936-37 showdown between the 1W and General Motors, the union was victorious on the planning of stocks and on the elimination of seasonal unemployment. Perhaps those who sing the praises of jutt in time production could take a page or two out of the history of Detroit in the 1930s, or maybe a page from the history of the recent recurring strikes m Europe and the US by the independent car-transporter drivers operating within the cycle ot the auto industry, who are actually the extreme appendages of the big companies. As regards the second thesis, the supporters of the notion of post-Fordism claim that production now requires, and will continue to require, ever-higher levels of communication between productive subjects, and that these levels in discretionality to the so-called "producers," spaces which turn offer spao B relatively significant, compared with a past of r. ommunicating labour, of "the silent compulsion of economic relations"^ of the modern world. This communication is supposed to create an increasingly intense connectn between subjects, in contrast with the isolation, the separateness and the silei imposed on the worker by the first and second industrial revolutions. While it is certainly true that processes of learning in production ("learning by doing") tiding have required and still require a substantial degree of int verbal interaction, between individuals, it remains the case that from Taylorism onwards the saving of workrime is achieved to a large extent through reducing to a minimum contact and informal interaction between planners and doers. ase Taylorism tried, with scant results, to impose a planning in order to \ productivity, depriving foremen and workers of the time-discretional ity which they assumed by negotiating informally and verbally on the shop floor. However, in the era of pre-trade union Fordism it should be remembered that m th ,Js of restructuring of the factory, of changes of models and nological innovation, the "whispering" ol ition was not only produce, bin llv essential to the successful outcorm the operation. Anyway, the silence imposed by authority and the deafening noise ol <' ment is what dominates the auto industry through to the mid 1930s.4^ But the iuctptinin k whisper wiihm the channels . "' ry? rrmnkotion — U this not perhaps alsa a constitutor characteristic of the On this point* one might note that mdustna lology, as a < line, was built on the concealing of the communicative dimension and on the n on ol analysis of the processes of verba) mteraction in the workplace It is not a mere n \ [ere we h -mly to remember the words of Harold (,arhnkel

•

as

'he Depression. The layoffs without pay, which were so frequent in th< >20s, and luring the I )ej>r because of the seasonal nature ! demand, was one of the battlefields that was decisive in the creation ol tne

There exists a locally-produced order of work thing I They make u} ve domain of organizat J phenomena; [ J

101

A( x

.

rk, without these ph

41,

thr

ake use »-l tl

s

C

w

Theref or the tenden.

impose spe p in >. this certai. did n. h the demise i e-union Fordism; il anything it is e\ n\ ii this i nd ol the twentieth cental n the face th gthening of the productive powers ol I «r In the tendency now assumes some of the character d tha pre-union Fordism d the Roaring Twen a precariousncss o( peopl< the nononce of health care schemes and unemp nl benefits; cuts not only in the real wage but also in mori he shifting of lines of production to areas well away from industrial rure" regions. Also working hours are becoming longer rather than shorter In the whole of the West, and in the East too. people are working longer hours than twenty years ago, and in a social dimension from which the regulatory power of the state has been eclipsed The fact that people are working longer hours, and more inter is also thanks to the allegedly obsolete Taylorist •meter and the "outmoded" Fordist assembly line. Ironically, precisely for France, which is where the regulationist school first emerged, precious data, nonexistent elsewhere, show that work on assembly lines ami subject to the constraint of an on the increase, in both percentage terms and absolute terms: 13.2 per cent of workers were subjected to it in 198M, and 16.7 per cent in 1991 (oii respectively. 6,187.000 and 6.239,000 workers).47 In the 1950s and 1960s — the "golden years" of Fordism as Lipietz calls them — the international economy under the leadership of the United States pushed the demand for private investment, even more than the consumption of wage goods. What bad appeared to be a stable m began ne apart from the >. because at the end of the 1960s the class struggle, in its many different forms, overturned capital's solid certainties as regards the wage, the organisation of the labour process, the relationship between development and underdevelopment, and patriarchy. / ' 'tot understand the radicality of tbis challenge tt becomes impossible tognup tbc elements of crisu and uncertainty which characterueJ the prv 'tnm •> the twenty year.* that followed*** The dishomogeneiry of the reactions — from the war of manoeuvre against blue collar work ers in the industrialised countries, through to capitalisms regionah .ition it three large areas (NAFTA, European Union and Japan) and to the Gulf War — denote not the transition to a post-Fordist model, but a continuous recombination Id and new elements of domination in order to decompose labour power politically within a newly flexibilist stem of produ tt

102

'

a

m

* a n d ™>tor of the overall movement of [ IM tn,, R u t n s c a k m soP d * A * » ol many when the te that "it is Jbnyg ital itself and the structures mposes ob> on the backs ol the ( gonists. that sets in motion the decisive conditions of class struggles and of processes < ^ Thus it is not surprising that the conclusions that the regulationists draw from their position tend to go in the only direction which is not precluded for them; namely that conflict against the laws of capitalist development has no future, and also that there is no point in drav ing attention to the cracks in the edifice of domination. Paraphrasing Mark Twain, one might hat if the regulationists have only a pan-Fordist hammer, thev will see only post-Fordist nails to bang. In taking up this position, not only do the regulationists deny themselves the possibility nalysis Ol conflictual processes both now and in the futu; but they also exclude themselves from the multi-voiced debate which is todfocussing on social subjects. 60 This is the only way in which one can explain the regulationists' reduction of the working class in the United States to a mere Fordised object.^ even in its moments of greatest antagonistic projectuality as it was expressed between the Depression and the emergence of the Nazi-Fascist new order in Europe. And given the limits of its position, regulationism is then unable to understand how this working class contributed decisively in the pla ing of that selfsame United States capitalism onto a collision course with Nazism and fascism. Pre-union Fordism was transient, but not in the banal (but nonetheless significant) sense of Henry Ford financing Hitler on his route power and decorating himself with Nazi medals right up until 1938, but because what overturned the silent compulsion ot the Fordised workforce was the workforce itself, in one of its social movements of self-emancipation — a fact of which the regulationists are not structurally equipped to understand the vast implications at the world level, and for mam years to come, well beyond the end of World War II. As regards today s conditions, what is important is not the examination of the novelties following on the collapse ol ous certainties in the wake ol the fall of the Berlin Wall, but the possibility or otherwise of avoiding the mevitab.htv of the passage to a P ost-Fordist" paradigm in which labour power figures once again as a mere object and inert mass As Pelaez and Holloway note, the insistence with which the regulationists invite their audience to look the future in the face arouses a certain perplexity.** Alter all, a belief in the marvels of technology Wi1 the organisations of the labour movement has led to |>"A , S

s,(l

>ol looks at the impl *

lhe cenlr

io5 H^^^^H^^^^HI

....

he

erwise of a

p^

y

A

* here is not ,UM the inevitability or oth-

rls t h e "l' w l m h c' V P*l biblio al references for the debat For the regulation « see, among others, the iollowing v B Robert la regula: * anafyee , ,ne Boyer, Li tl i m , \^ \ 1986; Robert Boyer (ed.), p a r i 8 p r c S ses /cU

•*> - « hl< h hM too .. able, but even the possibility of any u, er tentati >n the part o( social s u b l e t s . What is at stake her the possibility of r< *g a pr< I subordination ol labour power to tl,, inexorable New Times that are imposed in part, certainly, by the computer chip, but also b wrerful intra imperialist hostilities, which for the moment are disguised behind slogans such as petition and tree trade. What the present leads us to defend is the indetermmation of the bound anes of confl tl action We shall thus h to re-examine a means or two, to clearing the future at least or the more lamentable bleatings. tion and anatomisation of labour-power as a Up until now the decom "human machine" has been a preparatory process of the various stages of mechatton, it is a process which capitalist domination has constantly presented as necessary The point is not whether post-Fordism is in our midst, but e of "human machines" on the pyramids of accumulation whether the sa< n be halted. TRANSLATED BY E D EMERY 4

2

3

• r a timely critique of the term immaterial production," see Sergio Bologna, "Problematiche del lavoro autonomo in Italia" (Part I), Altreragiom, no. 1 p. 10 Michel Aglietta, (1974 ), Accumulatwn el regulation du capitalism* en tongue pe'rlode Lexempli -1970), Pans. INSEE. 1974; the second French edition has the title Regulation el cru*e<* du capita&me, Paris, Calmann-LeVy, >76; English translation, A The apitalu*t Regulation: the US Exptruncc, London and New York, Verso. 1979; in 1987 there followed a second English edition trom the same publisher. The link between the category of Fordism and that of post-Fordism may be considered the term "neo>rdism," proposed by Christian Palloix two years after the publication of ok Cf. Christian Palloix. "Le proems du tra the first edition of Aglie vail. Du fordisme au neo-fordisme," IM Peru* 185 (February 1976). pp 37-60, according to whom neo-Fordism refers to the new capitalist pi • of job » hment and job recomposition as a response to new r< ements in the management of workforces. For the regulationist interpretation of Fordism prior to 1991. see the fund m mental volume edited by Werner Bonefeld and John Holloway, JW-JR * t Debate on the 1 rdvi .-, London. Macmillan, 104

,,/

1

m - the

»TES

thcl
es de ; Vi Un ' ^ Alain Lipietz, "Towards Global Fordism'' New Ufi Review no. 132 (March-April 1982). pp 33-47; Alain Lipiet "Imperialism as the Beast of the Apocalypse apital OJ J2 (Spring 1984), pp. 81-109; Alain Lipiete, Behind the Crisis: the Exhaustion of a Regime of Accumulation. A 'Regulation School Perspective on Some Frenc .h Empirical Works," Rm col Political Economy, vol 18, no 1-2 (lL)o"b), pp. 13—32; Alain Lipietz, Mirage* am the C> :, Ixmdon, Verso\ 1987; Alain Lipietz, "Fordism and post-Fordism W. Outhw and Tom Bottomore (eds >. The Bbukwell I nary rd. BL 1993. pp. 230-31. Twentieth-Century Social Thought, I ientref Benjamin Conat, Peruer Tenvers. Travail c •e, Paris, Christian Bourgois. 1991, Italian translation, Ripensan I iutaxioiu del lavoro. Concetti e pnu.u del inoikIlo . Ban. Dedalo, with introduction and translation by Mirella Gianmni 1 say "relatively high productivity" because the assembly line has n ways produced results. For example, the So\ iism ol the first two ti ear was the object of some experimentation, particplans (1928-32, 1933ularly on the assembly lines ol the Gorki auto hank part to the i, but prodi. turned out to be technical support of Ford technu about 50 per cent lower than that of Fords US factory. Cf John P. Hardt and George D. HoIIid.* technology Transfer and Change in I iet

Bconotnii

>tem. in

Fleron, Jr.. Ted

wnuniei

Culture: the & ittural Impa, Vechn "d L >n, Praeger. 1977, pp. 18" 3. In his "Fordism and post-Fordism." or> \ U\ ***** u the term Fordism'

,sv

A t rtHfrn »fthf WmUm of the RymUHm School

6

11

publ fokru hs (I r his prison notes Oi Americanism and Fordism," Gramsci had the Italian translat the French < ,n pi bv Alcan Henn de Man, II superamento del nuaxumo, Bari, Latt 1929 In e the term Fordism" pre-dates de Man and G f i m t c i and 15 aJi n use in the early 1920s; d m particular I i ledrich von G< Ottlilientelci. hrasen iiber das Verh&tttW von Wirts
Lipietz. T o w a r d s Global rch-Apnl 1982). pp. 33^*7. 12 Ibid., pp. 3 5 - 6

Fordism," New Left Review,

no. 132

tion of the Japanese model within Western sociology, more bnefly and in more general terms, d Pierre-Francois Souyn, "Un nouveau paradigm^ Annals, vol 49, no. 3 (May-June 1994), pp. 503-10. M Robert Gu.llam, Japan. trvitUmtai* >aris, Seuil. 1969; Herman Kahn, The Emerging Japanese Superstate. Minneapolis. Minn., Hudson Institute. 1970 16 Robert Broch U mtrade miam japonats, Pans, Calrnann-LeVy. 1970. 16 Jon Halliday and David McCormack. Japanese Impen iy: Co-prosperity in Greater East Asia, Harmondsworth, Penguin. 1973. \7 Ezra Vogel, Japan as Number One: Lesso r America, Cambridge, Mass.. Harvard University Press, 1979 18 Karel Van Wolferen, The Enigma of Japanese Pouter, New York, N Y . Knopf. 1989 19 Chie Nakane, Japanese Society, London. Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1970; Italian translation, La societd giapponese, Milan. Cortina Michio Morishima, Why Has Japan "Succeeded'", Cambridge, Cambridge University Press; Italian translation. Cultura e technolagia net successogiapponese, Bologna. II Mulino. 1984 20 Jean-Loup Lesage, Les grands socUtds de commerce au Japon, Us Sbivha. Paris. PUF; Chalmers Johnson, MITl and the Japar trial policy, 1925-75, Tokyo, Tuttle. 1986. 21 Masahiko Aoki, The Economic /Analysis of the Japane. Amsterdam. Elsevier, 1984; Kazuo Koike, Understanding Industrial Relalu^ns in M rn Japan, London, Macmillan, 1988. 22 Tai'ichi Ohno, Toyota Sctsan Htvhtki [The Toyota Producnon Method], Diamond Sha, 1978; English translation. The Toyota Production Sy*
etti e prasst del nwdelb giapponese Ban. Dedalo, 199 1

24 Benjamin Conat. Ripensare Torgan

W lax

25 Benjamin Conat. Ripensare /'organic 26 Satochi Kamata. Toyota, I'usme

Mia* '«•• P S 5 ?**** Edit* HmneYes. \<>

English translation, Japan tn the Pa, ,,„,, New York. N Y Jit/

Lam Iniik Unwin Hyman, 1984. By the same

author, Lenders du Miracle, Pans. Maspe>o, 1980. 27 Rjg and Cindelyn Eberts. The Myths of Japanese

I 'n this development, cf the review by Giuseppe Bonazzi. "I>a scopert modello giapponese nelh identali," Stato e Mercato, no. 39 (I h >er 1993), pp. 4 3 7 - 6 6 . which discusses the variously critical recep106

Prentice Hall. 1994. 28 Irving Bernstein. Turbulent )

Op. cit.. pp. 32-33.

Upper Saddle. N.J.,

A Hu'tory of the Ameruan Work*

Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 196^ p. 737. 10

W-Wl,

A Critique fifth* Ftfrditm ••/ ihc Hen unshell. From tht lm

Wt*f* toJfa** Pniaetiaa

Baltimore and London, The Jokn Karl A' ttiaaj none*

Penguin,

;

(18i

41

i>kms University 1' qf the t

-v,

. p

">d.-

viduals. but expresses the sum ol interrelations, the relations within win. |, these individuals stand -rephen Meyer III. The Five Dollar Day Labor M unload m ny, i 1921 A l l N Y . State University ol Newtfu York Press, 1981, m particular \ o-202, ce SI Peterson. Atru Uomobile Worker** 1900-1933, State University of N e w York. I9i letroit Strike.' The Soti

W ' « [" Marie-t

Harold Garfinkel ztbodologxai York, Rout ledge & Kegan Paul, 198*

The

down production during the fall months in ordei to prepare the new yearmodels; and the automobilie worker has to stretch the high wages' of >,

Fever (

Instability of Employment in the Automobile Industr

Monthly Libor R,

vol. XXVIII, pp. 2 1 4 - 1 7 .

Bernstein, Turbulent Yeoro, op. cit.. p. 744. 34 David Noble, "Social Choice in Machine Design," in A n d r e w Zimbalist, Caje on the Ltihor I

N e w York. Monthly Review Press, 1979. pp.

18-50. oi these p<

49 Joachim

37 Karl Mai

nlent )t

59

vol, 24, no

une 1995), pp. 4 2 7 - 6

the Soviet authority earning to Bow: Post-Fordism and

Technological Determinism," in Werner Boneleld and John Holloway

it , p 740

Italian industrial districts w h o presented flexible pr-

Kapiiaii

bly lines of the Gorky auto factory were referred to as "the Fordised"

( e d s ) . /'.W- /

While not belonging to the regulation school, there are t w o admirers of the tion

Theory a

M Eloina Pelaez and J o h n Hollow

apital, vol.1. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1976. p. 152.

ing Bernstein. Turbulent }•

Roth. DOJ neiu G

On this theme see Peter Miller and Nikolas Rose, "Production. Identity and

(fordirovann

op cit., p. 740

ew

During the first two five-year plans under Stalin, the workers on the assem-

Rome,

Manifestolibri, 1995, pp 161-224. ng Bernstein.

London and N

SA, 198b, p, 37

Democr.

essay, "Economiaa modello soe lale nel passaggio tra lordismo e toyotismo"

1

Hirsch and Roland

Hamburg

I to be found in M a r c o Revelli's

in Pietro Ingrao and H«>ssana Rossanda, Appurttt
op cit.. pp

48 See the indispensable "Contribution by R do Bellofiore: On Pietro Ingrao and Rossana Rossands. Appunti di Fine Secolo," pub. Asso »ne dei Lavoratori e delle Lavoratrici Torinesi (ALL ovember 1995. [Editor's Note: A shortened version of Bellofiore's essay appeared in English in Common Seine, no. 22, 197

50

35 An updated syntl

, Mytfo

Anon.. Alternat, \ 994. on the D A R E S data: Enqw
sonal one. The factories slow

eight months to cover the full twelve-month period." Q . also M.W. La

ugnan and Yannick Lung (199

J o y c e Shaw Peterson. Amen :obiU Worker^ f900-/933, 5 4 - 5 6 ; Irving Bernstein. Turbulent Years, op, cit , p 740.

I, 136. no. 3528). 15 February 1933. pp.

T h e automobile industry is a

Beli

(The Toyota Method ol Production), op.

la I nternationalisation dans la e du modeil productifj \nnaL ',. - J u n e ; 541-67 \ \ W I-a Fever, "Instability naployment m the Automobile Ind lust op ,t pp 2 1 4 - 1 7 . Cf. also note 31 above. 44 Karl Marx. ( apital, op cit., p. 89'

Albany, N Y ' .

amuel Romer wrote in

'" «

m a no* Socio! Form, op. cit , 1991, p. 13

tion as an innova-

the 1970s. Here the reference was not to J a p a n , but to the

eastern part of the Po Valley plain: J . Michael Piore and Charles F Sabel (1983), Tb<

a.* trial Di

'ibilit

>r Prosperity.

Basic Books, Italian translation, Le due vie deli

N e w York,

luppo /

Arietta, Mit hel 11<J

trial*

J nple fe I Capital*™, h

Produzwftt it truism e protht.zione fle^tbtle, Torino. I S E D I , 1987. harles Wright [

Commentary on O u r Culture a n d O u r Cour.

Partisan Review, vol 19, no 4 (duly-August 1952). pp. 4 4 6 - 5 0 , and in ticular p, 44T 108

New L Al

mulotum et,

Uymeen

(1870-1970), Paris. insee, 1974; Regulation et i ?u I d m a n n - U v y . 1976 (2nd edition) English translation, mtuU RiguLtu m Tie I B Bxperu London and N e w York, 1979 (2nd edition, London and New York, 198

Romano (1975), Sulla Fiat t oltn tcritti

to

Milan, Feltnnelh.

Ai man*

' III parts 1 and 2, tiibro,

;

\nonin

tuetes ,*ur /'..

DARES d If mu Aoi Bt

Alternative.* Economigues, (May), on

lor nest pas m<

ft Us conOtiom

/ t h e Japanese Firm, Amsterdam,

•r. Jourguignan. Marie-Claude and Lung. Yannick (! l )94), "Le Mythe dc la ginelle L'internationalisatmn dans la trajectoire du rnodele product! f japonais. Annals.*, A

Bernstein. I m n g ( 1 %

Turbulent Years: A History of the American Worker 1913-

Bologna. Sergio; Rawick. George 1

obbini. Mauro; Negri, Antonio; Ferrari

Gambino, Ferruc

Operai e stato: Lotte operate e nfomui

italistwo tra rivoluzume d'Ottobre e New Deal, Milan. Feltrinelli, J. Bologna. Sergio, "Problematiche del lavoro autonomo in Italia," Altreragumi. 1 Bonazzi, Giuseppe (1993). "La scoperta del modello giapponese nella sociologia occidentals ito e mercato. No. 39. Bonefeld. Werner and Holloway, John (eds.) (1991), Pott-Fordism and Social >rm: A M MacMillan

Botafl Paw i

I

t Debate on the P^t-Fordut

State, Houndmills and London,

Boyer, Robert (1986). La th/one de Li regulation: une analyst critique, Paris, La De'couverte, Boyer. Robert (ed.) (1986), Unj taires de France.

Capitalism**

fin de si/c/e,

Paris,

Presses

Brochier. Robert (1970), Le miracle economiaue japonats, Paris, Calmann-LeVy. Conat. Benjamin (1991), Tenser lenverj. Travail et organisation dans lentreprue japonaise, Paris, Christan Bourgois. 1991; Italian translation. Ripensare Torganuzzazwne del lavoro. Concetti e prassi del nujdcllo giapponese, Bari, Dedalo, 1991. with introduction and translation by Mirella Giannini. Alike (1978). "Fordism' in Crisis: A Review of Michel Regulation et Crid

Pemuri B n rambino, M. Gobf : >V.//'. Milan, Feltrinelli.

Gambino » VnittA Sociales.

1987

M cgri

^ p^t

ifoft Jea, 1 Rov.t. Jeamne. Il> v I, Th r.s, Editions de I'Ecole des Hautes

Garfmkel, Harold (ed.) (1986

hnometho,

W des en

*s

Work, Routledge &

Kegan Paul. London e New York Gottl-OttlilienfelA

1941, Boston. Houghton Mifflin. Bravo. I

Gambi

r, Table 1.2.1.

lasahiko (19W), Th

hi /•

Friedrich von (1924),

> Paraphr^en ubcr das

I crhaltnts von fckafi und technu*cher Vemunft bet Henry Ford unt eriek W. Taylor, Jena. Gi Fis Gramsci. Antonio (1975). "Americamsmo e fordismo" (1934) in W mere, vol 3, ed. V. Gerratana, Torino, Einaudi Guillian. Robert (1969). J upon troisieme . V*\\^. Seuil Halliday, J o n and McCormack, David (1973), Japanese Imperialism J
John (eds ) 1991

Hounsheli David A ( 1 9 8 4 ) . / 1912), Baltimora e London. The Johns Hopkins Univei Je,

Agliettas

John

" I ress^

Bob (1991a). Regal** *J* Henfy to M'Wner Bonefeld, in Bonefeld, Werner and Hollov

' T tds) John (ed

Exp/runce des Etats Unit," Review. 2.

Eberts, Ray and Cindelyn (1994), The Myth* of Japanese Quality, Upper Saddle, N.J., Prentice Hail. Fox, R. M '1927). Fordism: A Critical Examination," The Century and After, CI, no 2.

no

Nineteenth

J«

Bob (19.110. rMrl

*n>

n i N VL^rn^r and Holl ,. in Boneteld, Werner, ana uunv. John*,,, ...l.ersd" MW >«» Policy, Tokyo. Tut tie.

in

,ohn

'

(eds

' inAllttnal

A HeouU Kahn. I

he &n*

l^

Superstate, Minneapolis. Minn ,

i the R

• Paris, Editions OuvneYes; w/iA ^ Lite (fl

I i udson K

hi ( -lath

!

English

k. N.Y Kai

Unwin IK man. WH4.

hi < !

Paris, Maspero. utrial Relati

n Modern Japan, lxmdon,

MacMillan l^a Fever. M W (1

Instability ol

Employment in the

Industry

Automobile

HI

Lesage. Jean-Loup (191

'h It** Shosha.

Pa Al

Towards Global Fordism 1984*

Li L*j

Imperialism as the Beast ol the Apocalypse," Capital and

;

\...

t Review, No. 132.

"Behind the Crisis

Accumulation

Regulation

the I

School

ustion of a Regime of

Perspective' on Some

orks,"&

French

ry, vol 18, No. 1-2.

Lipietz. Alain (19

ks: The

al Fordism, London,

erso Lipietz, Alain « 1

n am

Bottomore. Tom. The Bi Oxford, Bi

l-Fo>

II Dntt

y of Twentieth Century Social Thought,

veil.

an, Hendnk de (1926), Zur 19

in Outhwaite, William and

ialismus, Jena, E. Diederichs,

2nd edition, 19

London, Allen 8

h translation, The Psychology of Socialism,

iwin, 1928.

•rl (19b-4), //Capitate, vol I. Rome, Editori Rium Karl (1968), Lineament t

entail delta crtttai deU'economui po/ttica, vol.

I. tr di Enzo Grillo, Firenze, La Nuova Italia. Meyer Stephen III (1981). The Fur Dollar Cont,

the I

r.

Labor Management and Sochi

npany> 190S-J921, Albany. N . Y , State University

York Press, ezza

Sandro (1994)

a costituzione del lavoro. Hugo Sinzheimer e il

progetto weimanano di democrazia e c o n o m i c a l Quaderm di tuione soctale. - r a n d R< yon ' •untf

kolas (1995) "Pi

n, Iden

' 1 < > 8 2 ) ' WhH*Japan Cambndge Cambridge University Press; Italian translation, Cultura e tecnologia net succe^o J L portese, liologna, II Muhno 1984

,kane, Chie (1970), Jti/ London. Weidenfeld & Nicholson; Italian translation, La Sodetdguipponue, Milan. Cortina 1992 Noble, David (19: ,„. Machine Design, in Zimbalist, Andrew, C* Stw m the Labor Pi . New York, Monthly Review Press. Ohno, Tai'ich. (1978), Toyota Seisan Hoshiki [The T a method of production], Tokyo, Diamond, English translation, The Toyota Production System: Beyond Liege Scale Product ProaW . Cambridge. Mass. 1988; French translation. L'ejprii Toyota, Paris, Masson, 1989; Italian translation Lospirtto toyota. Torino, Einaudi, 1993. Palloix. Christian (1976), "Le proems de travail Du fordisme au neofordisnv La Pensie, no. 185. Pelaez, Eloina and Holloway, John (1991). Uarmng to bow: h fXem and TechnologicalDeterminism, in Bonefeld, Werner and Holloway John (eds.) 1991. Peterson, J o y c e Shaw (1987), Amerwan Automobile Worker -00-19JJt Alban N.Y, State University of N e w York Press. tat D Piore, J. Michael, and Sabel, Charles F (1983), The S< Possibilities for Prosperity, New York. N Y Basic Books; Italian translation, y de, Le due vis dello sviluppo industrials Produzwne di massa t p Torino, Isedi, 1987. Revelli, Marco (1995), Economia e modeli iale nel passaggto tra torch yotismo, in lngrao, Pietro and Rossana Rossand^ ttamentt M, Roma, Manifestation. Romer. Samuel (1933), "The Detroit Stake," The h ol 13b. no 352,^ 15 Feb™ 1933, pp. 167-68. Sinzheimer, Hugo (1925), Furopa and die I HschaftUchen Deem \e, in haft in Wort and Bdd. Beitn ir Wbi m * hr Europas Volk von der frankfurter Zeitung," 1% pp. xviinow m Sinzheimer Hugo, eirheitsrtchi und Arheu nmdt Kahn-Freund and Th. Ramm, Frankfurt-Koln. Euro, 1976 ( Schnftenreihe der Otto Brenner St.ftung.

indro Mezzadra 221-225; t t'Sea *ua i « ( KXXDt N o . 2 ( l W ) . P p 4. Souyri Pierre-Francois (1994), "Un nouveau paradigme?,"/!™^ voL 49, No. 3. Van Wolferen, Karel, (1989), The Enigma nose fower, New York, IN. I

Vogel, E/ ommentary on Our Culture and Our

tan Review vol 19, no. A.

«• *<* ° he Verlaganstalt, 2 Bde.. Bd. 1 F

and Democra

y, vol. 24

arles Wright (1952

M

boot

1979), Jap*

Harvard University ¥te>

Sumner One: U

Cambndge, Mas

T H E E N D OF WORK, OR T H E RENAISSANCE OF SLAVERY? i CRITIQUE OF RIFKIN AND NEGI

George Caffentzis

INTRODUCTION

The last few years in the U.S. has seen a return of a discussion of work th is reminiscent of the mid-1970s, but with a number of twists In the earlier pe od, books like Where Have All the Rahol.< i ' (Sheppard 1972), Fabt Promt. (Aronowitz 1972)and Work in America (Special Task Force 1973). and phrases like "blue-collar blues." "zerowork" and "the re; work" revealed a i of the assembly line worker which expressed i most dramatically in wild strikes in U.S. tories in 1973 and [97A (Lmebaugh and Ramirez 1992). These strikes Wi nned at negating the correlation between wages and productivity that had been the basis of th. d" auto capital itruck with the auto unions "in the 1940*. As Linebaugh and Ramirez wr. I the Dodge Truck plant will involving 6000 workers in Warren. higan between June 10-14, 1974 Demands were not formulated until the third da.v .,1 the strike. They asked for "everything." One worker said, "1 ,ust don t want to work." The separation between income and productivity, enforced by the struggle, could not have been clearer (I mebaughand Ramirez 1992:160). This clanty met an even stronger claritv ,n th. auto cap.tal ^ ^ t campaign to reassert control over the work process in the* pUnt. f j ^ lines Th, apital.s.s did not hesitate to destroy these very plants and assem 115

The Be

the? "Rust b« tnd "run away plant" !> Iie the phrases of the busim -cess wl ibing auto and other kinds of fa< tion in the 1 980s. these phrases fli I almost seamlessly into 'globalisation I "robotization" in the I The unprc iult of this campaign W .ts that full time weekly "real" wages in the U.S. manufacturing industry Hen almost 20% while the work time had reased. But in the mid-1990s books like The 1 rk (Rifkin 1 The Labor of (Negri and Hardt 1994) and The JohUu Future (Aronowitz and De izio ind ph like downsizing w York Timed 14>96) and "workMoore 1 themes associated with tfu er displacem< MS when the p relation between workers and capital is the inverse of the 1970s Wlv in the \q >rkers were refusing work, in the lc*90s capitalists presumably are refusing worker In this e I will show that these books and phrases are misleading in immg that "scientifically based technological change in the midst of sharpened internationalization of production means that there are too many workers too few jobs, and even fewer of them are well paid" (Aronowitz and De 199-4:xii), or that "technological innovations and market-directed are moving us to the edge of a near workerless world" (Rjfkin 1995: or, even more abstractly, that the "law of labor-value, which tried to make sense of our history in the name ol the centrality pi proletarian labor and its quantitative reduction in step with capitalist development, is completely banknd Negri 1994:10)

\ \ '< >i

A "jobless future" and a "workerless world" are the key phrases of this lit erature, but before we can examine the cogency of these phrases for the present and near luture it is worthwhile to reflect for a minute on the notions of job and work that they irnpl "Job" is the easier of the I It has a rather unsavory etymological past In seventeen id eighteenth century England (and even today >b" as a v -gested deceiving or cheating while as a noun it evoked the scent of the world ol petty crime and confidence games. In this context, a "jobless future" would be a boon to humanity. But by the mid-twentieth century "job" had become the primary word i m American English to refer to a unit of formal waged empi me ith some fixed, contractually agreed upon length of tenure. To have a job on the docks dillers significantly from working on the docks; for one can be working somewhere without having a job there. The job, therefore, rose from the nether world of poll economy to become its holy grail. 116

fife

Rtna^aru

The power of the word "job" does not come from its association with work, however lnde< to do a job" or vere phras€S d e s c n b i a )0 ke.

to refuse to work and gain an income Jobs, Jobs, Job* became the shibboleth ol late-twentieth century U.S. politicians because the •job" empi ed the wage and other contractual aspects of work ,n capitalist society which were crucial to the physical and mental survival of the electorate Hence a "jobless future* would be hell for a capitalist humanity since ,t implies a future without wages and contracts between workers and capitalists Although its salience is unmistakable, the job marks off, often quite conventionally and even with dissemblance, a part of the work process; but there is no one-to-one correlation between jobs and work The same work process can be broken down into one, two or many jobs. Consequently, "work" and apparent semantic cognate "labor" seem to have a greater claim to reality Therefore, the "end of work" denotes a more radical transformation than a hless tut lire," because there were many periods in human history when societies were "joble — e.g., slave societies and subsistence-producing peasant communities — but there were none, Eden excepted, that were workless. Before one can speak of the end of work, however, one should recognize that here has been a conceptual revolution in the last political generation concerning the meaning ol work. For a long period ol time, perhaps coincident with the formulation of the collective bargaining regimes in the 1930s and their collapse in the 1970s, "work" was synonymous with the )ol . formal waged work But since then a manifold of work was discovered (Caftentzis 19' Caftentzis 1996/1998) This manifold includes informal, "off the books rk which has a wage but could not be of? 1 v deemed contractual because it violates the legal or tax codes. This dimension of the manifold tapers into the great region of pun ninal m which in many nations and neighborhrivals in quant and value the total formal job-related activity Even more important has been the feminist housework in all its modalities that are i social reproduction (e.g., sexuality, biological reproduction, child care, CIKUI turation, the rapeutic energy, si tence farming, hunting and gathering, and ann-entropic production). sework is the great Other in st •ocietit for it stubbornly remains unwaged and even largely unrecognized in national statistics, even'though it is increasingly recognized as crucial for capitalist development Finally, there ,s a level of capitalist hell which collects .U the reed labor of thus m

led 'post-slavery" era: prison labor, military labor,

sex slaveindentured servitude, child labor Bv synthesizing all these forms of work, we are forced to recogrme an manifold of energetic investments that await intersecting and self-refle 1/7

The End of Wo

the Rinaumn

Uavtry?

6. ork" in ««j value terms. This vast emerging I I as the inverse manifold of its refusal has transformed the B I l g of work profoundly, even though many seem not to have it not Jin lv putt the jejune distinctions between work and labor n bio-power and capitalism Wilt), and between labor and commui ion (Habermas) into question while ing a remarkable expansion of class analysis and an enrichment of revolutionary theory ond the problematics of planning for fa vstems of the future. Most importantly for our discussion, this Manifold of Work problematizes the dis, *ion m«l its supposed end at the hands of technological change.

nlortunately. the notion of work that is often used in the 'end of work" I ot work's capitalistic meaning. This literature is often antediluvian and forg most clearly seen in Rifkin's central argument in The End of Work. He is anxus to refute those who argue that the new technological revolution involving genetic engineering to agriculture, of robotization to manuthe appli ring and ot computerization ol service industries will lead to new employment opportunities it there is a well-trained work e available to respond to the challenges of the information age." His refutation is simple. In the past, when a technological revolution threatened the wholesale loss bs in an econom >r, a new sector emerged to absorb the surplus labor. Earlier m the century, the fledgling manufacturing sector was able to absorb m rhe millions of farmhands and Lit m owners w h o were displaced by the i»id mechanization of agriculture. Between the mid-1950s and the early i-growing service sector was able to re-employ many of the blue rkers displaced by automation. Today, however, as all these sectors fall victim to r. ucturing and automation, no "significant" new sector has de ped to absorb the millions who are being displaced (Riflrin D95:35). Consequently, there will be a huge unemployment problem when the last servi replaced by the latest ATM. virtual office machine or here re unconI appli .mputer technology. Where will he/she find a job? There is no going back to agriculture or manufacturing and no going forward to a new sector beyond services Rifkin applies this scenario to a glo* i loresees not millions of unemployed people on the planet in the near future, but billions. The formal logic ol the argument appears impeccable, but are its empin premises and theoretical presupposm. Direct? I argue that they are not.

Hi

pjfltio'l technological determinism does not take into account rhe dynamics of employment and technological change in the capitalist era. U t us begin with a categorical problem m Rjfkma stage theory of employ mCnt He uncritically uses terms like "agriculture," "manufacturing" and espeservices" to differentiate the three developmental stages of a capitalist economy as indicated in the passage quote above and in many other parts of The grfgf Work. One cannot fault Rifkin for making an idiosyncratic choice here, since major statistical agencies like the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics also employ these categories to disaggregate employment, production and productivity in the last few decades. The core metaphors that helped shape this trichotomy are rooted in a distinction between material goods (produced on the farm or off) and immaterial services and in the spatial distinction between farm, factory and everywhere else (office, school, store, warehouse, road, etc ) This trichotomy allows for a rough and ready economic typology, with "the service industry" generally functioning as something of a fuzzy default category. But it is one thing to use a category ex post facto and another is to use a category in a projective way (either into the past or the future). Rifkin's somewhat Hegelian scheme sees technological change as the autonomous moving spirit that transforms one stage to another until it comes to a catastrophic halt in the eties in present "service" stage of history. Yet when we look at capitalistic the past, this neat series is hardly accurate. For example, was seventeenth and eighteenth century England agricultural? The "service industry" in the form of household servants in the larger agricultural estates at that time was quite substantial, but these servants often worked as artisans (manufacturing) and as farm hands (agriculture). Moreover, with the rise of cottage industry agricultural workers or small farmers also doubled or tripled as manufacturing workers on the farm. Finally, throughout the history of capitalism we find a complex shifting of workers among these three categories. Instead of simple the move from agricultural to manufacturing, and manufacturing to service, we find all possible transitions among these three categories The vast literature on the "development of underdevelopment" and on the many periods of capitalist '^industrialization" abundantly illustrates these transitions which were clearly caused not by some autonomous technological spirit, but bj historically concrete and ever varied class struggles and power relations. A n , n e introduced b apitaltsts to undermine industrial workers" power can lead to these workers losing their employment and becoming Service workers" or becoming "agricultural workers" according to a complex conjuncture ol forces and possibilities. There is no evidence from the total h'story of capitalism that there is only a linear progression that ends with e last servi c e worker. 119

j j ^ H ^ ^ ^ B The EnJof

Ritkm hema is further undermined i f w i mine its tuture pi n r a look at the wide vai pplications computer technology in the serve industr om \ recognition, to expert systems, to digital synthesizers), Rifkin ominously concludes: "In the future ivanced parallel computing machines, high-tech robotics, and integrated electronic networks spanning the globe are going to subsume more and more of the economic process, leaving less and less room for direct hands-on human pa pation in making, moving, selling, and servicing ' (Rifkin 1995:162). But here the very defaulting function of the category of service makes its future projection problematic for Rifkm, since it will not stay in a single place in logical space in order to be reduced to measure zero by technological change. Let us consider one of the standard definitions of what constitutes serve work: the modification of either a human being (giving a haircut or a massage) or an object (repairing an automobile or a computer). H o w can we possil roject such a category into the future? Since there are no limitations on the type of modification m question, there is no w a y one can say that "advanced parallel computing machines, high-tech robotics, and integrated electronic networks spanning the globe" will be able to simulate and replace its possible realizations. Indeed, the service work of the future might very well be perversely defined (at least with respect to the constructors of these machines) as modifications to humans and objects that are not simulateable and replaceable by machines! 1 Just as today there is a growth in the sale of "organi non-genetically engineered agricultural produce, and "handmade," garments made from non-synthetic fibers, so too in the future there might be an interest in having a human to play Bach (even if the synthesized version is technically more correct) or to dance (even though a digitalized hologram might give a better performance according to the ics). 1 would be surprised if such service industries do not arise. Could they "absorb" many workers displaced from agricultural or manufacturing work? That I do not know, but then again, neither does Rifkin. Rifkin's inability to project his categorical schema either into the past or into the future reveals an even deeper problem: his inability to adequately explain why technological change takes place in the first place. At the beginning of The End of Work Rifkin rejects what he calls the tnckle-down-technology argument" — i.e., the view that technological change in one branch of industry, though causing unemployment there, eventually leads to increased employment throughout the rest of the economy — by appealing to Marx's Capital and GrundriMe. Rifkin's view of Marx can be surveyed in this extended passage

Ka.lA Id don and wh

or

the Renaissance of Slavery? | ^ I ^ ^ ^ ^ H

ltd*, a greater control ov»r the mean, Wilting capital equipment for work, er possil Marx , that the

autom I ol produ. n u n w o u l tually eliminate the worker altogether 1 tic ( tarman philosopher look head to what he eup n.allv referred to as the ! metamorphosis of labor/' whe. n autom system of machine replaced human beings in the economic process.. Marx believed that the ongoing effort by producers to continue to replace human labor with machines would prove lefeating in the end [as] there would be fewer and fewer consumers with sufficient purchasing power to buv their products (Rifkin 1995:16-17). This use ol Marx is part of a new and widely noted trend among social policy analv n the U S Left, broadly considered But this revival of Marx's is is the use ol Smith and Ricardo on the Righ thought is often as seh In Rifkin's case, he definitely gets the broad sweep ot .'• i on technology right, but with some notable omissions. The first omission is of workers' struggles for higher wag* work, for better conditions or work, and for a form of life that absolutely refuses forced labor. These struggles are the prime reasons wh Dualists are so interested introducing machinery as weapons in the class war It kers were docile "factors of prod the urgency tor technological change would be much reduced. The second omission ii Mam l F dian recognition that orker permanently replaced by a machine reduces the total surplus value (and hence nee the capitalist the total profit) available to the capitalist class as a class depends upon profits, technological change can be as dangerous to it as the workers. Hence the capitalist class faces a permanent must finesse: (a) the desire to eliminate recalcitrant, demanding workers from prohe largest mass of worker ssibie Marx duction, (b) the desire I ^urpliw Vdlmi comments on this eternal tension in Theoru The one tendency throws the labourers on to the streets and makes a part of'the population redundant, and th< orbs Cutely so that the lot them again and extends wagc-slav of the worker ii always Qui M* bul he never escapes Irom it The worker, therefore, justifiably regards the development ot

the productive power ot his own labour as hostil* to himsell, fcl reats him as an elethe capitalist, on the other hand, W x 1^77:409) ment to be eliminated from prodt; problem with technological change is not the loss of consumers, but the loss of proflr I most developed discussion <>f this story is to be found in Part 111 of Ofdat III: The Law of the Falling Tendency of the Rate of Profit " There he recognizes that a tendency towards the total replacement of humans by an utomatic system of machinery must continually be met by 'counteracting tuses" or else the average rate oi profit will actually tall. These counteracting causes either increase the mass of surplus value (e.g., raising the intensity and duration of the working day), or decrease the mass of variable capital ( e g , depress wages below their value, expand foreign trade), or decrease the mass of constant capital (e.g.. increasing the productivity of labor in the capital goods industry, expand foreign trade) or some combination or these disjunctive possibilities (Marx 19(: ^2-282). Contemporary U S capitalism appears to be a PP'ying the maximal synthesis of these counteracting causes while the European capitals are being more selective. There is no inevitable capitalist rategy in the drive to overcome workers' struggles and prevent a dramat decline in the rate of profit. These struggles can lead to many futures — from the reintroduction of slavery, to a dramatic increase in the w o r k d a y to the negotiated reduction of the waged workday, to the end of capitalism — depending on the class forces in the field. But there is one outcome that definitely cannot be included in the menu of poss future? as long as capitalism is viable: Rifkin's vision of "the high-tech revolution lead[ing] to the realization of the ago-old Utopian dream of substiing machines for human labor, finally freeing humanity to journey into a post-market era" (Rifkin 1995:56). For capitalism requires the stuff of profit, interes i rent which can only be created by a huge mass of surplus labor, but the total replacement oi human work by m. les would mean the end of profterest and rent Although Riilcin seems to agree with much of Marx's an s of the dynamics of capitalism, Marx's fatal conclusion is carefully kept out of the sanguine scenario presented at the last part of his book. Rifkin lays out a future that would combine a drastic reduction in the workday along with new social contract' that would provide financial incentives (from "social" or "shadow" w a g e s to tax benefits) for working in "the third sector" — the independent, "non-profit" or volunteer sector between "the public and private" scents sector can become the "service industry" of the 21st centur ftCt it "offers the only viable means for constructively channeling the surplus labor

122

oft b9
cast

In other words. Rifltin'l vision of the "safe haven" for humanity , s a form of capitalism where workers are not producing profits, interest or rent He itrasts th. 4 a future where "civilization . continue^] to disintegrate into a state ol increasing destitution and lawlessness from which there iflrfn 1995:291). But how viable is Rifkin's social m a y be no easy return Chimera with its techno-capitalist head, its ample, woolly third-sector body, and its tiny surplus-value producing tail? There are proportions that must be respected even w h e n dealing with futuristic Chimeras, and Rifkin's cannot exist simply because the head, however technologically sophisticated, cannot be nourished by such a tiny tail The capitalism resulting from Riflcin's "nev ia l contract" is impossible, for it is by definition .Jism without profits interest and rents. W h y w o u l d capitalists agree to such a deal after they trumpeted throughout the Cold War that they would rather blow up half the planet than give up a tenth of their income? This "impossibility p r o o f is so obvious that one can not help but asking why Rifkin invoked Marx so directly at the beginning of The En<> rk only to completely exorcise him at the end? Is he avoiding reference to the unpleasantness of world war, revolution and nuclear annihilation that his earlier refit, tions stirred up? Is he trying to coax, with veiled Marxian threats, the technocapitalist class into an act of suicide camouflaged as a new lease on life? Answers to such questions would require a political analysis of the type of rhetoric Rifkin and his circle employ I forgo this effort But it is worth pointing out that Rifkin's chimerical strategy is not totally mistaken After all. he is looking for a n e w sector for the expansion of capitalist relations. He mistakenly chose the "non-profit,'' volunteer sector, for if this sector ii truly "non-pn it and voluiltfl nnot be a senous basis for a new sector of employm* in a capitalist

ie

And there is no way to get out of capitalism via a mas-

e fraud, h o w e v e r tempting that might be But Riflcins intuition is correct. For the Manifold of Work extends t beyond the dimension of formal waged work and this non-waged work does produce surplus value in abundance. U h II more dire, tk and efticiem exploited. «Ins work can become the source of an new area of surplus-value creating employment through the expansion of forced labor, the extension of din capitalist relations into the region of labor reproduction and finally the poteniation of micro- and criminal enterprises. That is why "neohberalism, n e w l e ery," "GrameenisnV and the "drug v he more W « ^ f * ^ r of the Third Industrial Revolution rather than the non-profit third

123

Thehulofl

tiflofl, for fchey can activate the "count. >t profit thai computline in the i genetic engineering provoke.

ing causes" to the pi ition, i kixati ind

The bankru, nitMI1 thai the fundamental va ,ges, and pr. - a.

the litn

eness, and death of the Law of Value t i n I les d k a l i * life - profits, interest r e n ^ b'er determined by labor-time. Negri argues as

ent Riftini * * ' 'to a period that Marx, in his most I tht igment on Machines" in the Gr l ~ visionary mode, I 1991:140-141) (Riflcin 1 !•- • * Let • ' • * 16-17). me chose just one of the many oftquoted passages in this

does

LAW

Rifkin can. perhaps, be indulged in his half-baked u I Marx's though After all. he did not come out ol the Marxist tradition and his previous referei s work were few and largely in passing. But the themes Rifkin rk can be found in a number of Marxist, so clearlv presented in The £/;, Post-Marxist, and Post-modern Marxist writers, olten in a much more obscure and lline >ne of the primary figures in this area is Antonio Negri. ho developed arguments supporting conclusions very similar to Rifkin8 in the ithout tht er's Marxist naivete. His The Lil>< tytiud (with hael Har published in 199*4. continued a discourse definitively begun in At Beyond Marx (Negri 1991. < nally published in 1979) and continued in munitU Like ( uattari and Negri 1990. originally published in 1985).3 In this section I will show how Negri's more sophisticated and Marxist anal i.m temporary capitalism is as problem as Rifkin's. It is hard to discern Negri's similarity to Rifkin. simply because Negri's work is rigorously anti-empirical — rarely does a fact or factoid float through his prose — while Rifkin's The I Work is replete with statistics and journalistic set pieces on high-tech. Negri does not deign to write plainly of an era of "the end of work." He expresses an equivalent proposition, however, in his theoretical rejection of the classical Labor Theory or Law of Value with hypostasized verbs. In the late »rding to Negri, the Law is "completely bankrupt" (Hardt and 20th legri I 10) or it "no longer opera t (Guattari and Negri 1990:21) or "the Law of Value dies < Negri 199 1 equivalent to Rifkin s more em| urns, but the equivalence can Th only be established after a vertiginous theoretical reduction. Negri's version the i ic labor the ot value ha principal task..the investigation of the social and economic laws that govern the deployment of labor-power among the different social production and thus to bring to light the I processes ot valorization" (Hardt and Negri 1994:8), or it is "an expression ol tl !at ion between concrete labor and amounts of money needi to secure e" (Guattari and Negri 1990:21) or it is a measure ol the determm »roportionahty between necessary labor and surplus labor Negri 1991 (he Law of Value was alive in the 19th century, but just like Nietzsche's God. it began to die then. It took a bit longer for the Law to be mall a death ( ite, howev<

The development of heavy industry means that the basis upon which it rests — the appropriation of the labour time of others — ceases to constitute or to create wealth; and at the same time direct labour as such ceases to be the basis of production, since it is transformed more and more into a supervisory and regulating at and also because the product ceases to be made by individual direct labour, and results more lor the combination of social act on the one hand, or he productive forces of the means of labour have reached the level of an automatic process, the prerequisite he subordination of the natural forces to the intelligence of society, while on the other hand individual labour in its direct form is transformed into social labour. In this way the other basis of this mode of production vanishes (Marx 1977:38. The development of "automatic processes" in genetic engineering, computer programming and robotization since the 1960s have convinced both Negri m are matched and Rifkin that the dominant features of contemporary cap potnt-for-point by M i n i vision in 1857-58. The m rence between Negri's work and Riflrins The t that while Riflun emphasizes the "sequences of thei utomatic processe >r the unemployment ot mas workers, Negri emphasizes the new workers that an 'rally involved the intelligence ol .al labor. Whereas Rifldn argues that these new "knowledge workers g., research scientists, design engineers ware analysts, financial and la Itants. arch.u marketing specialists, film producers and edit lawyers, investment banker SH never be a numericallarge sector and hence are olution to the problems created by this phase development. Negri takes them as the key to the transformation communism beyond "real socialism I- i. .mportant , o note a teminologicJ dil Wflun, because Negri has over ,he vears termed these I , he I970s to be ". I work, and 1

j ' « n *™ - J™T7* * e 1990s he bapM Ne

George Cnffent2 tized them as "cyborgs" J la Donna Haraway (Haraway 1991:149-81) Although singularly infelicitous in its English translation, the term "social worker" directly comes out of the pages of the GrunJrw.ie. For when looking for a descriptive phrase that would contrast the new workers in the "information and knowledge sector" to the "mass workers" ot assembly line era. many of Marx's sentences — e.g., "In this transformation, what appears as the mainstay of production and wealth is neither the immediate labour performed by the worker, nor the time that he works-but the appropriation of man by his own general productive force, his understanding of nature and the mastery of it; in a word, the development of the social individual" (Marx 1977:380) — deeply influenced him. The social worker is the subject of 'techno-scientific labor" and s/he steps out of the pages of the Grundisse as a late 20th century cyborg, i.e., "a hybrid of machine and organism that continually crosses the boundaries between material and immaterial labor' (Hardt and Negri 1994:280-oM) *< The old mass workers labor-time on the assembly line was roughly correlated to lue) produ and s/he w a s alienated from the (exchange-value and us ory system, the social cyborg's labor-time is independent of its productivity bur it is thoroughly integrated into the terrain of productio Rifkin sees the "knowledge class" of "symbolic analysts" as fundamentally identified with capital and explains the new interest in intellectual property rights as a sign that the elite capitalists have recognized the importance of the knowledge class and are willing to share their wealth with it Knowledge workers are tst becoming the new aristocr (Rifkin 1995:175). Negri has a (ferent reading of this class' present and future. The existence of social of capitalist development has borgs not onlv ii evidence that the oliali ccording to Negri, but capital simply cannot "buy it out. been "broken because "the social worker has begun to produce a sub ty that one can no longer grasp in the terms of capitalist development understood as an accom•shed diale« I movement'' (Hard! and Negri 1994:282) In order words, ientific L ennol be controlled by capital via its system of wages line rounded out with the promise of entrance into the top levand work-r el managerial, financial and political power for the "best." Not only is the social-working cyborg beyond the bounds of capital's time-honored techniques control, it is also in the vanguard of the communist revolution. Wh\ ! 1 -et us st hear and then interpret Negri's words: i of [cyborg] producers, is posed Coope n, or the associ independently ol the organization capacity of capi; he coo eration and subjecth >f labor have found a point of contact outside of the machinations of capital. Capital becomes merely

126

an apparatus ol >ture, a phantasm, an idol. Around it move radical! utonomous processes of sell-valorization that not t.tuu- an alternative basis of potential development onlv but also actually represent a new constituent foundation (Hardt and Negri 1994:282) -org workers have escaped capital's gravitational Negri claims that the field into a region where their work and life is actually producing the fundamental social and productive relations appropriate to a communism. These relations are chara It-valorization' - i.e., instead of determining the value pf labor power and work on the basis of its exchange value for the talist, the workers value their labor power for its capaci i determine the autonomous development — arises from the period when techno-scientific becomes paradigmatic (Negri 1991:162—63) (Caitentzis 1987). In et Negri's notion of "self-valorization" is similar to the "class for itself or "class consciousness" ol more traditional Marxism; but self-vak littinguishi the org from the politics ol the mass worker and marks the arrival of the true communist revolution ironically percolating in the World Wide Web rather than in the (old and new) haunt the mass workers, peasants and ghet dwellers of the planet The clash between Negri's picture of the anti-capitalig and Rifkin tlist knowledge worker can make for an inviting then image of the pro-c But jusi Rifkin's knowledge worker (as the last profit-making empl< apitalist development, so too is Negri s built upon a faulty conception I ler and critique the common cyborg. Consequently, it ii more useful to h these > Negri bases his version of "the social worker" on basis o! Mi as Rifkin does for his knowledge worker, bn should nent on Machines" was no. M last word on remember that th maihmesin ,talis u Marx continued work mother jd filled Volumes I, II, and 111 tpUal with new observations. Th not tl place to review these developments in depth It should be pointed lume I Marx recognized not only the gn owers machinery threw into I production process; he also emphasized machines' lack ol value creativity anaJogous to the thermodvnamical limits on lability ol work m a given energj Id (( 1 <)< but even more crucial lor our project is the par Ca III wh K revisited the terrain of the Fragment on Machines. these ^\^™^Zt s a g e s he recognized that in an * of 'automatic processes, the system as a whole m « I ^ ^ ^ eleration of the tendenc rate of uroht to tall He ***«*' |( this fall i, not greater and more rapid? * His answer was that there

127

The

0 capitali hat I i this tendency and tl hnological hnale. These are to be bund ly in the Chapter XIV on "counteracting causand indirectly in Part II on the formation of the average rate of profit I mentioned the critical uences ol (interacting causes in my discussion Riflcin, and they apply to Negri as well. Negri imperiously den the social r among the dif\ economic la hat govern the deployment ol labor-f* that labor-time i uof social production and rejects th the capitalist processes ol valonzatio But capital and capitalists are still devoutly interested in both. That is why there is such a drive to send capiihe reduction of tal to low waged areas and why there is so much r< a ion ot factories and the waged work day For the computerization and rob offices in Western Europe, North America and Japan has been accompanied and "new enclosures." by a process of "globalb tlists have been fighting as fiercely to have the right to put assembly zones and brothels in the least-mechanized parts ot the world as to have the right to patent life forms. Instead ot a decline, there has been a great expansion ion throughout many regions of the planet. Indeed, much of • profit of global corporations and much ot the interest received by international banks has been created out ot this low-tech, factory and sexual work edenci 1998). In order to get workers for these factories and brothels, a vast new enclosure has been taking place throughout Africa, Asia and the Americas. The very capital that owns "the ethereal information machines which supplant industrial production1* is also involved in the enclosure of lands throughout the planet, provoking famine, disease, low-intensity war and collective misery in • process (CaiTentzis 1990; 1995). Why is capital worried about communal land tenure in Africa, for example, it the true source of productive i i be found in the cyborgs of the planet? ne answer is simply that these factories, lands, and brothels in the Third World are locales of "the counteracting causes" to the tendency of the falling rate of profit They increase the total pool ol surplus labor, help depress wages, eapen the elements of constant capital, and tremendously expand the labor market and make possible the development of high-tech industries which ectly employ only a few knowledge workers or cyborgs. But another complementary answer can be gleaned from Part II of Capital 111: "Conversion ol Profit into Average Profit*" which shows the existence of a sort of capitalist st valuation. In order for there to be an average rate of profit throughout the capsystem, branches of industry that employ very little labor but a lot of machinery must be able to have the right to call on the pool of value that highlabor, low-tech branches create If there were no such branches or no such

128

> the Remit

right, then the average ol profit would be so low , n the high-tech, low-labor industries that all investment would stop and the system would terminate Consequently, new enclosures" in the countryside must accompany the nse of "automaiK processe lustry. the computer requires the sweat shop, and the cyborg's existence is premised on the slave, Negri is corred in connecting the rise of the new workers in the high-tech fields with self-valorization, but it has more to do with capitalist self-valorizajj on - i.e.. the right of "dead labor" to demand a proportionate share of "living labor" — rather than workers' self-valonzation. Indeed, capital's self-val lonzation is premised on the planetary proletariat s degradation. One can easily dismiss Negri's analysis as being profoundly Eurocentric m its neglect of the value-creating labor of billions of people on the planet. Indeed he is Eurocentric in a rather archaic way. He would do well, at least, to look to the new global capitalist multiculturali md the ideologies it has spawned •derici 1995), instead of to the rather small circle of postmodern thinkers that constitute his immediate horizon, in order to begin to appreciate the class struggles of today, even from a capitalist perspectiv But the charge of Eurocentricism is a bit too general. What can better account for Negri's methodological oblivion of the planetary proletariat is his adherence to one of the axioms of the Marxist-Leninism: the revolutionary subject in any era is synthesized from the most "productive" elements of the class. It is true that Negri has nothing but scorn for the metaphysics of dialectical materialism and for the history ol real socialism." but on the choice ot the r< olutionary subject he is Leninist to the core. Negri makes so much of computer programmers and their ilk because of their purported product mce the General Intelligence is productive, then these intellectual workers are its id« (and hence revolutionary) representatives, even though they have not vet launched a concrete struggle against capitalist accumulation qua "social workers" or "cyborgs." But this methodological identity between revolution and production has Proven false time and again in his I enin- • nd Unini n the past W often paid tor this mistake with their lives. Mao's political development Nearly shows that it took the massacre of Communist workers ,n the cities and m *ny near mortal experiences m the countryside before he recognized that the T *^ ciple - the seeming eakest and least productive can be the mo. W in a struggle - was more accurate than the Leninist Negns choice 'evolutionary subject in this period - the masters of the ethereal - c h m e s H ; ; s as questionable as the industrial worker bias of Leninistaim M) l ^ e d . the failure of The Labor ofZW-< (published in the US . . Wlanet, ddd 'ess the revolutionary struggle the indigenous peoples ot P

129

Ihri

pi tem

that rt-siM tins tendency and therefore the sys-

hnoloi finale. These an ly in the Chapter XIV on "counteracting cuusindii in Part II on the formation of the average rate of profit 1 mentioned the critical o vjuences of "counteracting causes" in my d r . usaion Kit'kin, and they apply to Negri as well. Negri imperiously denies the social and economic laws that govern the deployment or labor-power among the dilnt sectors of social production" and rejects the view that labor-time is crutlonzation." But capital and capitalists are ill devoutly interested m both That is why there is such a drive to send capiI to low waged areas and why there is so much resistance to the reduction of the waged work day. For the computerization and robotization of factories and (ices in Western liurope, North Amen nd Japan has been accompanied by a proce"globalization and V nclosures." Capitalists have been fighting as fiercely to have the right to put assembly zones and brothels in the least-mechanized parts ol the world as to have the right to patent lire forms Instead of a decline, there has been a great expansion >ry production throughout many regions oi the planet. Indeed, much of the profit of global corporations and much of the interest received by international banks has been created out or this low-tech, factory and sexual work ederici 1998). In order to get workers for these factories and brothels, a vast new enclosure has been taking place throughout Africa, Asia and the Americas. The very capital that owns "the ethereal information machines which supplant industrial production is also involved in the enclosure of lands throughout the planet, provoking famine, disease, low-intensity war and collective misery in the process (Caffentzis 1990; 1995). Why is capital worried about communal land tenure in Africa, for example, ?he true source of productivity is to be found in the cyborgs of the planet? O n e answer is simply that these factories, lands, and brothels in the Third id are locales of "the counteracting causes" to the tendency of the falling rate of profit. They increase the total pool of surplus labor, help depress wages, cheapen the elements of constant capital, and tremendously expand the labor market and make possible the development of high-tech industries whi directly employ only a few knowledge workers or cyborgs. But another complementary answer can be gleaned from Part II of Capttttl 111 "Conversion of Pr nto Average Profit," which shows the existence of a sort of capitalist sell on. In order for there to be an average rate of profit throughout the capitalist system, branches of industry that employ very little labor but a lot of iinery must be able to have the right to call on the pool of value that highlabor, low-tech branches create If there were no such branches or no such

128

r;,ht,

then the I

thtRl

Wy/

« e rate of profit would be so low in the high

, 1^ ,

k

Consequent! ew enclosu the countryside must accompany the rise of the computer requires the sweat shop and ••automatic proce .n mdu v ' he cyborg's existence is premised on the slave. Negri is correct ill connecting the rise of the new workers m the high tech Mtion, Ibut it has more to do with capitalist self-valonzafields with sell to demand a proportionate share oi "living m _ , e , the right or dead lal ,)0r» ^ rather than workers self-valorization. Indeed, capitals self-valonza tl(m is premised on the planetary proletariat's degradation. One can easily dismiss Negri's analysis as being profoundly Eurocentric in it, neglect of the value-creating labor of billions of people on the planet. Indeed he is Eurocentric in a rather archaic way. He would do well, at least, to look to the new global capitalist multiculturalism and the ideologies it has spawned ,denii 1995), instead of to the rather small circle of postmodern thinkers that constitute his immediate horizon, in order to begin to appreciate the class struggles of today, even rrom a capitalist perspective. But the charge of Eurocentncism is a bit too general What can better account for Negri's methodological oblivion of the planetar oletariat is his adherence to one of the axioms or the Marxist-Leninism the revolutionary sul ject in any era is synthesized from the most "productive" elements of the class. It is true that Negri has nothing but scorn for the metaphysics of dialectical materialism and for the history of "real socialism, but on the choice of the revolutionary subject he is Leninist to the core. Negri makes so much of compu er programmers and their ilk because of their purported productivity. Since the General Intelligence is productive, then these intellectual workers are its ideal (and hence revolutionary) representatives, even though they have not yet launched a concrete struggle against capitalist accumulation
129

The End of \

•

eg; !lv the Zapatista* in Me geography needs expansi

I a definite ligfl that Negri's revolutionary

the HtmuMan.

ended at the high-tech enf the system, ,ust wake up But such an an p.taJ.st version of /-sche's motto d is dead" is hardly inspiring when millions are still being slaughtered in the many names of both God and Capital

O ENP

Negri and Rilkin are major particip in the "end ot work" discourse oj the I^Os. although they occupy two ends of the rhetorical spectrum. Ritttii empiru .d and pessimi assessment of the end ol work" while Negri is aprioristic and optimi However, both seem to invoke technological determinism by claiming that there is only one way for capitalism to develop. They, and most others who operate tf urse, forget that capitalism is conrained (and protected) by proportionalities and contradictory tendencies. The stem is not going to go out of business through the simple-minded addition of more high-tech machines, techniques, and workers come what may, for Marx's turn; 'The real barrier of capitalist production is capital itself" (Marx •09:295 truer than ever It might be an old and miserable truth, but still to this day profit, interest, wages and labor in certain proportions are particular, but necessary conditions tor the existence or capitalism. Capital cannot will itself into oblivion, but neither can it be tricked or cursed out of existence. Rifkin tries to trick the system into believing that a viable way out of the unemployment crises he foresees is to abandon profit creating sectors of the economy. He reassuringly says that all will be well if the capitalists are in control ol automated agriculture, manufacturing, and service industries and nearly everyone else is working in a non-profit third sector which makes no claim on hegemony. But this scenario can hardly to pass the eagle eyes of the capitalist press much less those ol the boardroom without ridicule. So it cannot succeed Negri tries philosophical cursing instead. He calls late-20th-century capi m "merely an apparatu ipture, a phantasm, an idol" ontologicallv (Hardt and Negri 1994:282). I appreciate Negri's desire to put a curse on this system of decimation, humiliation and misery, but I question his "merely." As the highest organs of capitalist intelligence (like the Ford Foundation) have capital is as impervious to these ontologh.il curses as the conquistadors were to the theological curses of the Aztec priests. Indeed, capital revels in its phantom-like character Its main concern is with the duration of the phantasm, ontologual st The "end of work" literature of the 1990s, therefore, is not only theore and empirically disconlirrned It also creates politi< I because it ultimately tries to convince both friend and foe that, behind everyone's back. «pitalism has ended. It m< not the Third International's "Don't wor if**l will collaps, itself sooner or later." rather n m has always already

»'-S

1 This "perverse" definition is reminiscent of Cantor's diagonal method that h as proven so fruitful in mathematical research in this century The trick of this method is to assume that there is a list that exhausts all items of a particular class K and then to define a member of K that is not on the list by using special properties of the list itself 2 For example, in much of the current discussion of free trade, a low wage level is considered by many to be a Ricardian "comparative advantage." But such a reading is a distortion of Ricardos views and an invitation to justify repressing workers' struggles. The sources of comparanve advantage for Ricardo are quasi-permanent features of the physical and cultural environment of a country, not economic variables like wages, profits or rents. 3 This is not the place to discuss Negri political and |undical life since the 1970s. For more of this see Yann Mouliers "Introduction" to The Polu Subvcrjwn (Negri 1989). Negri voluntarily returned to Italy from exile in France in July 1997 and is now in Rebbibia Prison (Rome). There is an international campaign demanding his release < Negri often describes the work of the social worker cyborg as "immaterial." But an analysis of Turing-machine theory shows that there is no fundamental difference between what is standardly called material labor (e.g.. weaving or digging) and immaterial labor (e.g., constructing a software program). Consequently, one must look to other aspects of the labor situation to locate its value creating properties (Caflentzis 199

,t Z . Stanley 1973. F..U Pw

The Shaping JAmnm*

W«&V <

,.. N e w York: McGraw-Hill . . _ , > Wtawite, ! ley and Di I az.o. Will.am 1994. The JMm F„lun: Sa-Tecb an
trman Critique, Spring-Summer. ^ ^ a * a " In Calient,,, George 1990 "On Africa and Self-Reproducing Automa. Miinigkt Notu

1990.

The I

leoree Co ftent. CaiTentzis, George 1992. T h e Work/Energy Crisis and the Apocalypse" in MtMight Notes 1992 Caffentzis. George 1995. "On the Fundamental Implications of the Debt Crisis for Social Reproduction in Africa," In Dal la Cotta m d Dalla Costa 1()95 Caffentzis, George 1997. "Why Machines Cannot Create Value or, Marx's Theory of Machines ' In Davis, Hirschi, and Stack 199 iffentzis, George 1998. "On the Notion ol a I if Social Reproduction: A Theoretical Review." In Dalla Costa and Dalla Costa 1998. Dalla Costa, Maria Rom and Dalla Costa, Giovanna 1998. Paying the Pn, Women and The Politics of International Economic Strategy. London: Zed Books Dalla Costa. Maria Rosa and Dalla Costa, Giovanna 1998. Women, Development \d the Labor of Reproduction: tone* ot Struggled and Movements. Lawrenceville, N J : Africa World Press. Dc Jim, Hirschl, Thomas and Stack, Michael 1997. Cutting Edge: Technology, Information, Capitalism am* il Revolution. London: Verso. Fed*. Silvia 1995. T h e God that Never Failed: The Origins and Crises of Western Civilization." In Fedenci 1995. Federici, Silvia (ed.) 1995. Enduring Western Civilization: The Construction of th( cept. stem on and ltd "Other West port CT: Praeger lenci, Silvia 1998. Reproduction and Feminist Struggle in the New International Division of Labor." In Dalla Costa and Dalla Costa 1998. Linebaugh, Peter and Ramirez, Bruno 1992. "Crisis in the Auto Sector In fu]mght A 1992. Originally published in Zerowork I in 1975. Foucault, Michel 1981. The Hu>tory , xualtty. Volume One: An Introduction. Harmondsworth: Penguin. r, New York: n, Felix and Negri, Antonio 1990. Communists Ld Semiotext(e). Hardt, Michael and Negri, Antonm [994. Tie Lai 'ntnjueof the fate Form. Minneapolis: Univ»f Minnesota Press. Marx. Karl 1909. Capital III. Chicago. Charles Kerr. Marx, Karl 1977. Selected Writings. McLellan, David (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press Midnight Notes Collective 1992 Muhuaht Oil: Work. Energy, War, I 1991 N e w York: Autonomedia. Moore. Thomas S 1996. The D ihle Work Force: Worker Displacement d Employment Instability in America. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. Negri, Antonio 1989. The Politics of'Sun <
he Re,

Times 1996 The lh fAnu New York-FUndnm H f Wo UD* fkGUnlieJ^^ Rl |l,n. Jeremv 1995. The I ,, (the Post Market New York: G P Putnam's Sons

H

,| Task Force to tl ,11 [calth, Education, and Welfare 1993 (• m America Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press ;

US

DEVELOPMENT AND REPRODUCTION

Mariarosa Dalla Costai

1. ZAPATA AND THE WORKERS

Zapata's determined gaze and slightly stooped shoulders in the well-loved photograph paraded by the "cobas" of Alfa Romeo auto workers at Aresc iin Milan was one ol the striking journalistic images of 199-4,2 creating a bridge: iin real time between the Mexican revolt in January and the struggles of Europe's industrial workers and unemployed. A bndge was thrown through space and historical time to link struggles against continued 'primitive' expropriation of the land to those against the post-Fordist expropriation of labour that brings with it the progressive dismantlement of the public system of social rights and guarantees. The "primitive" expropriation of the land that began five centuries ago with the enclosures in England and which has been continued, and is still continuing,3 in the more recent forms of colonisation and exploitation in the Third World, is now linked even photographically to the contemporary forms of expropriation and poverty creation in the advanced capitalist countrie How to build and impose on expropriated men and women the discipline of the wage labour system (with the unwaged labour it presupposes) was the problem posed five centuries ago in initiating the process of capitalist accumulation. It is still the problem today for the continuation of this mode of production and its combined strategies of development and underdevelopment The creation of mass poverty and scarcity together with the imposition ot terror and violence, as well as the large-scale relaunching of slavery, were the basic instruments used to resolve the problem in this systems first phase. The expropriation of free producers of all the means of production as well "the individual and collective resources and rights that contributed to guaranteeing survival was subjected to a well-known analysis by Marx in his scc"on on primitive accumulation (in Capital. Vol. L Part 8, 1976) to which we

Hariaewa Dalle

to

refer you for the enclosures and all the other measures that accompanied the notably the bloody legislation against the expropriated, the forcing dowr, wages by act of parliament and the ban on workers' Assoc unions. Laws for th ornpulsory extension of the working day, another fundamental aspect oi th«r period, from the middle of the Fourteenth to the end of the Seventeenth cen rv are dealt with in Capitol, Part Three. Chapter 10, where the subjc t|^e working i Concerning the expropriation of the land, Marx observed: The advance made 1>\ the eighteenth century shows itself in this, that the law itself now becomes the instrument Ay which the peopled lai although the big farmers made use of their little independent methods M well The Parliamentary form of the robbery is that of 'Bills for Inclosure of the Commons,' in other words decrees by which the landowners grant themselves the people's land as private property, decrees of expropriation ol the people" (Marx, 1976, p. 885). The "little independent metho< re explained in a footnote to tl me passage, quoting from a report entitled A Political Inquiry into the I I Enduing Wa^tt Ltin, T h e larmers forbid cottagers to keep any living creatures besides themselves and children, under the pretence that it they keep any beasts or poultry th al from the farmers' barns for their support; they also say, keep the cottagers d you will keep them industrious, etc., but the reaJ fact, 1 believe, is that the farmers may have the whole right of common to themselves" vWx, 1976, p. 885, note 15) Th iote gives a powerful picture of the step-by-step process of expropriation used to produce the misery and poverty essential in establishing the sci[dine ol wage labour. But just as powerful an image is given to us by the isolation of people from all living beings that has characterised and still ch at. ^s the human condition m capitalist development. The human being, isolated not only with respect to his/her o w n species, but also with respect to ture — that "other"' treated increasingly as a comrnodified thing. Deprtpatwn and uolatum: they are in Fact the two great accusations, the I great t ms of rebellion syml he poster of Zapata whose watchword was Tterra y Liberia*). The reappropn n of land was seen by the Zapatistas in 1911 as a fundamental question because it opened up the possibility of reappropriaring a collective life free of misery. For even then the reappropriation of the land was pregnant with a multitude of meanings: as the propriation of a territory where one could express a different sense of life ol action, ol social relations and of work; as a place where one could imagine and bu liferent future. From this viewpoint. Zapata's nine-year revolutionary epic is one of the great suppressed memories of of I Mexican history.

Development

and Rep,

.,„

explotion d the tula rebellion shows how real the problem the reappropnation ol land remains, but also how much ,t has been magnified I issues raised by movements in the North and South over the qucstmn ol land. * Land, here, does not only refer to a means of subsistence though this would already be an excellent reason for a movement of reappro* pnation, littW m economies based on a non-cap.t.d„t relationship with the Und have gilt! I the possibility ol life for millennia to a large proportion o i people for whom capitalist development has offered only hunger and ext.n, ,n. h refers also to land as the earth, a public space to be enjoyed without the earth as an ecosystem to be preserved because he earth as a material real|,fe and. hence, of beauty and continual disc. jn. hich v i be reaffirmed in contrast to the exaltation (espe Toti

illy by male intellectuals) ol virtu But urning to Mai /, Void, 1976. Part 8). the creation of miser starts and proceeds Irom the fixing of a pric I as well as the land propriation Pricing the land is in tact the solution used lor colonies where I unable to lind a sut it number ol waged i the aspirant c When the B at their destination, they find a "free" land where thi can settle and work independently We have seen that the r he nuvv of the people from the Mil form* the ho the o essence of a free ry, ° n the contrary, consists in thi I the bulk of the soil urn part of it into h is still public properly, every settler on it can there private property and hii individual means of production, without preventing on Thi he secret both of ti later settlers from performing the same prosperity >f the colonies and of their cancerous iffltction - I th, OTIC*/ 176, p 934) In this context wt an leave tie ism that the "public"" land treelv settled by tl dc the Q belonged, in f lives A nt.nues: "There (in the colonies) tl cap.tantlv comes up against the obst.i resented b\ the pi ducer who, U ner i enr, h himself instead of the c , ,V Opp sytttnu hi

them Where the

Uchi \\ thedevelopm, labour

>ns of labour, e that His cento hetwun thm two manifestation hen

t fU

t has behind him the p

aliak

fthei

, quotes in this context. , fnm . t h i s end he det

(19/bt

'

'

°ud £ • that

e sen AlCti bour, cooper divis, hinerv or *rge scale, and so on, are impo

Maruirwut Dalla (

without the expropriation of the workers and the corresponding tra '^formation ofthem nua > «i into capital" ( 1976, p. 932) Wakefield's theory of colonisation tries to solve the problem of ensuring an adequate supply of labour for the capitalists needs by what he calls "system^ ic colonisation, which as Marx notes England tried to enforce for a time by A of Parliament Of Wakefield's theory Marx adds (1976, p. 938) "If men were willing to turn the whole of the land from public into private property at one blow, this would certainly destroy the root of the evil, but it would also destroy — the colony. The trick is to kill two birds with one stone. Let the government set an artificial price on the virgin soil, a price infopemknt of the law of supply and \ a price that compels the immigrant to work for a long time for wages before he can earn enough money to buy land and turn himself into an independent farmer The fund resulting from the saJe of land at a price relatively probibuory for the wage-labourers, this fund of money extorted from the wage* of labour by a violation of the sacred law of supply and demand, is to be applied by the government in proportion to its growth, to the importation of paupers from Europe into the colonies, so as to keep the wage-labour market full for the capitalists." Marx also pointed out that the land prut laid down by the state must be "sufficient," which quoting from Wakefield (1833, vol. II. p. 192) he explains means that "it must be high enough to prevent the labourers from becoming dependent landowners until others had followed to take their place'.'' The reference to the setting of a price on the virgin soil is more than just a reminder of a past problem and its analysis in Marx's Capital. Today, putting a price to the land and expropriation by illegality, pseu do-legality and violence are issues on the agenda throughout those parts of the Third World where capitalist expansion is currently seeking to break economies and societies based on a different relationship with the land; types of economy which have guaranteed subsistence from time immemorial and which, by the same token, resist wagelabour's discipline and the isolation, hunger and death that usually accompany its imposition. Silvia Federict (1993) and George Caffentzis (1993) underline the cruciality of fixing a price on the land in the policies directed to "develop" the African continent. In their studies of Sub-Saharan Africa and Nigeria in ular. they i I on the importance of this measure from the point of view of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other investors, but they also stress how this procedure became a terrain of struggle and resistance for the population. 'bviouslv. today, there are many other policies and measures creating hunger and poverty, from the lowering of the export price of agricultural products, which ruins Third World farmers, to those policies that, internationally, have characterised the period of the so-called debt crisis. But this has been dealt

Devebpmml and Reproduction h i n a r e c e n t c o l k , i,.. n of papers (Dalla Costa M and Dalla Costa G F eds r) 93) and il dealt with extensively by the Midnight Notes Collective (1992) In this article, the focus is on the two major operation* of expropriating the land and putting a price on >ce, even though they are usually ignored, they remain as fundamental today for making a profit out of the Third World as they w e r e at the dawn of capitalism in Europe. In fact, the current development strategy of the capitalist mode of production based on the "informatic revolution" continues to imply a strategy of underdevelopment that presupposes these operations which create hunger and poverty in order continually to refound and re-stratify the global working class. Obviously, the continual imposition of wage-labour discipline at the world level does not imply that all those who are expropriated are destined to become wage-labourers. Today as five centuries ago, this will be the fate of only a small part of the population: those who can will find employment in the sweat shops of the Third World or the countries they emigrate to. The others will be faced solely by the prospect of death by hunger, which may explain the tenacity of resistance and the toughness of the struggles. And, returning to the poster in Milan, it explains the revolt in Chiapas. The prut of capitalist development understood as a whole, in its facets as development and underdevelopment, is un.uu*tauvxblt because it consists of death. As I have argued elsewhere (Dalla Costa M.. 1995), a central assumption must be that, from the human vuwpotnt. capitaL*t devebpnunt has always been unsustainable since it has assumed from the start, and continues to assume, extermination and hunger for an increasingly large part of humanity The fact that it is founded on a class relationship and must continually refound this relationship at a global level, in conflict with the power that the class of waged and non-waged men and women build through struggle and resistance, onl makes its original unsustainability more ample and more lethal in time. The operations that produce hunger, poverty and death, have accompanied the continuous and progressive expropriation of the land, and its rendering as commodity/capital have obviously been redefined in ideological and technolog>od policies" brought into effect during the present cenical terms over time tit nutntion tury, officiallv in order to solve or mitigate the problem of insul have always been closely linked to "reforms" of the relationsh. th the land. The outcome has been'betu-t nutntion for the few iottlfficienl nutntion or hunger for the many, and above all a powerful tool for social control by break•ng up those organisations that parts of the worlds population, in very many areas ol the globe, had created in order to achieve better nutrition and a better , level of life as a whole. The "social reforms" characteristic of these policies have always been i'nked to new divisions and a new hi, h.v between the waged and the

Jfiiruirwa u n w a g e d as well as w i t h i n th

p/ntnt

/It > groups. H a n

remains fundamental lor its analysts and the globalil

v e r s essay ( |

(19

nfon

Mary M * 1 * 0 1 •

, n as well

'I With Shi D

Limption thai I

tlisroa political economy

e fundamentally

As this author informs u s

,(

°o1

*

m l e xX h a s m a n

. V points of contact with the above

,thei COIU * r n e d to define a "feminist green socialism

as for its reports on numerous struggles and the sort of policies adopted to fight them. W e agree in full w i t h tht

to mention only the most famous ones. In contrast

I share mu

I the critique advanced in this blossoming of feminist stud-

ies on the rt

nship between human beings and nature and on the North-

interesting to note h o w experiments carried out by the Rockefeller Foundatii

,,h relationship. H e r .

in China in the 1920s and 1 930s provided clear e v i d r n a - ol tl

re extensively But one point 1 can make is that some ecofemmist scholars

ibililing efK

o f better food supplies coupled w i t h some land r e f o r m measures on peasant

thai

nough space to compare our positions

k primarily at the forms of struggle and r<

e in the T h i r d World, while

i ice policy as

seeing the First W o r l d p r i m a r i l y as an area of excessive consumption whence

a tool for haJtmg peasant revolt in m a n y parts of that continent. Later, the issue

the assertion of the need for a reduction of production and consumption. For

unrest

I n the 1950s, politicians w e r e still talking about an A

mysell ^n<\ the

lly became a h u m a n i t a r i a n one. T h e G r e e n Revolution, on the other hand, was put into effect in the 1960s

uit of scholars 1 have worked with since the early 1970s, we

affirm that besides looking at the T h i r d W o r l d struggles, just as much impor-

in both East a n d West on the basis o f a technological leap i n the mechanic

tance should be given to advanced capitalist areas, not only as a source i

chen

sumption, but also as a place of labour, hence our stress on the importance of

and biological inputs in agricultural polio\

T h e a i m w a s to apj

n-

Kevnesian principles to agriculture, in other w o r d s , a c h i e v i n g wage increases

the struggles o f w a g e d and unwaged that occur there and their relationship

linked to a n increase in prodi

with struggles in other areas. W e also see a need to analyse consumption in a

. But. as C l e a v e r argues, the w h o l e history

o f this technological b r e a k t h r o u g h in agriculture w a s l i n k e d to the de-composi\ the

r of the w a g e d and the u n w a g e d , the continual creation of

n e w divisions a n d hierarchies, a n d the progressive expulsion of w o r k e r s having A g r i c u l t u r a l technology became more a n d more subject to criticism and n and the expulsion f r o m that land o f unwaged

o w e r e managing to m a k e a living from it, and of w a g e d agricultur. displaced by the continual technological change. I m p o r t a n t in this

al

>nnection is the wort

V a n d a n a Shiva

(198

a n d w h o uses the category of tht

whose approach is not >le against male reduc-

nce. A n outstanding physicist, V a n d a n a Shiva a b a n d o n e d

India's

nuclear p r o g r a m m e because she felt that the "reaction of nuclear systems with living system

as being kept se

from the people I n her w e l l - k n o w n work,

Sttii

isn, I

prri/ni ( 1 9 8 9 ) , she illustrates the systemat

nd gra^

jy an

ss ol resources for health a n d subsist*

in biodiversity imposed in Ind

through the reduction

y the agricultural policies ol recent decade

the dependence a n d p o v e r t y created b y the imposition

o f n e w laboratory

hybrids; the d r o u g h t and h u m a n and e n v i r o n m e n t a l disasters created by dams a n d tl

naJity b y comparison w i t h earlier forms o f w a t e r management.

T h e history of the enthe land, but also

isumption by workers, obviously

including housewives, has in fact never been high and, today, is falling drama icallv. But these are simply a few hints in a debate that will develop further. 1989) says of water

and drought

holars, being so closely linked to large land holdings,

w h i c h meant the e x p r o p r work*

w a y . B y definition

Let us now r e t u r n to our discourse Vandana Shi

different forms of relationship w i t h agriculture

analysis by f e m r

more articulated

m a n d commercialisation i

hich is centred on the events o f these last decades. T h e r e are other important irrei

th

i natural disaster. T h e issue oi

ter. and water scarcity

has been the most dominant one in the 1980s as far as struggles for su

d in the subcontinent are concerned. The manufac-

ture oi droughi ist k m of lif

m d models ol development which violate cycles i rivers, in the soil, in mountains. Rh

because thei. cull

i desertification is an outcome of reduction-

hments I

-re drying up

been mined, de-forested or over-

to generate revenue and profits. Groundwater is dry-

ing u p because it has been over-exploiter Village aft.

eed cash crops.

Ilage is being robbed of its Lifeline, its sou,

d r i n k i n g water, and the n u m b ,

*

village, facing water famine

is in direct p r o p o r t i o n to the number of schemes^mplemented by g o v e r n m e n t agencies to develop* water (p. 1

*l

»nly of

plants, animals, a n d w a t e r s is r e v i v e d in Shiva's analysis,

orks belonging to the ecofemim

T h e d r y i n g up o f India, like that of Africa, is a man-made rather

rst of all the w o r k o f M a r i a M i l

O I

" C o r n e r , ,..l e x P l o „ . . . i o n c

«

commercial agru u l , I , and ,nap, nniied for the w a t e r crisis

" * * » l (S l

HI

are

'T^Zl ,he

ma

'0r

^

^

farmr&A l\itla Carta Time and again. Vandana Shiva points out, famous British engineers who learned water management from indigenous techniques in India, commented i the "sophisticated engineering sense, built on an ecological sense, that provided the foundation for irrigation in India Major Arthur Cotton, credited as rhe founder' of modern irrigation programme rote in 187-4: There are multitudes of old native works in various parts of India. .These are noble works and show both boldness and engineering talent They have stood for hundreds of ears...When I first arrived in India, the contempt with which the natives justifiably spoke of us on account of this neglect \ material improvements was very striking; they used to say we were a kind of civilised savages, wonderfully expert about fighting, but so inferior to their great men that we would not even keep in repair the works they had constructed, much less even imitate them in extending the system (p. 187). The East India Company, as Vandana Shiva adds, took control of the Kaveri delta in 1799. but was unable to check the rising river bed. Company officials struggled for a quarter centu nally, using indigenous technology, Cotton was able to solve the problem by renovating the Grand Anicut. He wrote later: "It was from them (the native Indians) we learnt how to secure a foundation in loose sand of unmeasured depth. The Madras river irrigations executed by our engineers have been from the first the greatest financial success of any engineering works in the world, solely because we learnt from them...With this lesson about foundations, we built bridges, weirs, aqueducts and every kind of hydraulic work... We are thus deeply indebted to the native engineers." But the lesson has obviously been overwhelmed by the full flood of the capitalist science of development/profit, what Vandana Shiva calls "maldevelopment."5 British engineers in the 1700s and 1800s recognised that indigenous technology and knowledge tended to preserve water resources and make them available for the local people. Today, capitalist water-management projects cause drought and deny survival to entire populations. One woman from Maharashtra State in India sings against the dam she has to help build so that crops such as sugar cane can be irrigated while women and children die of thirst (Shiva, 1989) As I build this dam I bury my life. The dawn breaks There is no flour in the grinding stone.

142

I collect yesterdays husk for today's meal The sun rises And my spirit sinks Hiding my baby under a basket And hiding my tears I go to build the dam The dam is ready It feeds their sugar cane fields Making the crop lush and juicy. But I walk miles through forests In search of a drop of drinking water I water the vegetation with drops of mv sweat As dry leaves fall and fill my parched yard.

A response to this mad 'enclosure" of water became more and more a problem on the agenda of political networks that monitor and struggle against projects of this kind. The immediate future will show the effects of this effort. An exemplary case is the Bangladesh flood control plan (Del Genio. 1994), presented by the World Bank in London in December 1989. Even though it was claimed to differ from previous projects because of its low environmental impact, other estimates of its effects were so dramatic that an international coalition of organisations, opposed to the World Banks approach to the canalisation of rivers, was created in Strasbourg in May 1993 Considering solely the immediate human impact, the building of the Narmada dam in India was expected to require the evacuation of 500,000 inhabitants and aroused strong opposition from the "tribals" and the organisations supporting them. The Bangladesh Flood Action Plan (FAP), coordinated by the World Bank on behalf of the Group of Seven, would require the forced transfer of 5—8 million persons in a territory whose population density is ten times that of India Del Genio's article illustrates the reasons cited to justify the plan — on the one hand, mystified assumptions and, on the other, the lethal techniques of the Green Revolution This plan insists on the need to "propagate modern mechanised agriculture capable of coping with the food crisis" so as to increase the "Itivation of modern high-yield varieties of rice which, in its turn, requires a 'arge and regular quantity of water and a system of flood control and irrigation to make it available. The drawback! of the high yield varieties include a dependence on the market and the laboratories, since thev are unable to reproduce, and imply the

(afiafWd IXiti

ta

redi n ol the genetu diversity of load seeds. Awareness or the drawbacks is growing in the woi nd rural workers' grass-roots organisations are putting up increasing resistance to these agricultural improvements that are supposed to >r satisfying their nutritional needs. As regards Hood conbe more appropn trol, some of the years regular flooding bring nutrients which ensures the so. fertility and top up the water-table as they expand across the plain. Other, purely* destructive floods need to be controlled through works different from the planned ones if the aim is to be achieved without destroying the environment, including the humans in it. In this connection, it is worth remembering the level of sophistication achieved in biodiversity by long-term cooperation between humans and nature; among the hundreds ol local n e t varieties developed in to the demands of territory and climate, a sub variety called Aman is capable of growing over 16cm in only 24 hours il the level ol the water rises. or transferring 5-8 million persons I>\ u n i, thi self inconceivable from my point of view, since to uproot a population is like cutting a trees roots, but in this case a forests The hrst and obvious question that comes tnts are to find the to mind is: where and how does one suppose that the j money needed to pay the costs of agricultural modernisation (machinery, ferThe answi identical and repeated thousands of times over in tilisers, t the history of the Green Revolution: only the big proprietors and the big enterises can sustain the costs. And the others 7 Work has begun in the meantime.. The peasants and many working with them in international networks are nd opposition. The Asswan dam and what the consequent organising rev lo; oil nutrient tnt for all the peasants who lived off the soil, plus ated, necessarily con to mind. all the other grave consequences it has pre For example, the flooding of part of Nubia and, with it, the burial of major reli ttmn and the abandonment ol the land by those who lived there. ie could cite. When I was in But this ts only one case in the midst i>t the mat _;ypt in TJ89, there was talk of a pi irn the Red Sea into a lake. 1 hope that the growth ol the ecological movement, the movements of the native populations and others will have relegated this project to the nightmares of a pa* Returning the same observations, made by her and many otl holars today about the dams and other Western water management pi eci Third World ually be applied to the t nologies that are mi Third World agriculture, in livesto< i raising I in the destruction forests to cultivate e.\ rops: the destrn Uodiversit; ologi hat ^ subsistence. In short the pro[uilibrium id the lil< >r the big companies, the denial
hN

fUpmmt and Rtproc

Lm

nature and the effects it has. she finds no difficulty in concluding that the foundations of capitalist accumulation are the science and practice of the cul t u r e of death. Her merit is also to have contributed to bringing to international ,ents otherwise ignored or neglected Our argu nt jp„ struggles and m< m c n t here is that the Chipko movement ,n which women organise to stay in The forest even at night, embracing the trees to prevent the logging companies from cutting them down, should be placed on the same level as all the other struggles against various forms of expropriation and attack against individual and collective rights in different parts of the world - not only the right to survival, or better to live, but the right to the self-determination of one's < are. The economic and life system of the Indian tnbals"* « reated the Chipko A act movement which forms the focus of Vandana Shiva's studies and pi ity, is based on a combination of agriculture, livesto ng and the use/conservation of the forest. The forest has a central and many-sided role in the whole n. The forests bear 'soil, water and pure air ,g the Chipko women i Shiva, 1989, p. 77), and they play an important nutritional role. Whatever crisis may hit crop livestock, say the Chipko women, the children will never sul hunger il there is a lorest near. Thus embracing the trees to stop them from being felled is like occupving the land to prevent it being expropriated, or struggling defence ol lobs or a wage or a gu d income when survival dep< toJelv on money. This is what we see if we want to spotlight how the different parts of the working social body struggle contemporaneoi and in diHerent forms against the same m that exploits and besieges them in different ways. This is important for getting a real idea of how an opposition to th ol development is growing increasingly at the world level and is re g to | price while seeking other paths I* rent future. But 1 think that the struggles of the Chipko women and all the other movements lor the m nai iul del <>! an age-old experiem J knowledge in humankinds tk*political relationship with nature are all the more vital tor us li empowering the i / ikoM vk vt /<' poy the pn tht.* in the "
oi

ewpmeni emul ne< r//v he an • Shi wor The other great de. ns advanced h have d h< n if briefly, because it is represent tire .dies developed by women in the world tha, ool of femi, concern the g i ..pulation ol living species. To the tampering nutrn ommun.r.es is added the ( puUi "I the species. This topi, that has aura * " * , n recent yeara m the various omen sch and a. m "With engineering ring the lift ** rem ihty or hie as a self-reprodu vstem comes I Life ml » engineered now.

/V5

Development and lit reproduced. A new commodity M reated as inputs, and a new com mod. is created as output. Life itself is the new commodity uva. 1989, p. 9 | "The market and the factory define the "improvement" sought through the new bio-technologies... Nature s integrity and diversity and peoples needs are thus nultaneously violated" (Shiva, 1989, p. 92). This biotechnological trend is matched by the determination to patent and "bank the genetic heritage of the living species. This was denounced by women meeting in Miami in preparation for the Rio conference (Women\* Actt umKi 1}I, 1991). but their opposition is widely shared. After patenting cotton, the agro-industrial corporations now want to do the same for rice and sov, two of the fundamental foodstuffs for many parts of the world's population. Increasingly food, already difficult to obtain because ol the combination of expropriation of land, technological inn ions in farming methods, and the ratio between prices and wages (when there are any), is manipulated, placed beyond access, privatised, monopolised, patented, "banked.** A new enclosure. A, In this parabola oi ta hnological conquest cr nature, expropriation reaches its acme: human beings are expropriated, the living species are expropriated, the earths own reproductive powers are expropriated to transform them into capital. This mode of production pretends to capitalise the generation and oduction of life. What a long way cap m has come since it, indit ferent to life, was sa ith nothing more than appropriating an excessive number of working hours 7 or when it simply pretended to transform all life into work and. to that end, whilst ignoring the contra on of exploiting free and ive labour at the same time, on the one hand, drained dry the life of the free *d masses oi ves! workers, and on the other But the amplitude of the various rebellions and struggles in the world in \pe of development is matched by the increasingly massive, >n of tl rms of domination Considering only the lethal and monstrous structure; most recent past, from the Cull War on, the increasingly warlike character of velopment has undeniably produ m escalation ar that removes nether or not it is founded on the science and pracy residual doub ath Referring to the wars in the Gulf, ex-Yugoslavia, Somalia, and Rwanda-Burundi finds its limit in the fact that these are simply the wars t. have received the most erage in the media in the last three or fouryear^ cei have no intention of underestimating the number s that have en pursued in the world without them ever entering the limelight n recent years has confirmed the emp< If anything, the escalation ness of what the major powers said on disarmament Rather, war bo* become rument par excellent it t\xty dt toe y tin

/ M t ||vin8

l

.mhilation. terro

leporta,

conAhonj. and life expectations. In th, end, humans. ^

luge, ^ ^ less concealed concentration camps ol ,ons But. at the same tune, the otho ealed ever moi early, through the growing monsi macabre laboratory generates. War is J„ gr eat laboratory, but since the vo,

^ then

^

^ n%

haV)ng Knolojy has\

n ;

pursue life in tl mpt eal and capitalise its secrets, death has been d. ,-ered increasingly as a terrain for profit In tl ikeahil :uhe indifference to the death of masses of ind pnn their means of production and sustenance, to th< bodies or bodies destined in a nonchalant way to die n with new technologies o« nmei se bo w Besides the traditional markets of arms, post-war r <J u., luttrial experimentation on which our 'peace economj offers above all the biggest mass of living/dying gum horn hnologies applied to acquire more ki on a mass scale, the n e v body and hv perate on it Here too. it is clear how the part ol guinea-pigs ns, even it has been pla) ed a b o v e all by the people of the a similar role has recently been emerging t or the n art (row i to war or use thou! cial sectors o f the great powers, dispa knowing it in "pea me." But w a r c o n t i n u e s to offer n e w and 1 !u< h ip profits If or example Hov How many for trafficking in o r g a n s ? ' 0 Hon* n iliwai pple* ' H o w many for j tution ' Hov childless couple »ng in adult males and lemalcs also got all the reasons mentioned above, apart from the It itherstrang ..i.mdi >g suv ible development, then su10 mention o f the un.ui lity for humankind and tl easingly taJv the i that d e v e l o p m e n t ha* The poster with th« n which we * as sc { ! the war an rest. *• m the Chiapas r ns annerl e w o r k e r s in Milan, it , * m the land rem *me time «• **f M * pressed in the itTUggUs throughout the world cm
d unwaged la in * " uire is there for unwaged labour?

141

,n

^

°* '

,l

II in.i

11

""1

V

the UnA ,*

1

Cl

i ,t

V

When

It n

^ink th

"LI

n reUunch-

tig rhr in gly dr question unship between these two of I the postt tnc hei the feminist qu«. great se on that emerged a I the women's m nent in the 1970s i e ., the the unw I labour of reproducing labour ! he woman aged labourer } ellei nd e es in this develop ment Dai >sta, M., 1995; Dalla Cost f ^ n the one hand, h hich has been created by caj G ' talist i lopment, nsustainable in m in the "ad^ ed are
•ndmon. cannot be solved within capi m. which forms its basis. To be juires a totally different conception and organisation of development, but by the same token, women's struggles around their condition amplithe demands of other unwage il subjects from whose labour this capiopment continually accumulates value. tal imerous studies of which I mention only some (Michel. Agbessi Dos Santos. Fatoumata Diarra, 1981. Michel 1988; Boserup. 1982; Shiva, 1989) ontinual real capitalist projects in the Third have i Ids rural areas, apart from expro} ing the land, makes it increasingly r women to gain access to the fundamental means for the production id forage for the aniwater for the hmals. Now. hours or days have to be spent etching things that were previfairh These resources too have been swallowed up by enclosure/approp ommoditisation/capitalisation. »dox th.ji precisely for Fern authors (Mies, 1992) have noted the their a related to acquiring these resources, as well as for having too m jral women are blamed for doing harm to the environment Suppo /, they destroy the forests if they go there in search of wood; they llutt I use up the water sources if they go to fetch water; they Uie up the 11 they have too many children It is a typical case of blaming th< same time, their working and living nlmons and, with the entire commu are continually undermined by the debt pohth»

H8

<*xpr

elf M M

«11

m tlu-.i

gapl

ale

v-elopmen

h,iemale<

resjK the example (81 also quoted by i\\ ie s , i n e n, who oppose the felling of tree the Himalayar • I purpose

nman\

the men were less determn

B

the* jldbeg

the saw-mi 11 But on. he women's biggest doubts was of how much of th mom ige the mid have received - and the opposed d eation of a hiei on having or not having a wage. Above all, iht posed the problem of what would happen to all of them when the lor basis of their sul flowed up by the saw-mills wh there would be no more wood to cut. would be closed. The women s^ that they needed no jobs Irom the government or private businessmen as long as they kept their land and their forest vt cenIn Shiva (1989), there are many other episodes of this kin turies in which the scene has been rep1. the lesson has been learned in the n not to put ones most remote corners of the earth There is a great determi' in the hands of the planners of development and underdevelopment ; ' to w hicr stop others from plunging whole populations into total uncen es not lead to hunger today will do so t a determination to a in

ing turned into beggars or refugee camp inmate It.; ,,l p. ns linking natur >d consumption ii ingleapp ifteo cril mantieism male schol One might v . r, if only I lise the most simple questioi value do these * (tribute to the right to survival amunii - and (here are mam ol them - whose n e and til m are gua

anteedpn

ly bj

pra

es with nature, while the . mai

pment I the UU

mun- • Igliifi ^UorlJ II this as something that men sho

nth, nan

fnngthatth

ith increasing I

Irom the "charter

iththegr

their m(

the vane

lent in the la

\fiiruin\<.i lUlla CoStA two decades, together with the right to land, i.e., the right to survival/life, then* , increasingly strong demand for the right to identity, dignity, one sown history, the maintenance of the complex of collective and individual rights belong, mg to ones own culture, and the right to work out one's own future starting from ones own premises. Obviously, there is no intention here of skating over the contradictions within the existing customs and systems of rules, above all those between men and women. If anything, what needs immediate clarification is that capitalist development, far from offering solutions to these problems, most often aggravates them. Politicians promoting development often try to suppress the women's movements which deal with these questions Nevertheless these movements have grown and are creating an increasing number of new networks, that struggle, denounce and demonstrate great determination in changing a state of affairs clearly causing women harm. In this connection, the Chiapas revolt is exemplary since it brought to international attention how the Maya women defined their rights with respect to men society at large. Work and grass-roots debate in the communities produced a code of right* ,H Some rights concern the economic/social/civil plane such as the right to work, a lair wage, education, basic health care, the necessaj od lor oneselr and one's children, the right to decide autonomously the number of children one wants to have and to rear, to choose o n e s companion without being required to marry him, to suffer no violence inside or outside the Others rights concern the political plane, such as the right to take part in managing the community, to hold office if democratically elected, to hold positions of responsibility in the Zapatista National Liberation Army (ZNLA). The code repeats that women must have all the rights and obligations deriving •m revolutionary laws and regulations. As far as one knows, women participate fully in the highest offices in the ZNLA. I v hiapas in the winter of 1992-93, and in San Cristobal I was lick by the numerous posters put up by women's right n ists alongside the posters in ( if the guerrilla heroes. A year later, the great work achieved these women took on new substance and became known throughout the world, disclosing how much progress had also been made within the community as regards the relationship between the sexes It is significant that an imporril point in the code of women's rights, corresponding to the centrality tl issue has won in the Western world, concerns violence. I would only like to add that, during my visit the year before the revolt, I was told in San Cristobal that i va women no longer willing to go to the hospital to have their children lor fear of being raped — evidently not by the natives. It seems clear that these women's elaboration of their rights was not in a d improbable phase, "after*' the movement that was tending towards

Development and Reproductum a radTcal change in the state of things, but formed an integral part of .t The samee thing happened in the elaboration of their rights by the \ during the Entrean liberation war, and it ^ n ^ ^ ^ J ^ ^ 0f

situations. These facts show how it ,s invalid to presume a lack of movemen

"non-advanced societies because of a supposed observance of tradition I WO uld also like to underscore that the relationship with nature!* is for all ot u s a fundamental contribution made by the movements of the native women Vct there is great resistance to it being recognised as such by the more or less historical elaborations of urban male intellectuals that try trv to to ifind a way to change the world. in

As the Chipko movement shows - and numerous other examples are available from various parts of the planet - the leaders are increasingly women in mownenU that link the maintenance, recovery and reinterpretation of a relationship with nature with a defence of economic subsistence and the conservation of the identity and historical-cultural dignity of the communities/civili sanons to which they belong. In that their primary task is the reproduction of individuals in wage and subjects par excellence in both types of non-wage economies, that they are unu economy, and that their possibilities of autonomous subsistence are progressively undermined in the proceeding of capitalist development, women emerge as the prmleged interpreter for the unwaged of the earth's future. Today, their critique and their theoretical contribution form a necessary moment in the formulation of a different development, or in any case in reasserting the right not to be developed against o n e s own WTII and interest On the other hand, international networking between women scholars and feminists and women active in various ways and various organisations concerned with the women's condition, development and the native peoples have brought an awareness of these experiences of resistance and struggle, stimulat ing a closer attention from Italian women researchers as well. Several of them, internationally well known, are cited by Cicolella (1993). One is the Green Belt Moment founded m 1977 by the Kenyan woman, Wangan Maathai. who starting from the idea of "afforestation for life/' has created green belts around cities in twelve African countries where forests had been replaced by open spaces. Then, the Gabrula group in the Philippines began its activities by safeguarding a mountain precious for its natural equilibrium and fragile ecosystem. The Third World i\ rk founded by a Chinese jurist Yoke Ling Che, aims at forms of development that truly respond to peoples real needs and. above all, < » » pendent of aid from the industrial nations. The MaPuche nu^ment ^ Chile led by Alicia Nahelcheo, w h o was already active against the Pinochet dictatorship. * today struggling against development projects, the expropriation o\ land to

151

/W,yv/„„

til

build pov

width oppingfoi comn ial purposes of the./. ,Ul fruit is a basic I ftUfi But these a iinplea The forms in which man n and women increasingly fcJ guarantee their survival and at the tame tune fight against this multiply and emerge further. At the same nent can be e.\ nvtn ol in tangly ample mitiatives.it the internationa] lev* i e . the/ designed to contest the legitmi >f, and to halt the diret h\ <s handed down by, he World Bank and the IMF At the economic am ial level, these are the k points in the management of contempa >pment, as well as being tin major in the poverty and degradation of n leveloping" countries. r the same time, the strong critique and forms of struggle and resistance against this form of development have produced an increasingly vast and articulated debate in which va i interprt >ns ot what a different development should be rner^ immune redi, I993) of the major po tions stress that the centre of it all is the importance of the environment and the iltural context for elaborating an autochthonous project. 17 They also stress the sign oologies which, in order to identify the fundamental goals opment. list as categories of basic needs, rather than those concerning e pfv il survival, those concerning security', welfare, identity and liberty as agatn ilence, material poverty, alienation and repression which typify the in which governments rule "developing" countries. Central to approaches such as these remains self-reliance, by mobilising all the human and material resources available locally and by using technologies compatible with the cultural and natural environment. But many other positions could be listed. To the range ot approaches of basic needs, self-reliance, and eco-development summarised by the Dag Hammerskjold Foundation >, others have been added because, since then, the debate has developed significantly. The most questioned idea is "sustainable development" as it emerged from the famous world commission for the environment and developm ed b o Harlem Bruntland. The main criticism is that it confuses development with economic growth and confuses "everyone's future" with the ure ot the First World. In case, it is clear that any definition of a new approach concerning development makes sense only in so far as it grasps the demands ol those men and women who have so far paid the heavier price ! ievelopment while gaining the least n it And in so far as it recognises the right to n -lopmcnt in all situns where people refuse it, as it often happens in many different parts ot the world In this sense, Gustavo Ksteva said as long as ago as 1985, in his comments on a conference of the Society for Intern Development: "My people are tired of development, they just want to live" (quoted in Shiva, 1989, p. 13).

152

, fl, < < I above, a look at th ^OVemtnl Hiring < oach the question of d e v e l o p frlT • p r f t f shows, in my v,,w, that the most interesting ap T '

T 7

mmimmrib^m -espe • J r h u ^ f f e and " ||Vj„g beings in general. Since ,t appreciates rather than devalues the knoll edge and C .ence of the w o m . n ,„ the nat, ^ ™ j ommunit,cs, il|so

relaunches an approach including th, relationship with nature asThe

50U rce

of In subs tee, the nght to self-determination, and the reaction I model ot development. () m e capi 1 think that a cross between this feminism with the more radically anti-capfaOT which has analysed the condition and struggles of women and llahsl the unwaged in this model of development, posing the question of what peractives, "™y m a k e a v e rV interesting contribution. In this context. I would like to recall, it <,nly briefly, Vandana Shiva's conception of nature wh ., r m s the foundation of her discourse. She uses a reading of Indian cosmology' in which Nature (Prakrti) it an expression of Sakti, the female principle, dynamic primordial energy, the Prakrti eresource of abundance. Joining up with the male principle <7V ates the world. Women, like any other natural being, have in themselves the female principle and. therefore, this capaci r creation and the maintenance life. According to Vandana Shiva, the reductions caJ of Western science continually expels the female principle from the management of lit the same token interrupting the life cycles and theret he regeneration of! itself creating destruction in its place. The reduction! h respect to nature and women ensures that they are reduced to means for the produ of commodities and labour-power. Patria t^gories which understand destructi production' and regeneration of J I 'passivity' have generated a crisis for survival. Passivity, an assumed category of the 'nature' of nature and women, denies the activity of nature and life. Fragmentation and uniformity as assumed categories of progress and development destroy the living forces which arise from relationships within the web of life' and the diver. I the elements and patterns of these relationships (Shiva I (>89, p Feminism as ecology, and ecology as the revival of Prakrti source of all life, become the decentred powers of political and economic transformation and restructuring (Shiva, 1989. p. 7).

DtveL

Contemporai vmens ecological struggle* are new attempts to establish thai steadiness and stability are not stagnation, and balance with nature's essential ecological processes is not tet hnological backwardness but technological sop! ation (Shiva, I p. 36) brought by the native Discourse on land, on water, on nature return t< ients and the knowledge *>t the native women, almost the most precious of the riches that ancient civilisations hid and the secrets that they never revealed But with the land, there also returns to us the immense potential of a human diver that has been able to resist and preserve its heritage of civilisarion. And now it gives forceful expression to the will to work its own future autonomously The need for a relationship with the earth, for liberty, time, and an escape from the modalities of labour and the relations that the capilist model ol development its to continue imposing also represents a long th tor expropriated Western humanity. Perhaps, precisely the fact of having being heard so widely in the world, as happened with the Chiapas revolt, gave many their first perception of the real feasibility of a different life project which they had resignedly relegated to a dream of impossible flight — a world in which lite would not be all work, nor nature an enclosed park in which relationships are prepackaged, pre-codified and fragmented into atoms. It is evidently because these deep and dolorous chords in expropriated Western humanity were touched that the whole body of working society rated together with the Chiapas rebels, beating a thousand keys, transmitting, declaring, sustaining. A thousand arms and a thousand legs were moved, and a thousand voices heard. A hinterland of communication and liaison has been constructed with the growth of the native movements across the Americas and in the world in the vears. Relations, analyses and information have been more closely last twe and more strongly interwoven, especially recently in opposition to the North America Free Trade Agreement. And all this has become the primary issue for communication between and action by different sectors in the working social body. Workers and non-natives, ecological movement militants, women's groups, and human rights activists have been attracted into a complex support action, helping and monitoring from various parts of the world. But it is clear that, in the last analysis, what has moved all these individuals, groups and asso10ns is the ract ol having recognised their own demands in the demands of the native movement; of having seen their own liberation in the native movement s chances of liberation

/W

'** and ln

The natives have brought the feyj and t h e y are on the table. Thev can £ o p en other doors to enter the Th.rd M.Menn.unv Outs.de, the fc„ ^ arr ived. break.ng the concrete banks and drowning the latest h.gh-yield varied Ami of n c e . . . T h e p e d a n t s take out their hundreds of seed vanet.es, while pushes its stems out above the water TRANSLATED BY JULIAN B« ENDNOTES

1 This paper was first presented at XIII Conference of Sociology, Bieiefel Germany, J u l y 18-23, 1994, Section 8: Women, Development and Housework [ R C 02: Economy and Society-]. 2 See ll Manifesto, February 8, 1994, but many other newspapers have used the same image. The demonstrating workers were led by the Cobas, the rankand-file committees created to negotiate on working conditions without passing through the traditional trade-union organisations. The movement now has a national liaison committee. 3 This is the subject of the third part of Midnight Notes Collective (1992). 4 In lectures on Capital that I used to give each year, I devoted some comments hara in 1970 to the fundamental question of the two opposite tenden terising the history of the working day. They were published later (Dalla Costa M.. 1978). In my university courses. I continue illustrating fundamental parts of Capital, especially those concerning primitive accumulation Social processes in this period which were neglected by Marx in I //. e.g., the great witch-hunt, have been analysed by the feminist scholars I worked with (Fortunati, 1981; Federici and Fortunati. Wth the aim of clarifying the capitalist sexual division of labour and the construction of proletarian women's individuality in capitalism It is no coincidence that this period is considered as crucial by various currents ol feminist thought 5 The term mabdevdopmud and its French equivalent maktoebpement were originally , oined with a biological meaning in mind, rather than a political one. TheVeference to the idea that the wrong type of development is male-rel eel is clear India has about 50 million members of scheduled tribes, recognised as such by the Indian constitution because ol their particu advantaged s.tuat.on They are found most extensively in tl - a , Andhra Pradesh and Maryana and are at most margmally integra, « * the market economy TheiV ., ic social orgamsation tends to be non-mascuhn.st and genera,* speakmg egalitanan. with a parlKularly sustainable approach to na.urai

Dalle

ta

resources- But they are considered as without caste, being despised and exploited as cheap or unpaid labour when they are forced to join agricultural or industrial units. Consequently "tribal* I mg to India, has not only .l-anthropological meaning but a juridical one as well I apital asks no questions about the length of life of labour-power"... "What experience generally shows to the capitalist is a constant excess of populate . "Apr/.* mm U dilugel is the watchword of every capitalist and eve capital, t n 6. Vol. I. p 576, 380, 381). 8 In Lii RepubbL \? 1994, an article entitled, "Where have the Sarajevo children disappeared to?" Wondering where the children evacuated from the Bosnian war have finished up, the article quoted spine-chilling figures from the humanitarian organisations on trafficking in children and reportold girl who finished with Italian go-betweens ed the case of one N and managed to escape. Also mentioned is an article in the weekly, Focus. The number of children used in the pornography market was referred to with increasing frequency in the media in 1993-94. ,0 International criminal networks and international crime organisations with legal terminals are growing around the clandestine tra; n organs. In this connection, Italian public television has broadcast a series of programs on this issue. One of the most interesting, on March 5, 1994 on the second ite channel, provided evidence of a relationship between these organisations and legal terminals in France. 11 It seems worthwhile putting this question given the incredible figures on slavery* published recently 200 million in the world, according to The >.'( of January 6, 1990. 100 million are reportedly children, according to UMa 8.06.1994, which quotes a U N I C E F report published on the previous da Wattin , 4 00 1(>94. publishes an article on the discovery and enur >on of an organisation that was exploiting women and war 'ripples from ex-Yugoi. In Mestre, Venice, the forn vere sent to work beggars. as prostitutes, the la 13 An eflc< h \ e de i tion of the creation of underdevelopment through develpmei provided for the Port Harcourt area in Nigeria ilvia Feden (1992). lanuary 1. 1994, the day on which the revolt broke out, there has been ual flow of iniormation in the press. In Italy, UManifesto and other newspaf have reported the major demands of the rebels and with them nen of Chiapas as they were advanced. Two articles with very preise information on the demands as a whole and the details of the mobilis tion >mez (1994) and ( 1994) A brief synthesis of the

1%

Ihvcbpnunt and Reproduction

women's rights in the Women's Revolutionary Law is to U fU.. I r> S f a £ ^ a n d Pisani (eds. 1994). I must add that a book not to be i n g the condition of the Maya women, this time in Guatemala » n (1991). Jfr Nanu U ttigokeHa . \temeU Guatemala, is Burgos 15 In any case, it needs recognising that, in recent years, even if with different approaches, there has been a growth - internationally - ,n attempts to link different theoretical elaborations with approaches whose focus is the reia tionship with nature, particularly Marxism and ecology, The magazine bestknown lor publishing this type of debate is Captialunu fom, SodaMsnw which is explicitly located in an eco-Marxist perspective. In this same magazine, a particularly ample discussion has developed around the O'Connor (1992) theses on the "second contradiction of capita.' On the relationsh between the lefi and ecological issues, see, among others. Ricoven i 1994) 16 Just to mention two initiatives the Circle of the Peoples coordinated ie range of associations in a counter-summit against the Naples summit o h he Group of Seven on July 8-10. 1994, and, in the first ten days of October of the same year, a large number of associations is taking part in a countersummit in Madrid for the annual assemblies of the World Bank and the IMF, this year marking the fiftieth anniversary of Bretton Woods and the international financial organisations created there. For the same event, the League for the Rights of the Peoples is working at the Lelio Basso Foundation in Rome to produce a statement on the Bretton Woods institutions to be published when the summit is on in Madrid, just as was done I the IMF general assembly in Berlin in 1988. 17 Autochthon, from the Greek [ott pi.] are of the earliest known inhabitants any count? id/or an animal or plant that it n to a region, Greek meaning from the earth itself f Editors Note],

Ri

Boserup, E . (I

. // Lworo Me fame. La

WfiwWWntilo ^duf

^nomieOx Torino, Rosen * & Sellier. wktrta Menckk Ciunti. Fircnze Burgos, E. (1991). Mi cbiam 13), La en * eprumpali im*l mi/m Caffentzis /< n D a l l a C o s t a ML & Dalla Costa G CI, H (| lM ,d, Famine and the tnternanonal Cns.s" in & w w * , Political Makriab % Fall . .. Cleaver, H (1994), T h e Chiapas Upriaingand the Future of Class Struggle. in ( vmmon

•. N o . 15.

Man

i I hi,'

fa

C o p p o , p. 6V Pisani. L (eds.) (1994), Amu indiaru Rivoliuuoae e 04 Unpad me. Bdizioni Co I ibn, Milano.

lament and ReproJnctuw

yanei

Cicolella, O . (1993). "Le d o n n e tra crisi ambientale a sviluppo insostenibile," i n Re<*, No. 7 DaJla Costa, G.F. (1989, 1 ^90 2 ed.). Li riproduzumeruttottajviluppo, Lworo deiU alia t Stato nel Venezuela degli annx "70, Angeli, Milano. Dalla Costa. M and .lames S. (1972), Tkepowm -'men and the subversion of the mtty, Falling Wall Press, Bristol. Dalla Costa. A\ t1978). Nate on Lti § ita tavonUiua m Marx, appunti da un letdel Capitiile, Cleup, Padova. Dalla Costa. M. and Dalla Costa, G . F (eds.) (1993). Donne e politic he del dehito, tone e L iemnumle nelLi crun del dehito intcrnaztonale, Angeli, Milano (English translation Paying the Price: Women and the Politic* cf International Economic Strategy, Zed Books. London, i ). Dalla Costa, M. (1995 itiem and Rep/ n, in Bonefeld et al (eds.) farxu*m, Vol. III. Pluto Press, London. !995 D a g H a m m a r s k j o l d F o u n d a t i o n ( 1 9 7 5 ) , What now? Another Development, Uppsala. Del Genio. G (1994), La Banca inonda il Bangladesh," in Capitalumo, Natura, cui/ufmo, N o . 1. '90. The Economui Federici, S. Fortunati, L. (1984), II Grande Calibano. Storui del corpo socialc rihelU nella prima taoe del capdale, Angeli, Milano. Federici, S. (1992). Developing and Vnderdeveloping in Nigeria, in Midnight Notes Collect i\ Federici, S. (1993), CrUi economic*, epolitica dcmografica nelPAfrica sub-taharuina. ltd fcria, in Dalla Costa M . a n d Dalla Costa G . F (eds.) 1993. Fortunati, L. (1981), L\ 'la riproduzione. Ctuuiltnghe, prch*titute, operai e capitate, Marsilio, Padova (English translation: The Arcane of Reproduction, A u t o n o m e d i a , N e w York, 1995). Gisfredi, p. (1993 'Teorie dello sviluppo ed egemonia del N o r d , " in Re**, No. G o m e z , Luis E. (1994), "La nuova cavaJcata di Emiliano Z a p a t a " in Riff Raff, March. U Man ,8.02.1994. II Mam ',8.06.1994. II Matt 4.06.1994. Li Repubblica, 17.05.1994. Marx, K , (1976), Capital, A Critique of Political Economy. Volume One, London, Penguin.

158

Mellon M. (1992), breaking the Hounds, Virago Press. 1 ondon.

Tomar* a Feminist Green v / nu,Li Umn SoaaJym,

MeUoi mmimsmo e ecosocial.smo. Dilemmi di essenzialismo e matenahsmo. in UapdaUem* Saturn. Soctatumo, March Michel, A.. F a t o u m a t a Diarra A.. Agbessi Dos Santos H., (1981), Fcmmej nuiltinatianalcj, Karthala, Par; Michel, A. (1988), "Femmes el development en Amerique Latin* et aux Caraibes," in Recherches feminuleo, vol. 1, No. 2. Michel, A. (1993), Donne afruane, sviluppo t rapporto Nord-Sud, in Dalla Costa M and Dalla Costa G . F ( e d s ) 1993. Midnight Notes Collective (1992). Midnight Oil. Work, Energy, War 197J-J992, Midnight Notes, Autonomedia, New York, N.Y Mies, M. (1986), Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale, Women in the International DivUion of Labor, Zed Books. London. Mies, M. (1992), Global u* in the Local, report at the Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, Canada, 25.02. Mies, M. and Shiva V (1993), Ecofcminism, Zed Books, London O'Connor J., (1992), "La seconda contraddizione del capitalismo cause e conseguenze," in Capitalismo, Natura, Socialt. No. 6. Ricoveri, G. (1994), La sinistra (a fatica ad ambientars in Capitalismo, Nat lira, Social i.* mo, No. 1, Shiva, V. (1989), Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival tn Indui, Zed Books. London. Wakefield, E. Gibbon, (1833), England and Ameru\i. A Compart I the Social and Political State of both Nation.'. London. Women's Action Agenda 21 (1991), in VbrD Wome o Healthy Planet, Official Report, 8-12 November, .Miami, Florida. USA. United Nations, N e w York.

159

8 CAPITAL MOVES

J o h n Holloway

Capital moves. This statement is so obvious that there seems no point in writing it down, much less making it the title of an article And vet In the obvious, commonsense interpretation, the sentence "capital moves" means that capital, normally in one place, gets up and moves. British capital is exported and invested in Africa. Japanese capital moves out oi flows into the United States. Capital is understood as basical! <1. but ble of motion. Capital is attached but capable of detaching itself. Thus: Volkswagen has a car factory in Puebla, but we know that it *a German com* ; \ and move its capital elsewhere. Capital is !>le of pany) can close its t movement, but it is defined first in terms of its attachment: attachment t« company (Volkswagen), attachment to a branch of industry (the automol industry) and attachment to a place (Puebla. Gen » Thus, following the al invested in the textile mdu ten n ed to as same reasoning, "textile capital. apital in the banking indi banking capital. ned by M< s Mexican capital, by US Am< "US etc. Although the capacity of capital to move, or to detach itself from a particular put in question, the movement owner or bra of economic activity nv to ita initial definition ill tachment or v. apital is s In all oi those examples, capital is treated as a thing, a thing that can be owned, a thing thai ia normally attached to a particular place, company, branch of economic activity; a thing thai can be moved, from place to place, from company to company, from one branch o! another. All this is obvious; but ontry to deprive cap.ial o h.nghood. il becomes less obvious. Why should we try to depn III QJ 'hlW™ s the obvious analysis of the movement of capital not sufficient.

161

hn //<>//.'<»•
i

answer is surely that it depends on what we want to understand. If we want to 01 il we want to understand understand capitalist development as econon he way in which capital dominates society, then there is probably no reason to que i the thinghood apital [£ however, we want to understand not the d. n and reproduction of capital, but the vulnerability and rupture of capital, if in other words, we want to understand not how capitalism works ut how it can be destroyed, then we need to open up the thinghood of capital to break the illusion/reality of "capital is, capital moves, to break its fact) capital rules, that's the way things are." That is why Marx devoted much of his life to showing that capital is not a thing but a social relation, a social relation hich exists in the fetishised form of a thing. If capital is understood as a social relation rather than a thing, then what does it mean to say that "capital moves"? The answer is now less obvious. Howcan a social relation mo\ movement of capital can only refer to the mobility, or perhaps better, flux or fluidity of the social relations of capitalism, the relations of power under capitalism What the mobility of capitalist social relations means can best be seen bv contrasting capitalism and feudalism. Under feudalism, the relation of domination/exploitation was a direct and personal one. A serf w a s bound to a particular lord, a lord was limited to exploiting the serf that he had inherited or could otherwise subjugate. Both sides of the class divide were bound: the serf was tied to a particular lord, the lord was tied to a particular group of serfs. If the lord was cruel, the serf could not decide to g o and work for another lord. If the were lazy, unskilled or otherwise insubordinate, the lord could discipline them but could not simply fire them. The relationship between serf and lord had a fixed, immobile character The resulting discontent was expressed in revolt by the serfs on the one hand, and the pursuit by the lords of other ways of expanding power and wealth on the other. The personal, immobilised relahip of feudal bondage proved in juate as a form ontaining and exploiting the power of labour. Serfs fled to the towns, the feudal lords accept>n of domination. ed the monetisation of the n The transition from feudalism to capitalism was thus a movement of liberation on both sides of the class divide. Both sides fled from the other: the serfs >m the lords (as stressed by liberal theory), but also the lords from the serfs, through the movement of their monetised wealth. Both sides fled from a relation of domination which had proved inadequate (as a form of domination) Botl ies fled to freedom Flight to freedom is thus central to the transition from feudalism to i apitwn. But there are urse, two different and opposing senses of freedom here (a dualism which is the central contradiction of liberal theory). The flight of the

\pttal

'•

'

was a flight from s u b o r d i n a t e to the lord, the flight of those who for one rcA son or another, no longer^accepted the old subordination, the flight of the in8U bordinate. The flight of the lords was just the opposite: when they con verted their wealt I, into money, ,t was a flight away from the inadequacy of subordination, a flight from insubordination. On the one side, the flight of insubordination, on the other side the flight from insubordination: viewed from e,ther side, it was the insubordination of labour that was the driving force of the new mobility of the class relation, the mutual flight of serf and lord. serls

The flight of-and-from the insubordination of labour, the mutual repulsion of the two classes did not. of course, dissolve the class relation For both serf and lord, the flight to freedom came up against the reassertion of the bond of mutual dependence. The freed serfs found that they were not free to stop work since they did not control the means of production, they were forced to work for a master, someone w h o did control the means of production. To survive, thev had to subordinate themselves again. However, this was not a return to the old relation: they were no longer tied to one particular master, but were free to move, to leave one master and go and work for another The transition from feudalism to capitalism involved the de-personalisation, dis-articulation or liquefaction of the relations of domination. The relation of exploitation was not abolished by the dissolution of the ties of personal bondage, but it underwent a fundamental change in form. The particular bond that tied the serf to one particular master w a s dissolved and replaced by a mobile, fluid, disarticulated relation of subordination to the capitalist class. The flight of insubordination entered into the very definition of the new class relation. On the other side of society, the erstwhile lords who converted their wealth into money! found too that freedom was not all they had imagined, for they were still dependent on exploitation, and therefore on the subordination of the exploited, the workers, their former serfs. Flight from insubordination is no ision of their wealth solution for the lords turned capitalists, for the i depends on the subordination of labour. They are free to abandon the exploitation of any particular group of workers (for whatever reason - laziness, mappropriate skills, whatever) and either establish direct links of exploitation with orkers or simply partici pate through non-prodc -invest•ther group ment in the global exploitation of labour. Whatever form their particular relation to the exploitation of labour takes, the expansion of their wealth can be no more than a part of the total expansion of wealth produced by the worker. Whatever the form of class domination, labour remains the sole constitut power. Just as in the case of their former se light tofreedom turns out ^ flight to a new form of dependence. Just as the serfs flight from j u b o r t ^ • leads them back to a new form of subordination, the lords flight from

bn HM'uuy insubordination leads them back to the need to I that insubordination. The i. however, has chang* pttftl'l flight from insubordination to its struggle to impose subordination (as example, in the ev< Hit threat of factory closure or bankrupts•') The flight from insubordination has become fining feature of the new class relation. The insubordination of labour is thus the axis on which the definition of capital as taJ turns. It is the mutual repulsion of the tv lasses, the flight of and from subordination, that distinguishes capitalism from previous class so es. that gives a peculiar form to the exploitation on which capitalism, like an iss si is based. The restlessness of insubordination enters into the ass relation as the movement of labour and capital. From the start, the new class relation, the relation between capitalists and worker r. more accurately, since it is a depersonalised relation, between capital and labour) is a relation or mutual flight and dependence: flight of-and-from insubordination, dependence on re-subordination. Capital, by its very definition, flees from insubordinate labour in pursuit of more and more wealth, but an never escape from its dependence upon the subordination of labour. Labour, from the start, flees from capital in pursuit of autonomy, ease, humanbut can escape from its dependence upon and subordination to capital only by destroying it. by destroying the private appropriation of the products of labour. The relation between capital and labour is thus one of mutual flight and dependence, but it is not symmetrical: labour can escape, capital can not. Capital is dependent on labour in a way in which labour is not dependent upon capital. Capital, without labour, ceases to exist: labour, without capital, becomes practical creativity, creative practice, humanity. Fioth serf (now worker) and lord (now capitalist) remain as antagonist poles of a relation of exploitation-and-struggle, but that relation is no longer the same. The insubordination of labour has entered into the definition of the relation as restlessness, mobility, liquidity, flux, fluidity, c< nt flight.2 The class relation has become a constantly shifting, inherently mobile relation, in which all capitalists participate in the exploitation of all workers and all workers conibute to the reproduction of capital, and in which the patterns of exploitation are constantly changing, kaleidoscopically. With the transition to capitalism, the dialectic of insubordination/subornation of labour which is the core of any class relation acquires a distinctive — the antag( «c movement oi the flight of-and-from the insubordination of labour to its renewed subordination. This peculiar historical form is expressed in the familiar categories of political economy: in the existence of labour power and of the products of labour as commodities, in the existence of value, money, capital. All of these categories express the indirect or disar-

lU„)

character of capitalist tl ,a.,„ n . All express the Uc, ,ha in capita|isl|1 ,| lt subor.lm...,,,,, ..I labour „ mediated through "freedom " ,'he Tree,he worker an. the Ireedom" of ,h, - t a b s , , or. ,n other words the ' '* fligh. ol-an.l l.om .nsubord.nat.on. These gorles therefore ^ mb ody . 1 - law-bound character ot c a p i t a l * development, are ,n real e p r e s s e s ol the defining presence ol the insubordination of labour within ex the chaos at the heart e capitalist relation ol subord.nat.on. that it t o e . the

0f capitalist

domination

This seems upside-down. We are not accustomed to thinking of value lor example, in these terms. It is more common to think of value as establishing or(|er (the "law" ol value), as be.ng the social bond in a society of autonomous at only if the emphasis is on the critique of liberal producers. This is corre* theory, The notion of the "law of value" says in t: "despite appearances, th apparently autonomous producers of capitalist society are bound together I .aJ ue jocial connection which operates behind their backs — the lav on the other hand, we start not from the appearance of fragmented individualism. but from the historical irruption of the insubordination of labour into the very definition of subordination, then value expresses the fragmentation wreaked bv this irruption upon the more cohesive domination of feudalism. The law of value is simultaneously the lawlessness of value, the loss of any social com over society's development, the presence of insubordination within subordination. Value is the political-economic expression oi the presence of the contradictory flight of-and-from insubordination within subordination itself mst as freedom is its catcgorial expression in liberal political theoi Value, in the form of money, is the new liquidity of the class relation. It is (he fact that social relations come to be mediated through money that makes it possible for the worker to shitt from one master to another, in each case selling his or her labour power in return for a certain amount of money It is the I that the lord-turned-capitalist can convert his wealth into money that make possible for him to abandon one group of workers and move to another, and to participate in the global exploitation of labour. Money not only liquefies the class relation, it also transforms or fetishises it. It gives its o w n colouring to the class relation, making the relation of subordination/insubordination appear as a relation between rich and Poor, a relation of inequality between those with money and those without money rather than one of antagonism. It transforms the antagonistic relation of subordination/insubordination into a relation of money t r a n * ( o ' t( * flight of-and-from insubordination which defines the capital-labour Nation into the movement of money, the movement of capital (understood dsan economic p h e n o m e n o n ) .

165

MoM

hn //<>//,'.«'«/v The banal sentence with whu h the article began, "capital moves" has now acquired a new meaning. It is a tautology "Capital moves
Capital, then, is a social relation. But it is not simply a social relation of exploitation/subordination/domination. It is a social relation of subordination (etc) in which the defining presence of insubordination is expressed as unceasing restlessness, mobility. This mobility is both functional (as capital is metamorphosed from productive to commodity to money capital, and back) and spatial (as capital flows/flees through the world in search of a means of self-expan sion). The peculiar unity of subordination/insubordination which is the differ. entia specilica of capital is expressed in the unity ol production and circulation, or in the unity of the different functional forms of the circuit of capital (dis. cussed by Marx in Volume II of Capitat), or in the unity of the world as the locus of class struggle (the relation between insubordination and subordination). Conversely, the dislocations of production and circulation, or of the dif ferent functional forms of the circuit of capital, or of the spatial flow/flight ot capital can only be understood as the disunity-in-unity of insubordination ana subordination, the constant inability of capital to contain labour, the constant overflowing of insubordination Irom subordination, the existence of labour against-and-in (and not just in-and-against) capital. All this is just a rephrasing and development of what has been a central theme of the Conference of Socialist Economists (CSR) debate over the las: twenty years and more — the critique of structuralism, of the separation ol structure and struggle. The separation of structure and struggle is, crucially, the separation of subordination and insubordination. It has been common in the mainstream (and overwhelmingly structuralist-functionalist) Marxist tradn to think of capitalism as a basically self-reproducing system of domination/sub ordination ocasionally disrupted by class struggle (the open manifestatior insubordination), as a self-reproducing economic system, in which the exploit ed workers are victims, except on the rare occasions on which they engage m open struggle. In this tradition, the labour theory of value is understood as the mechanism which explains the self-reproduction of capitalism; there is a pecu liar blindness to the most obvious feature of the labour theory of value — name that it is a theory of capital's dependence upon labour, a theory therefore of class struggle. It is in the face of this stultifying, and above all disempowenn^ tradition of mainstream Marxism that it is important to reassert the unity »

166

subordination and subordmaUon, the corros.ve, destructive ch a „„ , nsu bord.na«.on wnthin the def.mt.on of subordinat.cn ,tse|'f

^

^

The way in which the notion of the mobil.ty of cap.tal l s used ,n „„, discussions of the "internationalisation" or "globalisation" of c a p T t Z o T example of the s e p a r a t e of subordination and insubordination, structure I d T f | e . In such discuss.ons. labour, it „ features at all. appears only as a struggl — -u. appears only as a vicv J ' *Ut> latest developments in canitalict A~~*:— ™ t i m 0 f the latest developments m capitalist domination. The actors in such diS cussions bear such names as U S capital, Japanese capital, European capital f j n a n c e capital. Debate centres on the extension of the power of "finance cap^ rivalry between "US capital," "Japanese capital" ta|/< on the "inter-imperialist All of these categories rest on the notion of capita! as a thing, a notion that ludes the attempt to understand the restlessness of capital in terms of the power of insubordination. If current changes in capitalism are understood in terms of the conflict between different national capitals.^ then class struggle, if ,t appears at all. can only appear as a reaction to the changing form of domination, not as the substance of the change. Everything is turned upside down the "globalisation" of capital (which I take to refer to the enormous increase in the speed and scale of the flow/flight of capital in money form) is seen as increase in the power of capital, rather than as a manifestation of capital's incapacity to subordinate labour. 4 The violence of money is a measure of capital s flight from the insubordination of labour, and of the desperation of its need re-subordinate.6 Marxism is a theory, not of the power of capital, but of the power of insubordinate labour.

ACKNOW

TS

My thanks, for their critical comments on the original draft of this paper, to Ana Esther Cecena, Andres Barreda and their seminar group in the UNAM, to Chris Arthur. Werner Bonefeld and to Paul Stewart as co-ordinating editor for

oitaland Clot

ENDNOTES 1

I" a helpful comment on the first draft of this paper. Chns Arthur remarks that "the paper virtually asserts that the capitalist is the lord with a new hat on. This is historical revisionism on a grand scale with no evidence given. He should at least concede to the usual story that a new mode ot produc-

167

>hn //.'//i'uviy

Capital

3

n meant, at a minimum, the de I the lord and the rise of the C*pitaJist vimum a sharp class struggle between the two, punctuated by quite right: the argument of episodes like the French Revolution Ch the paper is indeed that the capital i the lord transformed. What matters not the question of personal continuity (present in some cases, absent in others), hut the understanding ot tht ition from feudalism to capitalism as a change in the tnrm of the relation ot domination and struggle or, better, of the inbsubordination/ subordination of labour It class is unde ipitalist "lords"), but as the pole of an ood not as a group oi people antagon relation of domination u t M >unn 1987), then it is clearly wrong to see the struggle between capitalists and lords as a struggle rather, a struggle over the form of class domibetween two classes. It »rm of subordinating ibordinate labour. For "historical revination, t sionism* on a genuinely grand scale, see Gerstenberger (1990), who supot Marxist historians with ports a similar argument against the orthod an impressive wealth ot evid m fcnglish see Gerstenberger 1992; Holloway 1993; Gerstenberger 1993). I follows that class antagonism cannot be understood simply in terms of production, but in terms of the unity of circulation and production. The view ot production as primary and circulation as secondary tends to lead to a il the working class as the class of people subordinated in production, that is, the industrial proletariat. It capital is understood in terms of the unity ot production and circulation (or the unity of the flight of-and-from subordu a and the imposition or subordination), then a different picture emerges. Capital lives by subordinating and then fleeing from the insubordination which is inseparable trom subordination: it sucks in labour to exploit and then spits it out as unpalatable. The antagonism which defines the working class is not one of subordination, but of subordination/insubordination the working class not subordinate victims but the subordinate trom whom ital (lees and whom it must subordinate II < s by sucking and spitting, the working class can accurately be rth. defined as the unpalatable sucked and spat ot tl The only possible justification tor the notion of a "national capital" would be ms ot the understanding of the national state as an obstacle to the equalisation of the global rate of profit (cf Capital, Vol III, ch. 10), but I have not seen such an argument made, and in any case it would have to be le in class terms. I see absolute , reason for granting a priori validiam." the United States, to such questionable categories as "Japan," etc I ike ai her category of social th« "Mexico," "Irelan these must be critii lsed.

Move*

A Tor a development of some of the arguments in this paper tee R™.r U P P *>ntMd ( | 9 9 3 ) . Bonefeld and Holloway (1995). 5 This paper seems to Moat ,n the air. but it does not. Behind it lies the question of the relation between the Zapatista uprising in Chiapas and the devaluation of the Me I peso, together with the upheavals on the world financial markets (the "s lie r„k" to world capitalism) which the uprising has provoked. The understanding of the flight of capital from Mexico as an economic phenomenon quite distinct from the revolt in Chiapas (the separation of structure from struggle) makes it more difficult to establish the unity between the two forms of discontent, in the countryside of Chiapas and in the worlds biggest city. The connecting fuse, once lit, could change the world. [Editors Note: The issues raised here have been developed further in Holloway. John and Pelaez, Eloina (eds.) Zapatista. Pluto. London. 1998; and Holloway, John "Zapata in Wallstreet," in Bonefeld, Werner and Psychopedis. Kosmas (eds.) The Politic** of'Change, Palgrave, London/New York

Ri

,'CRS

Bonefeld W. (1993), The Rccomposition of the brdub State, Dartmouth, Aldersh< Bonefeld W. and Holloway J (1995). Global Capital, the National State and the Poll/. fMoney, Macmillan, London Gerstenberger H. (1990), Die suhjektlose Gewalt: Theone der Entstehung burgerlu-berStaatsgewa/t, Verlag Westtalisches Dampfboot, Munster. Gerstenberger H. (1992). "The Bourgeois State Form Revisited, in Bonefeld, R.Gunn, K. 1 hopedis (eds), Open Marxism, Vol 1, Pluto Press. London. md 'Open Marxism': A reply to John Gerstenberger H. (1993), "Hist, Hollowar i Sense no. 14. Gunn R. (1987). "Notes on Class Hollowi I (1993). "History and Open Mai Marx K . Capital

fcff*

no 12.

T H E POLITICS OF CHA

E:

IDEOLOGY AND CRITIQUE*

Werner Bonefeld

INTRODUCTION

"Globalisation" has been established as one of the organising terms of conThe term indicates that the idea of a temporary political economic inqu cohesive and sequestrated national economy and domestic society no longer holds and that everyday life has become dependent on global forces It is claimed that "globalisation' represents a qualitative transformation of capitalism in that there has developed a new relationship ol interdependence beyond the world market and his notion that the the national states. Marx's vie need lor n slant iv expanding market for its produci the bourgeosie over the whole surface of the globe, appears to be emphasised by the "theor of globalisation "S I is not. For the globalisationists, there is no such thing as the bourgeoisie; instead ved as some sort of economic mechns t mposes itsell ectively" upon the social individual, rendering both the working class and the bourgeoisie helpless Both are seen to be subjected to the risk that globalisation appears to present (Beck. 1992). The ing elements of "globalisation" can be briefly summa as follow J 1. Ttw in, retting importance and ngnii structure and thet ofcr. mg to the dominan ace over producn Harv. i haa argued that tin ,.,1 has become an mdependtrang nphas.sed the mcreased

e»r

he financial superstructure.

Qt

The growing importance of the "knowledge itructui Giddens 1990) ecome an importanl

unge 1988; pro-

d X p|

b^bei

•

,le r e s o u , . bu also, to a resource to be operated on and sold with »g produced for export fcfc , w • * e

3) The in< idity ol redundancy ol given technologies and the n the transnaiionalisation ol technology H emphasise is on knowledge-based Industrie *sing reliance on technological innovation, and increased n mological backwardness (Gidd< 1991); * The rise of ( il oligopolies in the form of multinational corporations: Corpt 9 are said to have no choice but to go global and multinational corporations together with, and importantly transnational banks have become most influencial powers beyond the national states and their national economies Stra. 1991);

The

of ca

|reTTeT0' ks show clear!, thai Mane s msiglv

P,tal

whU

"J * • ****** Sta

*pri: ,lg t o

^cumuUnonl w h | c h ,# 1Jt

ce;ifi

of

birth, was yesterday, in England, the capitalised blood of 1983. p. 70 hi] remains a powerful judgement of contemporary eondition. ' , human tut Looking at the above summary of globalisation orthod. fering is neither acknowledged nor of any concern for the theor global.., tion." For its proponents globalisation has somewhat "solved" the crisis of capitaliet accumulation, has left behind "social relations between people" and thereby undermined resistance to capitalist exploitation. All that can be done is to recoup the loss ol liberal-democratic values by transnation ng democr government Only in this way. it is suggested, will the rights of the ens oi the world be secured.

The globalisation of production, knowledge, and finance is said to have led, on the one han the retreat of the national 8 as a regulative power and the globalisation of political power in the form of a plural tied with the U N , G7 (now G8), on the other (Held, authority structure as The erosion of the national state is seen to lead to (a) greater global institutional and regulatory uncertainty and (b) to the hollowing out of national liberal-democratic systems of government. The national state is seen to have transrmed into a rnpetirion stai Cerny, 1990, 1997 The so-called new freedom of capital form national regulative control and democratic accor lity is said to lead to increased ecological destruction, social fragmentation, and pove r Hirsch globalisation is based on a class society without classes. Globalisation is thus seen to render work* powerl to withstand economic di( Anderson, 1992. p. 366). In short, apital s impossible dream: to accuglobalisation is viewed as the realis mulate uncontested. The above has summarised the main planks of globalisation orthodoxy. 2 The next two sections supply a critical commentary on "globalisation' Where does the global begin, where does it en<

<

HAT

ISATK

C the last de* e has been an increase in the trafficking ol women and children, prostitution and ery. N e w markets have emerged in human organs and babies, reducing the proprietors of labour power not only to an

^_ What is to be understood by the notion of the liberal den nd its \ Liberals, since Adam Smith, have argued that the state is indispensable sta for the provision of the exact administration of justice to resolve clashes of interest, the protection of property; the military defence of its territory; for the povision ol public goods that are essential for. but cannot be provided by the market; and for facilitating relations of equality and freedom, including the "encouragment" ol competition and therewith ol conditions of so-called market self-regulation. liberal "notions" oi the proper role of the state been lobalisation? This does n> em to be the case and, indee undermined b the globalisationists argue that globalisation emphasises the bourgeois Si as a liberal state What, then, do we make of the notion that the state is in "retreat"? Commentators offer the notion of the comj >n state as an adequate definition of the State under conditions of globalisation. What are the stai ompeting about? Are they competing to extend, safeguard and exploit e advantages 9 Is the competition stai nething like this The their com, tould not and cannot try to protect iobs by interfering with investments tpital is not allowed to get the greatest net revenue that the use because Ol maokin II afford here, it will be carried abroad" leading to "serious disthe demand for labour" (Racardo, [1821] 1995, p Does the | competition it indicate Ricardos msigl or the globalisationists, liberal democracy has been undermine the same rime as which the national state has been iransformed into a neo-liberal state.* The so-called retreat of the state, then, stands for its reasseration as a liberal state' As Cerny (1996) sees * only < "residual functions' are left to it particularly in those areas geared to ensuring capital c o m p eness. B globalisation then, the state is seen to 175

172

Werntr Bi'nefeL* behaved ill a socially responsible way. regulating the economy in terms of a >mprehensive social democratic project where everyone is supposed to have been a member of the "one-national boa ee Hirsch, 1997). Against the background of the struggles of the 1950s and 1960s, this globalisationist retrospective of the past is not only absurd. It is also dishonest (see Bonefeld, 1999). Witi ve might wish to argue thai theoretical mysteries ... find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this practice" 1975, p 5). For globalisation orthodoxy, however, such a view is deeply problems if not "anachronistic (1 iirsch, 1995). For them, it is not human social practice but the developmental logic of the economy that is decisive — social practice is merely conceived as a derivative, that is something that can be derived from the "objective" logic of economic mechanisms. The notion of the globalisation of capital not only assumes that "capital" has suddently left its domestic skin by globalising its existence but also that "capital has globalised "itself," has suddenly become more based on scientific expertise, has discovered monetary accumulation beyond and dissociated from productive accumulation, has expanded into a borderless world. In short, (or the globalisationists, capital appears to have suddenly since the late 1980s, discovered the Id market! Where was "capital" before? What does it mean to say that "capital" has "de-nationalised" itself? Was capital ituted nationally, was it a national capital, in the past? Globalisation orthodoxy posits the capital relation as a relation of capital to itself rather than as a social relation of production. In other words, the conceptualisation o\ capitalist development is based on the competitive relationship between capital and capital — a self-relation. The social constitution of this relation cannot be determined: The answer to the question what is "capital" is already presupposed: capital is capital and vice versa. As shown by Gunn (1991), this rehnement amounts to an infinite regress of meta-theories, seeking to discover the practical meaning of invisible principles. The eternal quest of political economy (and of those seeking to supply a blue-print of a new faced capitalism) to discover the practical meaning of invisible (as well as inevitable) principles ends up as an irrational exercise because what needs to be understood is presupposed as something beyond reason. The attempt to find "truth" in the "invisible" has always been the character of traditional theory, that is, of a theory which resists an understanding of our social world as a world made by humans and dependent upon human social practice — however perverted or enlightened this practice might be (see ^rkheimer. 1992). In short, analytical approaches to "globalisation" fail to conceptualise the ldamentaJ relationsEpJ^tweenJabour and capital. This relationship remains untheorised and is replaced by a tautological understanding of capital as a sell 174

21b l',luu, of ( han„, ISeolo^ W Cru^u relation. In this v.ew, labour is merely seen in terms of the w ^ as a labouring commodity (on this. Bonefeld 1995 a) A

I reut,

. ° n . that is

„ the substance of value ,s excluded theoret.callv an^ c l Z T T ' ^ in terms of a domesdc ^ J j * * * » mere, class whlch J ^ through the threat of moving production to areas more favour.kl T ^ ^ i ^ ] n o n . The notion that capital is a thing, and not a ^ course, very much to the tradition of politica. economy However, it is Z £ i n g that globalisation orthodoxy appears to have forgotten its own theoretical heritage. Adam Smith at least sought to provide a scientific understanding of the constitution of the bourgeois world - however flawed his theory of value For the globalisationists the world is accepted as a given, as a thing m-itself In this way, globalisation orthodoxy represents a vulgarised version of classical polit cal economy: it does not raise the question of the social constitunon of value and epts. as a consequence, that the world of capital is regulated by the invisible principle of an effective, efficient, and fair power of an almighty hand. The posal, then, to re-democratise the political regulation of capitalist umulation is based on the acceptance of the invisibles How might it be possible to make the invisible accountable to democratic principles? For the proponents of transnational democracy neo-liberal market freedom is structural' unable to generate social acquiesence and they recommend "democratisatio; on a transnational level as a means of faciliating relations of freedom and equality The debate, then, on transnational democracy goes beyond the vulgar lif> eralism associated with Hayek in that it seeks an arrangement whereby the global relations of liberty would be institutionally embedded. It seeks, in other words, to safeguard market freedom through institutional safeguards and guarantees. Might there not be a good case to argue that the proposals for a transr. tional democr ;eek to guarantee the rights of citizenship at the global level so that the liberating potential of hard labour can be cherished on the basis equality, freedom and Bentham? In sum, the proponents of globalisation, on the whole, do not "like" what "capital" is doing when left unattended by regulative institutions of a liberal-democratic sort. Yet. while they might not "like" the invisible s hard hitting "hand," they are forced to accept it because the acceptance of the "market" entails that the cunning of reason amounts to no more than the invisible's own project.

STATE A N D SOCIETY

The cor sense. Th< which .

(s "state" and "society" are usually understood in a "domest ate" is perceived in terms of national sovereignty - a sovereignty ed over a definite territory and in relation to a people or peoples. 175

Werner /<<'/ lut

The rel. ihip between te and * is one of the admu. i political space, including i ially the people living in this space. This rding of the n nship betweei is "domestic" insoundt le as the inqi nto the constitution of the "state" is based on an understanding of the relationship between a given society and its state. As a consequence, the study of the inter-relation between states is conceived in terms of diploma trad sell as inter-national cooperation, conflict and competition/ In tl view, the politics of national states are conceived in terms of Ricardo's notion of comparative advantage. The "globalisationists" emphasise this by arguing that the national state has transformed into a competition state and dismiss it by stressing that the national state is in retreat. Does globalisation merely mean that capital has leh its national society behind, that capital has de-nationalised itself, and that, as a consequence, has "hollowed out" the national state? Is the state in retreat because its has lost its "basis." that is. its national economy and therewith ional society 9 What is a national society The notion ti nnotes a national entity seems, at first sight, re used to speak about British society and so on. Though, uncontrovt rsial \ hat is soassic political economy, society was understood in terms of economic constitution. O n this, the classic statement is provided by William Robertson (1890, p. 104) who argued that "in every inquiry concerning the operation of men when united together in society, the first object of tion should be their mode of subsistence." The relationships of subsistence, of social production and reproduction, are one of capital. Would this mean that so mounts to capital 9 Is capital society? We know about the attempts of political economy to define "capital " Usually it is seen as a "thing" with invisible but hard-hitting qualities, which supplies structure and dynamic to "socieHere, society an pital are seen as interrelated but nevertheless as different things and the relationship between them remains obscure in so far as something "invisible" determines the constitution and dynamic of social relations. critique of political economy supplied a — negative — solution. His conception of social relations overcame the dichotomy between socit nd ruing tli.it capital" is not a thing but rather a definite and contradi ttionship of produ There is no need here to review his mque of fetishism and theory of exploitation For our purposes, the understanding of society as a capitalist society, as a society of class antagonism su sisting through exploitation and i ttuted by class struggle is sufficient because it raises two interconnected issues: 1 i the critique of the domestic character of capital therewith the lehned antagonism of labour to capital; I the critiqu te as an impartial administrator of political space.

The cup.,al rckdon i j l, v its very form. .

g,obal

^

^

argued

tha, the world market c o n f u t e s the presupposition of c a p , t l , , ^ ion as well as its s u b s t r a i n \ W x , 1973 n O O R C T U pv ; P between the national state and us national society. Rather, the state subsists a^ I form of the social relations of production ^ t h e pol m re|atlon to world market. Thus, as von Braunmuhl (1976, p. 276 . I l n n | |HJts |t •each n nal economy can only be conceptualised adequately as a , p . international and, at the same tame, integral part of the world market The nation state can only be seen in this dimens The national state relation to "society" is fundamentally a relationship between the national state and the global existence of the social relations of production, that is. of the class antagonism between capital and labour It ,s this global dimension "in which production is posited as a totality together with all its moments, but within whii at the same time, all contradictions come into play" (Marx. 1973, i

;„ , te *. r«U, ,„,h, b,^„ fc .

„£ ^

»«-M

T H E N E W W O R I I> O K D K R

The term N e w World Order has become a catch-phrase employed to describe developments post-1989. It refers to a new, as yet undefined, rear ranging of political space since the end of the Cold War. Within the framework of this paper, new world order has a slightly different and distinct meaning. Sudden movements or vast amounts of money have, over the past years, triggered three big crises of political ST The first was the European currency crises in 1992 and 1993, the second the plunge of the Mexican peso in December 1994 which rocked financial markets around the world, and the third the so-called Asian crisis since 1 ulatr runs on currencies have been described as a new form ol I reign p<> risis (st irn and Silverstein. l1^ Benson, 1995). This does not mean that old-style foreign policy crises with aggression between states, movements of troops, the threat of nuclear war. and bombing of populate have been replaced by potential national bankruptcy and the threat ol global tin I collapse. Tht ner continuous to m deadly form; and the potential of global financial collapse has been part of the history of capitalism since its inception Nevertheless, tl, been signifies ranges in the relationship between the n (he global economy. These changes have been working themselves through the capital. »rld the breakdov the Bretton Woods em in the early 1970 The "consequences of the breakdown of the system of Bretton Woods can be summarised as follows: 177

Werner fom

I he PoldL

1) The criv the post-war attempt of integrating labour politically, ec nomicallv. and tally through commitments to full employment, politics of in i and prospects of higher living standards — or, as Agnoli (1967/1990) saw it, a polit f pacification effected through institutionalisation; 2 ) The construction of regional systems of co-operation (NAFTA around the most powerful capitalist states: the USA, Germany, Japan.

APEC)

I The emergence of new currencies as international standards of "qualit i.e. financial secunt rtainty and measure of other currencies (DM/Euro, Yen urrency. The emergence of and Dollar), replacing the dollar as the sole qua! these currencies hints at a new territorialisation around blocs of regional colon and a new inter-bloc imperialist rivalry. stem of fixed exchange rates The breakdown of the Bretton V occurred shortly after the tremendous wave oi struggle associated with 1968. 8 The revolt of those years, as in the early part of the century following on from the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, was contained in part through violent suppression, but to a much greater extent through the expansion of credit. The consequences of "1968'' (the accumulated wave of struggle that showed its crest in 1968) were less dramatic but nevertheless equally profound as the upheavals of the earlier part of the century. The precarious relation between the monetary system and the rate of productivity was ruptured Fundamentally, as reflected in the breakdown of the Bretton Woods system in 1971 (on this: Marazzi, 1995). The struggles of the late 1960s manifested a new intensity of discontent that had been unknown since the late 1920s. Furthermore, the exploitation of labour's productive power was confronted with depressed rates of profits. 9 The exploitation ot labour's productive power had become much too expensive In other words, the post-war attempt at integrating labour's productive and disruptive power through institutionalisation was failing. Capital responded by financialising profits and by moving labour-intensive production to socalled developing countries where cheap labour costs were seen to provide competitive advantages. Yet, despite this expansion of productive capital to new centres of cheap labour, the dissociation between montary accumulation and productive accumulation continued unabated and on an increasing scale. From the late 1960s, especially since the oil hike in 1974, the dramatic increase m global money capital has not been matched by the reduction of necessary labour the constitutive side of surplus labour. Wealth started to be accumu lated in the money form without a corresponding increase in the exploitation of labour power in the factory. Capital's attempt to "liberate" itself from the

178

nlC tC(1

g ' ^ °^0r' asserting u s e h . n i u , I form o\ money capital (M M') iri(\uates the I most n- n ^Ofcapitalitl reproduction. Since the early 19 ,he rate of m o n e t a r y " fc fc m u lat.on has by far outstripped that of productive accumulation. In , a t , o n of a credit-superstr ,re amounts to an accumulation of "unemployed" capital ( d Marx, 1 %b), of capital which is su led from the dire exploitation of labour At the same time, however, the creation of a global redit-iuperstructure" represents an accumulation of claims on the future exploitation of labour. In short, the guarantee ol M ~ M ' depends on M - P JVT, that is, the exploitation of labour 1 0 Growing investment into the fantastic world of monetary self-expansion recomposed the global relations of exploitation and struggle. The world market became a market in money (on this: Walter, 1993). The attempt to make mon out of money created a much more fragile capitalism on a world scale. Without the global search for profit in money tt would have been unthinkable for the Mexican crisis ol 1982 to have had such an immediate knock-on t vestern" banks ,982 indicated that the and through them on the global circuit of capital. Me formidable attempt at containing social relations through a policy of tight mon associated with monetarism had reached an impasse. The "crisis of 1982" indicated a tremendous recomposition of the class relation. SeemingK marginal" pock ets of resistance to the politics of austerity, a politics that was introduced from the mid 1970s, threatened to transform the attempt to make money out of poverty into a severe global financial crisis. The dissociation of monetary accumulation from productive accumulation — the so-called dominance ol the finance rueture — rather than heralding a new phase of — globalised — capitalism, is intensely ensis-ridden. Besides, it amplifies and transmits labour unrest across the globe through its impact on the global relations oi mon* In the wake of M 0 1982, monetarist policies of austerity were hastily abandoned, leading to a politics variously described as "delinquent Keyne military Kevnes.anism and permitting the USA to emerg during the 1980s. as the biggest debtor country On a global scale, the rapid sb

!

from a policy of tight credit to a , v of credit exp. *d ^ * n e u t r a l ising "agent" as it helped to co-opt parts of the working class to the project ot prosperity. The credit-sustained boom of the 1980s acknowledged that sustained accumulation is the best guarantee for the containment of class conflict Poverty unemployment and marginalisation of superfluous labour power coincided w, prosperity. The decomposition of resistance to austerity was based on poxern poverty which was the mirror image p - h t - d m en P ^ W . , The significance of credit expansion as a ^ * ^ * ^ " reasserted itself. The policy of deregulation, flexib.l-non. privatisation

The I agm

d emr

social relah m hand. In the fa* | poven igmem i undermm on to uust* 1 hi i r ,l, t m ? onl »ned the boom o( the I 6^ itioua on. It also helped i the notion ol the market, unleathing a preintei olution through the imposition ot abs' equality, i.e., the ofnu tfreedom ed with neo-liberalism nshij

mone;

rybody is equal before

n know special privileges. It treats poor and rich .is equals. n of the abstract equality of money involved the imposition of The in-: inequality because the power which each individual exercises over the activier sooal wealth him as the owner of exchange values, lonev The individual carries his social power, as well as his bond with sociWarx. 1973. p. i Neo-Liberah policy o! market freedom rested on a systematic exercise ot r that defined social a on the basis ol the market — "poveruntreedon loseph/Sumption. 15 p. 47). Resistance to a control through debt was thus decomposed on the basis of what Hirsch (1991) refers s the "southa: nisation" of social relations. This view is shared by Negri p 97) who argues that the "ideal of modern-day capitalism is apartheid." H and as Negri in unlike Hirsch, apartheid is the ideal but not the re The reality is capitalist crisis and its containment through a policy of edit expansion within a framework ol "deregulation" whose purpose was the re ^ through the intensifi n of exploitation in exchange for detencncbtions and wage restraint Neo-liberalism s aim of adjusting working class nption to produ y growth was never successful however painful the results ol its attempt. In ite of all the hardship, all the misery, all the cost-cutting, all the poverty, all the intensification ol work and the restructuring he labour-process, the fa that estment t lifting off...is perhaps testimony to the radicality ol the flowed from it that every challenge to capitalist power, and ol the fear tli upturn in the economy would reactivate conflict A testimony, in short, that the smantling and restructuring I parts of the capitalist valorization process ill in lull motion (Bellofiore, 1997, p. 49) Although, as Dalla Costa (1995, p. 7) puts it, "s< misery or "unhappiness" which Marx considered to be the "goal of the political economy" has largely been realised everywhere, capital has d to redeem the promise of future exploitation by subordinating labour in the present. In other words, the inflation of money capital in relation to prodi e activity confirms negatively the difficulty in securing the subordination of social relate o the abstract equality of exchange relations and, through them, exploitation. Far from stimulating investment, employment and output,

the

result

-n m . tight mone: ork was the ^ ess unemployment There was no breakth ' k o*

tlditii

in "

*

•

*

-

-

-

*

-

?

-

The pjjj d o e s during the 198 ^ " agm. % decomr rf^J ther, Ives the imposition o! valori*. upon ^j |abour Such an imposition implies not just the inter r)n of wnrL „ J *L " « w o r " and the represlusion trom prod I those disregarded as being inessential It ^ , entails the transformation of money into trul employed to create value through the explo Ubour ( M - P Without this h on, capital faces its ultimate contradi The m rational form ol capital ( M — M ) becomes meaningless {btgriffjlu) becaL loses its grip on labour, tl ;ance of value.U In other s, money rath er than betting on future exploitation, has to be transformed into an el com mand over labour in the present. This means that the exploitation of labour I to deliver rates ol profit adequate to redeem debt and to allow for expanded capitalist accumulation. This exploitation of labour presupposes the recomporer sition ol the relation between necessary and surplus labour indication than the ballooning of bad debt that capital has not su» led in imposing a recomposition ol the relations of exploitation adequate to the . 2000 mulated claims upon surplus value (see Hollo The experience or the last twenty jgests that the tr mnation ol money into truly productive capital is both \ and impossible When a repeat performance of the crash of 19 ened in O even the most fierce mom ated expansion — anything id the and confront Awmy Idbnni. muel B' ot the Financial Tunes put it in 198 hen a slum| I k*k copters dropping currency notes from the sk ted in Harman. ll) I This i to the h, specific though it v IM) ] the forefront bad debt management V Susan *T during the 1980i hing th. ts so, A rather than pri -rid-wide collapse urrentatl nttng nlbadd teeing the cap. rights on! &»tuw nor, ^financed '3,1, taking m

ririuj haN -ll.l M h l.

app

banl

ithe tfloatbyl ,utc

* lender o! last r< While * -vat

i lahoui infi the working class U told that il in no ked t ^n the ba

I that the

"f"

•U)

kt m or drown rheir losses are socialised while their profits are prot he lav property. The strutural adjustment politics a. the IMF entails the imposition or poverty upon those whose laboui the validity of credit as a claim on surplus value still to be imped oul of the worker The I M F response to the ia in Asia represents, as during the so-called debt crisis ol the 1980 imposition of poverty: work harder for less reward to secure the banking system and with it the capitalist propert hts < ion. ession of the 1990s, the M< m crisis of 1994-95, the peftfi currency ses of 1992-93. and the Asian crisis of 1997-98, the Russian crisis of 1998 and the Brazilian crisis of 1999, indicate that there seems be no v orward. for capital or for labour Yet this is not the first time Writing in 1934, that is after the first global imperialist war and in the face of ttempt pling labour, 1 - Paul Mattick suggested that capilism had entered an age of permanent crisis: The periodicity of crisis is in pr nothing other than the recurrent reorganisation ol the process of accumulation on a new level of value and price which again secures the accumula1 If that is not possible, then neither is it possible to confirm accumulation; the same crisis that up to now had presented itself chaotically and uld be overcome becomes permanent crisis. In contrast to previous crises of pitalism. which had always led to a restructuring or; capital and to a renewed period of accumulation, the crisis of the 1930s appeared to be so profound and prolonged as to be incapable of solution. Crisis, Mattick suggested, had ceased to be a periodically recurring phenomenon and had become an endemic feature \attick s suggestion, pessimistic though it was, turned out to be far too optimistic. The crisis was resolved, in blood. Capital was restructured and the ba ir a new period of accumulation created. The "golden age" of post-v. now a memory, as is the blood-letting through war and gas. Once r would seem that we are in a situation of permanent crisis. It is possible it the crisis will be permanent, with a progressive south-africanisation ol the world It is possible too that the crisis will not be permanent, that it will in esolved: what the resolution of "permanent crisis" can mean stands >s a warning of a possibly nightmarish future. The prospect of a world constituted by human dignity and sincerity has to g o forward through a critique of political economy, including, of course, revamped versions of Keynesianism The summoning of a new world order should l»e taken seriously. The old "new world order," the world order postbrought about by a nightmare. While 1 share Lipietz's (1985) nignt>ut a capitalism walking on the thin air of credit, I do not share his caJl

m

„, k e e p capitalism away from the aby M . Thi. i,. d esp l t e 1U „ . . n$,ons a dangerous view to take. It is dangerous because it acce u K ' g dignity and thus endorses the rescue of capital through thT """"out I a resource for the accumulation of abst ' COnt'"ULed treat ment 0 f human. Th S trus "^ ' ' m e n t resolved the crisis of the 1920s and 1930s

CONCt.USION

Globalisation orthodoxy fails to see "globalisation" a* a m,

-

that he. at its heart. This paper has argued that this contradictions is const,, tuted by the presence of labour s productive and disruptive power, a power m and through which capital exists. Globalisation orthodoxy fails to see the misery of our time and projects, instead, capitalist global reorganisation as an inevitable development. This view ignores that the globalisation of capital is at the same time the globalisation of labour's presence in and against capital, and is ill-equipped to comprehend the vast implications of current developments. These I summarised in terms of Mattick's notion of a permanent crisis Lastly, methodologically, globalisation orthodoxy is founded on an analytical theoretical persepctive. At best, this perspective confers on capitalist development an objectivity that merely serves to generalise empirical data m abstract theoretical terms. In this way, the ideological projections of "capital" are confused with reality. This perspective fails to supply enlightenment as to the crisis-ridden nature of globalisation. Instead, it offers abstract generalisations which already presuppose that the market reigns supreme. As was mentioned earlier, the uncritical acceptance of the market entails that the cunning of reason amounts to no more than the invisible's own project. Globalisation is thus rendered practical as the project of the invisible itself. Against this view the paper argued that "in the misery of our time, we find the 'positive' only in negation" (Agnoli, 1992, p. 50). And the national state? Surely the gobalisat.onists arc quite right to argue that globalisation has rendered obvious the myth or the national state as a framework for the achievement of conditions where the tree development of each is the condition for the free development of all. According to the advocates of bourgeois society, the spect. communism has been replaced by the spectre of democracy at the same time as spectre of globalisation has undermined the conditions of liberal-democratic government. History when ,t was declared to be dead, appears full ol surprises: is this the irony ot history or the making of history?

m

m

lhrIUUt

'

Arm I

an i

»nd c o r n

essay that first appeared i n 4,

j

i glo i see tmple, Beyer and Drache Thompson Ruigrok and i U d d e r (19 and lence that questions \\ se authors provide rich empi n argue that the economic has gained autonom r the state and the crits argue that the state still holds ret power over the economy, rener economic relations, allowing a dering it capable of reasserting either p r o v i d e ! LSS analysis of globalust regul m this see. Bonefeld (2000). Burn ham (2000) and Holloway (2000). See, others, the contributions to Dalla Costa a n d Dalla Costa (1995, 1996), Midnight N o t e s ( 1992 I and I >alta Costa's contribution to this volume. state Fill >n S k i n n e r s introduction to Adam Smith's This 111 The Wealth Penguin, H a r m o n d s w o r t h As Agnol >2) have shown, the capitalist state is fundamentally a liberal state w h a t e v e r its specific historical form. For a critique hberal-democa and i irrent transformation, see Agnoli (2000). 6 The idea ie "economy" as a force in its o w n n g h t d e p e n d s on the underanding o1 al as the subject. Backhauls (1997) h a s shown, that this conception a m o u n t s to no more than the theoretical hypothesis of political nd T u r c k e (1986) has argued that the e n d e a v o u r to conceive capital as the subject amounts to an a t t e m p t to posit the invisible and that :ept For the lemic left, the conception of capital as *ct supplies reassurance about its o w n involvement in the class the struggle Intr Is the existence of h u m a n i t y as a resource is replaced b; al i ation of, a n d reconciliation with, capital tf a sell-constituted subject. Traditionally, the u p s h o t is the demand for the nomic resources, including the resource labour. rational planning ot 7 For a .e oi see, Bonefeld (2000); B u r n h a m (1994, 1995); Holloway (1995), and P 991) • I lowing section n a p a p e r written jointly with John 8 P a r t s of tli Holl M o n e y a n d Class Struggle,'' published in Boneleld and Hollowa

/AV

Ufy

Eft] (1984) and Mandel (1975)

i/ufu,

lamentation

| / ' ; • « > 7 l . ' ; i ; 7 I'1: M * ™ » - ^ - money and credit, see Bologna * * d (1995b); N L n d Taylor (1998); Negn (I9B4): Ki> i lardi (iyoi II O n this, see M a r x (1966) an r commentary, Bonefeld (1995b). O n this see G a m b i n o s contribution to this volume.

Ri

;CES

Agnoli, J . (1967/1990), Du Tra> motion der DemAratte, ( > ira, Freiburg Agnoli, J . (1992) "Destruction as Determination of the Scholar in Miserable Times mmon Sense, no. 12, reprinted in this volume. Agnoli, J (1997"), Faschtsmns ohne Reunion. £ a ira, Freiburg. Angoli, J (2000), T h e Market, the State and the End of History." in Boneleld. W. and K. Psychopedis (eds.) 2000. Anderson, P. (1992), ZonesC$'Engagement, Verso, London. Armonstrong. P. etal. (1984), Capitalism Since World II, Fontana, London Backhaus, H G . (1997), DU DiaUkttk der Warenform, Qa ira. Freiburg. Beck, U. (1992), Risk Society, Sage, London. Bellofiore, R. (1997). "Lavori in Corso," Common Sense, no. 22. Benson, G. (1995), "Safety Nets and Moral Hazard in Bankin in K. S a w a m o t o etal. (eds.) Financial Stability tn >ient, Macmillan, London. Bologna, S. (1993), "Money and Crisis,'" Common Sense no 13 and \A Bonefeld, W (1995a) "Capital as Subject and the Existence of Labour, in W. Bonefeld et al. (eds.) 1995. Bonefeld, W. (1995b) "Money, Equality and Exploitation." in Bonefeld/ Holloway (eds.) 1995. >, "Globalization and the State Boneleld, W (1

M*»

no. 58. Bonefeld. W. (2000), "The Spectre of Globalization, in Bonefeld. W. and K. Psychopedis (eds.) 2000. Bonefeld. W. a n d J Holloway (obV) 0 9 9 5 ) . I the Politic of Money, Macmillan. London. id K Psychopedis (eds 000). TUPetih Bonefeld BoneTeld'

tomMtShO*** Palg"

G u n n . R.. Holloway. J . and K. Psvchoped.s (eds ) (1995). Open

Marxism Vol III, Pluto. London.

The Politi

Werner c\*ne1\ ifld L> Drachfl (eds.) (199 tateAgam.*! Markets Routledge, London. • irnham. P (1994) n A\ai xisin and Vulgar International PoliticaJ Economy.'/? fnten mill iy, vol I no. 2. Burnham. P >5) "Capital, Crisis and the International stem,'' i n Bonefeld/Ji 1995. Burnham. P (2000) Globalization. Depoliticization and Modern Economu lanagement," in Bonefeld. W and K. Psychopedis (eds ) 2000 Cernv. P. (1990). The Changing Architecture ef Politic*: Structure, Agency, <W the Future of the State. Sage, London Cernv, P (199 "International Finance and the Erosion of State Policy CapaC! International Organ i n vol. 49, no. A. Cerny. P (1997). T h e Dynamics of Political Globalisation," Government ej vol 32. no. 2. Clarke. S. (1992), T h e Global Accumulation of Capital and the Periodisation of the Capitalist State Form." in Bonefeld. \V. et al (eds.) Open Marxism, vol. I, Pluto, London. Cockburn. A and K. Silverstein (1995) War and Peso," New Statesmen and Society. February 24, 1995. DaJla Costa. M. (199 "Capitalism and Reproduction," in Bonefeld et al. (eds ) I DaJla Costa, M. and G F Dalla Costa (eds ) (1995) Paying the Price, Zed Books, London DaJla Costa, M and G F Dalla Costa (eds ) (1997), Women, Development and Labour Rtproductum, African World Press, Lawrenceville. Feden S. (1997), "Reproduction and Feminist Struggle in the New International Division of Labour Dalla Costa, M. and G.F. Dalla Costa (eds.) 1997 orge, S. (1992), The Debt Boomerang, Pluto, London. Giddens, A (1990). The Consequence. Modernity, Polity, Cambrigde. Giddens, A (1991), Modernity and Self-Identity, Polity, London. Gunn, R. (1991), "Marxism, Metatheory, and Critique," in Bonefeld and Holloway (eds.) Post-Fordism and Social Form. Macmillan, London. Harman, C. (1993) "Where is Capitalism Going?," International Socialism, no. 58. Har\ [> (1989) The urns of* Postmodernity. Blackwell, Oxford. Held 995), Democracy and Global Order, Polity, Cambridge. Hirsch, J . (1991), "Fordism and Post-Fordism," in Bonefeld/Holloway (eds.) Post-Fordism and Social Form, Macmillan, London. Hirsch, J (1995), Dtr nationale Wettbewerbsstaat, id-edition, Berlin.

186

Hirtch, J

(1997)

i-.l-al,/.

ant and the

ufue

Nation State," SUutu.. ,„ I

I 'ecu amy, no. 58. outtaa Thompson (1999), a ^ L , , / , , , , n W w f f p ,. Hi •J-OJ < * W ,„d N - i - d S u „ , . I ' l ^ t Holloway (eds.) 1995. Hollov <2000), "Zapata in Wallstreet," in Bonefeld Psychopedis (eds ) 2000.

W. and K

Horkheimer, M. (1992), Kntuche tadtniddwnelle Theoru. Fischer, Frankfurt Joseph, K. and J . Sumption (1979), Equality. John Murray, London I ip ietz, A. (1985), The Enchanted WorO, Verso, Londo. Mandel. E. (1975), Late Capitalism, New Left Books, London. Marazzi, C. (1995) "Money in the World Crisis.' ,n Bonefeld and Holloway (eds.) 1995. Marx, K. ( 1966) Capital vol. Ill, Lawrence & Wishart. LondonMarx, K. (1973? drundru^e, Penguin, Harmondsworth. Marx, K. (1975). "Theses on Feuerbach Heeled Work, vol. 5, Lawrence & Wishart, London. Marx, K. (1983 ipital vol I. Lawrence & Wishart, London Matrick, P. (1934), "Zur Marxschen Akkumulanons- und Zusammenbruchstheorie," Riitekorrespondenz, no. 4. Midnight N o t e s (1992) Midnight Oil: Work, Energy, War I 1992, Autonomedia, N e w York. Neary, M. and G Taylor (1998) ney and the Human Conddion. Macmillan London. Negn, A. (1984), Marx Beyond Marx. Bergin & Carve v Massachusetts. Negri. A. (1989) The Politi fefa Polity Press. Cambridge Picciotto. S (1991) "The Intemationalisation of Capital and the International State System.' in S. Clarke (ed.) (1991), The State Debate, Macmillan. Und< Ricardo, D n the Prmctpi '"> Taxatum, Cambridge UP, Cambridge. Ric. B7), "Rereading Marx on the Role ot Mo.

nd » mane

vol. 10. Rzttitn-h m PoliticalEwwty Robertson. W. (1890) Work* vol. II. Thomas N « k » . Kdinburgh Ruigrok. W. and R Folder (1996), The U ""-«' *»toutm Rout ledge, I >n Strange, S. (1988 « * * * K*r.LondonStrange, S. (1991) "An eclectic aP; MurPn\ a IrtMUtwm Macmillan. tendon. T/,

Werner Bmefeld Strange, S. (1996), The Retreat cf

the

Stat

*

Cambridge

University Press,

Cambridge. Turcke, Ch. (1986). VermdtlungaL> Gott, von Klempen, Liineburg. von Braunmiihl. C. (1976). "Die nationalstaatliche Organisiertheit der burgerHchen Gesellschaft." G&tlUchafl no. 8/9, Suhrkamp. Frankfurt. Walter, A. (1993), WorO RrtW **& W<>r fonfy Harvester Wheatsheaf,

10

London. Weiss. L. (1998). The Myth of the Powerless State, Polity, Cambridge.

T H E CRISIS OF POLITICAL SPACE

Antonio Negri

W

hen people use the notion of a "New World Order," they are bringing into a single ne three powerful concepts: order, world-scale globalisation and the newness of the relations established between them. This new connectedness of "world" and "order" seems to eonstmn \gw paradigm, in other words a new way of arranging political power and the physical space of the world. In order to understand this new coming-together, v therefore need first to think about these concepts — to establish what they used to mean, and what is the crisis of the former ways in which they were conne< ed; and then we will need to penetrate to the originality of the new connection, and its dynamics. At that moment we will perhaps be in a position to und« stand the depth ol the change that has taken place. Let us begin with the concept of order. In the modern era, the concept of social and political ordei ery close to the concept ol .unereynty - a territorial sovereign Inch only with the passage of time becomes "national sovereignt Thu^ teed to examine the concept of sovereignty and th national sovereignty separately

source. However, when one considers it in it. exerc.se ,/,, '« CO, cep, of sovereignty .s rather a singular concept Th.s in no sense d.m.n.shes,, u character of absoluteness, bu, .. i, . — I , « singul -hat sover-g exercised. Modern sovemgntv i. s.ngulansed -u. ol the la<« ha exercised over a territory. Z • e.auon to a I ^ J ^ £ law i, founded on .1, ugularity/u*p*twm, or better, the ng which ong.naily cons.sted in reso.vmg confl.cts £ » £ by means of pacts "By means of pacts, and thus a light 189 ISK

l

S

n

J - -

,

Tke(

Ant. lmi

ang* rati I sin^

" Kc exte

„

ttell as a ^

r

&a |

en pov

tubjectl < )r. hotter, as an inter-

i ten i all ease* it is a r

ai

ithm ? , e or

i there exis'

t a space

I The legitimation, to put it m

ship bet^

i sovereign and sul>

legal/ration— a rela-

both the expression of authority and

isobedience) ol the sul

[mi, an absol

,

um

or again the sover

,iUt

Liferent aspects of *

^

a

^ ^

'Sovereign power becomes all th Hid Mverde

^ a

t e m

,nger

as its med within the continuous historicaTdevelopment of

modern sovereignty This process of absolutisanon and intensification of relations is also at the rt

A the con* ep(

ereignty Integra

Democratic sov-

«a space of the life of a people. Legitimation, in this

case, seeks to be dialectical. Administration becomes bio-polit State, the ttat-p*

The Welfare

nee and the SozuiUtaat. are figures of perfected sovereign!

in a progressive and uninterrupted continuity which seems to complete the anthropological process of the sedentansation of hordes, to the point where

s.

configures within a given space the global time of social lit

ng and inhabited sj

und at the basis of modern citizen-

Order is the result of an acth

government w h i c h meets acceptance

So, from an external point of view, sovereignty is characterised by a

ip of citizens over the extent of a territo-

monopoly of legitimate physical force; by the exclusive ability to mint the social

and/or passi ry

h has nothing

ur it has a lot ol things below K In particular it ha* I I and a multitude (the

blcs

. -

authorit

etgnty may be a p ao«.

Mod,

ut

In this persp'

n, in other

norms of exchange for reproduction (money); by the singular structuring of the

authority w h i c h extends

forms of communication (national language, education system, etc); by the

itv of administration, ter-

democratic (biopolitical) definition of legitimation It is an absolute process of

are extended through it.

UrritonaliMtion.

sovereignty as order becom organises itself as a machi

through and structures territory. T h r o u g h the > organised, and structures of auth

inut

the connection

Modern sovereign states have, in the course of the centuries of their hegemo-

between administration and territory becomes intimate and full. The nature

ny, exported their absolute power outside of the territories they had originally inte-

Increasingly within the dynani

mic regime (mercantilist or liberalist) matters little; the nature of

grated and moulded within the rules of domination Imptnahem (as also colonial-

al regime (absolutist, aristocratic or p o p u l a r ) also matters little.

ism) consisted of occupying zones of the world, and exploiting peoples to whom

he ei the p<

of modern sovereign

pace f\

bsorbed into the scenarios of sovereignty in ways that are

increasingly coherent, and each particular) progres

structured by the whole in a

rresistible m a n n e r

was denied, by tins means, the possibility of acceding to territorial or national so ereignty. In the territories of imperialism, order, legitimation and adnurustranon are not auto-centred, but are functional to and dependent on the imperialist star

n a while before it combines w i t h that of sov-

Thus far we have posed a number of premises enabling us to get the meas-

National sovereignty, at the start of the nineteenth century, was not in

ure of the earthquake which is today shaking the old paradigm of sovereign

opposition to sovereignty; rather it perfected the modern concept of sovereign-

order. A n earthquake which touches all the elements of the old order, and

It takes the concept of

It is a powerful specification of sovereignty, which exalts the connection

which has created oPa

tinctures wherein many hypotheses exist side by side,

b<

en sovereign and subjects, and at the same time the potency of the whole.

and in which one can identify a number of tendencies at work. The changes

Th


under way are so profound and extensive that we are not yet ,n a position to

self-su

ral r ethnic and economic entity within w h i c h the spiritual

ement overdetermines the sum of its determinations. T h e process of legitimam is hypostasized in nature and/or in the spirit Between Sieyes and Novalis, between Fichte and M a z z i n i , between Hegel and Hertzel, the concept of nation that of sovereignty, and makes the space of sovereignty an absolute ei

he concept of national sovereignty, territory and people are like two ites of one same sul

crates this ur tern

ce, and government is the relation which conse-

The modern concept of sovereignty, in its close relationship to

is carried to extreme consequences

identify directions of development with certainty; they do. however, permit »n fact thev demand — new parameters of anaKsis. Today the first element t h . . » obv,ous i. .ha. thi. earthquake hakes the old paradigm of order in «>

^

Z

Z

tion ,o space, .he progression towards a space tha. s mere The parad.gm of order is forced I

. * £ * » Z

g

* £

-ne to terms With a space w

dWond determinations - or worse, a space .ha, ,. hmuless. Ihe elements wh.ch should permit us to define Ata breakdown and £ * £ i Tk»«#» ;*re (he bonw, rrumey, anu ««~ approach to a new power scenario. I nese are

191

^ ^

Am

The I

|ilfIofl

B<

All th„ began between 1'

, n i , !<,:

hen

^

^

the dollar and end rvertbibty, thus puttrng an end |on. J ^ Z feed exchange rates. The end of Bretton Woods. The consequence ofTI I m the highly aleatory nature of the market* „nich m o n e v e r y soon re , n o n s (band themselves subordinated to movements , overeignt; ..n th)S situation national money tends to lose all char* the dollar, which seemed to have taken on a role as a measure or "standard" of the Iter moneys become* increasingly subordinated i n a a l markets And mis< paradox.cilly. becomes obvious with the fall of the Berlin Wall, in oth , n | s from the moment in which - the Cold War having been won - the USA fmds itself deprived oi command rent by its allies. A national money, with the < i d which it had during the period of moden nconceivable todav. At this level too, the process of globalisation becomes a very powerful agent of radical transformation With a series of dramatic consequence^

lrom

The development of nuclear technologic me of the elements that has L the basis the present thquake. It his development that we owe the reign of terror which has maintained stability over the "thirty glorious years" of Kevnesian development; but more particularly we owe to the bomb the extension of the notion of limit nty to the great majority ol countries ol the monopoly of legitimate physical force — thi n one of the original qualifications of sovereignty. Today this qualification, which once included the ability to declare war, no longer belongs to the great majority of states. Major trs begin to become unthinkable; not, however, small wars, limited conflicts, international policing operations, civil wars, dirty wars, guerrilla wars, etc, etc. It was within this perspective that the bomb first appeared, as Gunther Anders was already pointing out in the 1950s: it was the operation of a violence that was absolute, a new metaphysical horizon which deprived sovereignty of its own territory and denied resistance the possibility of action. And yet this dialectic of deterritorialisation finds — or rather could find — a limit in imperial heqenwny. or in the necessity o\ imposing a new order, of imposing a new territorialisation on growing processes of deterritorialisation. /,< this new he. At really in the process of formation? The conditions for it are there: however this does not mean that this new hegemonic pole necessarily has to emerge as a sovereign continuity of the old order (the USA, for example); it might instead be made up of an ensemble of international powers and organisations. The game is on. and bets — and hypotheses — are being placed on which tendency will eventually win. In any event — and this is the element that I want to stress — the sovereign monopoly of legitimate physical force (which is one of the key characteristics of the modern concept of sovereignty), is here completely sidelined. Even in a scenario where world hegemony was conquered by an old power (the USA, for example), the content of u\* sovereignty would have to be completely and radically requalified: the worldwide extension of domination modifies the form of that domination. Imperial sovereignty presents itself as a nuclear terrttoruiluation of a universal Mem ition: here w e have a useful initial definition of imperial hegemony. rial

1. The impossibility ol monetary regulation at the national level — whether in Kevnesian, or simply monetarist, terms; 2. The definitive undermining ol all processes ol welfarist intervention at sovereign ^lch derives lrom the national level, and the crisis of democr that tact; 3. The push towards the construction of regional and multinational organisations/groupings, with the aim of building a relative resistance to the po of finance and illation, and thus to create new possibilities (illusions) I planning their own future; 4. The e n rgence. in the chiaroscuro of the -in curren) as imperial»**&• Hi bile modern cies (dollar. 1 is becoming increasingly I "d the proce global deter tonalisati. with the construction ol the world m here is a hint feility of lemtoruiluuUion, which is unilateral - not construed but solelv on political values Is this possible hat moneta .1 alien* nd in what forms, and within what t.me-scale) to the n ol the dollar

other currenc

m imperial w

M<

The construction of the work* market is a second element of the earthquake which we are experiencing. This has involved, in the first place, a monetary deconstruction of national markets, and of national and/or regional contexts of monetary 192

THH ETUI R

Th, , n g of language and defen. I nonalsys, and the p, *»


£

{",•

The Crm* of Political Space

"t

substance of sovereigi rogatives. However from now on all this is dissolved I the airwav odern systems t mmunication are not subordinated to sovere {uite the contrary, sovereignty is subordinated i mmunication In the field of communication, the paradoxes implied in the dissolution of te rial and/or national sovereignty, and by the breakdown in the singu lahsed relationship between order and space, are taken to extremes. In faj communication c for deterritorialisation is wholly original, it no longer merelv limi weakens modern sovereignty; it removes even the possibility of a link between a given order and a given space Kxcept within the compk lanty of signs and the indefatigable continuity of that circularity. From this there derives a conception of territory as circulatory territory" and therefore the impossibility of singularising the relationship of order to territory. Deterritorialisation is the prtmurrw circulation is the form in which it unstoppably manifests ind thus in the ether languages become functional to circulation and dissolve all relations of sovereignty. As for education and culture, they have no choice but to subject themselves to the "society of the spectaclt In this experience we reach an outer limit in the dissolution of the relationship between order and space: henceforth we can only view this relationship thin xin other place — an "elsewhere" which is original in being uncontainable 'hin the articulation oi the sovereign act. The space of communication is completely deterritorialised. It is absolutely other, in relation to the residual spaces that we have identified in analysing the isis ol the the monopoly of legitimate physical force, and that of the definition of monetary measure. What we have here is not a residue, but a rnetanwrpho* a metamorphosis of all the elements of political economy and theory of the ate. which derr rn the fact that we have entered a phase of real ,uib~ vr of society within capital. In other words, communication is the form of the capitalist process of production at the point where capital has conquered and subjected to itself the whole of society, in real terms, globally, by suppressing any margins of alternative ver an alternative is to be proposed, this will ve to be done through the intermediary of the society of real subsumption, and it will have to be constructed within it, playing up new contradictions. The alternative will be posed within the "new/' in fact within the "very new." The imperial tendency is also oper rial within the ether. Once again tl tendency is seen at first sight in the continued existence of American power ami in sion. The space which is being created with this breakdown of relans of sovereignty is very often American However in none of the situations whi< h we have examined is the reference to the function of imperial reterritohsation more unstable than here. Unlike what is happening on the terrains oi nd money, communication is actually a relation oi production, involving

d e v e l o p ™ , of capital and, at the . a ™ t,me. a transformation of the force, of production. Th, S dynamic produces a powerfully open situation ,n whLh onfrontation with the power of social sub.ects American power comes „ j | .hose who are increasingly actively involved ,n the interactive producrion of communication. In th.s place more than any other, which ,s a place of c.rcu | a I l o n , .mpenaJ dom.nahon over the new form, of production/communication has proved to be uncertain. the

The earthquake which has destroyed territorial and/or national sovereignty is thus deep and thorough-going. The space of politics becomes undefinable and within it we can no longer count on the functioning of dialectical connections, or even simply of functional connections. In the formal subsumption of world space to capital there still existed intermediations which ofTered points of reference to given biopolitical processes. Today we can consider the Fordist period as having been a phase of transition (from formal subsumption to real subsumption) within which, little by little, all determinai rend to be erased. We find ourselves looking at a space which is smooth, with occasionally a few variously striated zones, a space that is unified, and periodically identifiable by the hierarchies which run through it. a space that is invested by a continuous circulatory movement, within which one can occasionally perceive resistances Or, again, to put it in another way, we are living in a universal suburb, characterised by variations of speed — sometimes one can iden entres, on this desolate horizon, maybe one, maybe many, but at an\ event what we have here is a power which invests a new space, a new pone r Obviously, our problem is to decide whether this new space is in the process of being organised, and if it is, then we must desenbe how How is tl new deterritorialisation expressing itseU in terms of administration. I do not necessarily think that it is possible to advance more broadly in this direction But it would nevertheless be useful to pose a number of premises, or. rather, to anticipate an ideal type which might enable clarification ol the road to be followed. The ideal type of empire could be useful to us. It is radically different from the concept of imperialism (which consisted, as we have seen, in a spe ition of sovereignty) because the space of empire is without preconstituted determinations; it centre which is dislocated over numbers of terrains, and which "lates without finding obstacles. Within a unified world-space, individual states combine within fluxes and networks that are always in movement; countries exist in a context in which peace is guaranteed by a permanent and elective policy of international policing. When this breaks down, conflicts are isoare weakened lated. In all cases, the sovereign characteristics of single si I recomposed within collective functions of the market and the organisation °l communication and policing.

W

Ant.

I

ri

\frnu rh,

nuchoftl Cling of th taract lct .i|>. same tok much oJ the new nl nd \\ I til ulai I the emergen* e and there break the Oaf niri entity), | n nr *e descnj vioing an understanding of the s of moving beyond mere mamles>damental n B of the em} ragmenta nd tl> org. ng in a unitary manner within the fragmen within the complex, within the intermingling and control dentin^ Posts ologies haw made great pL ih a given situation t not perceived the new structuring dynamic. which, up until i It was tnd Deleuze wh st grasped the figure of empire (conom the point the construction of an ideal type). The th nodel h they propose \^\- the evolution of the political re$: dermtv (from "ancun regin to "disciplinary society, to identifies the dynamic of weakening sovereignty within the "control SCK transition trom disciplinary society to the control society — not as something mescent. but quite the com as modernisation and optimisation. "Control sot - the framework within which imperial power is deployed. In raising imit «mmand to an enormously high level, the possibility of mediathe m the resolution nflicts and therefore the dynamic requahfication of all particularities within the process of power, becomes very much greater. Force and discipline are thus included writhin politics of control. But let us now take a look at the model of empire which Polybius constructed The Roman empire, we are told by this Greek intellectual who lived in Rome, was a synthesis of the three forms of government defined by classical antiquity: the empire was monarchic with the emperor, aristocratic in the nate. and democratic-republican in its tribune fur ns. And what about today 7 Is what we are seeing in the organisation of a new imperial power once again Polybi threefold model? Perhaps. A definitive monarcl litre, the exclusive holder of force, has not yet emerged, although one cai that it is increasingly identifiable in tendency. But the two other aspects of the model require the imperial synthesis are there: on the one hand the finanItocracy and the di* ipline which it imposes on substantial fractions of overall labour power at the worldwide level; and also the republican power of > pi i nary reflex which is embodied in what is left oi the sincontrol, or th gle national states, and which asingly represented in a contractual role in relation to the imperial authority. The empire is thus there, ju> >und the corner, waiting for us inexorabl as something which is already in place. As a political philosophy, post-modern» oeen a warning sign telling of empire — sad and inadequate, but eft*

Tie I

far Stronger and more real are the warning siirn. tU * w i i «M»ung signs that are etched in tU„ , s es and the temporary p a u « s of the ,utive° „ , etched " *e .tradiction. between procedures. Incnatinfy 4tr^ hen we consider j pace o f t h e p r o p e r ^

Ucomt

economy and the political, of the legal and the illegal, and when the traditionJ constderatK d law and the social (not forgetting the moral) comes up against the spatial opening-up of empire In the lives , m a n d commun.i a large part of public activity is her th devoted to the resolution of these n of the procedures which govern them, and thus conflicts, to the recompo to the "management" of these hybrid spaces. We trly have to ask whether the life of empire - in this, which would be its first real form - rather than being invoked for the solution of major international conflicts, should not here be invoked to deal with the individual conflicts affecting the material aspects of the existence of peoples and nation This now brings me to my final formulanon. For me it is so fundamental th would be very happy if it found an equal footing in everything that I have said so far, even in reductive fashion — because it is no less essential. My conclusion is the following: the breakdown of the modern relation between order and space is a radical rupture, the sign of a mutation of paradigm. What this rupture presents to critical thought and action is a new traructnfanlal oi tlx poL When politics is looked at within the dimension of empire, one can no longer com if in the dimension single national spaces. From now on, concepts ot politics, sovereignty legitimation, administration etc are completely thrown into question — they certainly go into crisis, they may be subject to re-arrangement, but in the long term they are also open to overthrow and subversion, because they no longer ha elation to the old paradigm of national, international, territorial and cosmopolitical order. Toii the multinational level is played out within a space that is quasi-national. There are no alternatives to the vertically of the new imperial power - the only alternatives are in who will actually own imperial powe D it be the or a conglomerate of different sovereign states that will take power over the empire'?), or in the games that might be played in term ransversalirv In any event we are already right m there. \V e are citizens of this world which is preparing to make public ita new utternational organisation - in other w o r * * * * ^ ' ^ * Whether or not one agrees with this development, we must necessarily view it hie, and we will have to recognise that many of the contradictions which as b democr action has experienced hitherto are going to reproduce j j ^ 1 ^ terrains thai are infinitely more complex. From now on power can ony trom within the framework of this new political transcendental. TRANSLATED BY E D EMERY

h)

196

i j * * ^ ^ .

PART THREE

T H E CRITIQUE OF THE POLITICAL

11 T H E CAPITALIST STATE: ILLUSION AND CRITIQUE

Werner Bonefeld

i Johannes Agnoli has reminded us of the need to complement Ma tique of political economy with the critique of the political, of the state. Marx never wrote his projected book on the state. This has let generations of Marxists to argue over "the" Marxist theory oi the state.1 Would Marx's book on the state really have been a theory of the state — and not a critique of the state? Yet. it was a theory of the
I The assumption that Marx's work ence leads naturalh lemand for a Marxist theory oi the state. This can either be done in terms of the so-called state der ion debate of the 1970s, or in terms of a Marxist pohtual theory aas< fed with the work of Poulantzas. The derivation debate sought I "derive" the category state from Marx's A /. The economy was seen as the base from which to "derr • the categones of the political "superstructure." This was not a "derivation" of categories from human social relations — but a derivation oi the political from the ecom he economic was presupposed and the politi ippeared as a mere derivative of economic categories.5 The Poulantzerian offer of a Marxist political theory amounted to a highly complex theor I maze which externalised structure and struggle, separated the economic from the political, leading to the laracterisation oi living labour as a structural agent capable of reproducing those same structures that rendered the agent an exploitable resource. Poulantzas (lc^ >aw his work as a contnbution to Marxist political theory that corresponds to so-called Marxist economics. 6 In short, "Marxist" political theory accepted the bourgeois separation between the political and economi rendering Marx's enunciation of "critique" harmless and without bite. The net result c larxist" political theory was a division between abst theory and a descriptive — or higher journalistic — account of "social reality." Political theory — whether Marxist or not — deals with constitution in terms tate-building and political emancipation. There is no need here to review at length Marx's critique of political emancipation. He equated political emancipation with the integration of labour into the capital relation as a labouring commodity, as wage labour. This integration entails the suppression of human emancipation. This is the classic quotation: All emancipation is a return of the human world and human relationships to humans themselves. Political emancipation is the redu 1 of man, on the one hand, to a member of bourg* society, an egOi and independent individual, on the other hand, to a citizen he state, a moral person. Not until the real individual man has taken the abstract citizen back into himself and, as an individual man, has become a species-being in his empirical life, in his individual work and individual relationshi not until man recognises and organises his propre**' as social forces and thus no longer separates so< ial forces om himself in the form of political es, not until then will human emancipation be completed. (Marx, 1964, p. 370).

/.*/<,/ ft* IBmm an

ilu,

The notion, then o{ a Marxist political theorv am„ • r «- meory amounts to the renewal cS ol bourgeois political thought and, because of its ^ u T l u tht t. own right, the suppression of human L ^ 9 U t e as a iub Marx's d< >ve cntiqiH , replaced by a constructive c n t i q u e ^ aims, m it ormist gu.se, at a fairer integration of labour into the capital re la ,volutionary guise the central planning of economic resources' | l o n a l l c i in A including the resource ot human labour. Whereas Marx (1983 p 447) ^ a labourer is ...not a piece of luck, but a misfortunT?"ne lh at to be a prod* proclamation ol the soc r republic oi labour presented this misfortune as h
II There is no doubt that a critique of the political is needed There is no doubt also that this critique cannot be enunciated as a theory of the state i\Wx did not have an economic theory nor a theory of crisis as opposed to a "theory- of accumulation" or a "theory of something." Marx supplied a critique of political economy, including a conceptualisation of the categor His project was not to offer analytical tools for the fine-tuning of a perverted world but. rather, to negate capital, including its state. This negation does not amount to a "closed" dialectical analysis that culminates in the negation of the negation, and therewith the reconciliation with bourgeois relations of power (Hernnbdthirrhaltnwse). His critique is negative and destructive Agnoli )92, p. 45) puts it, "Marx wanted neither to construct nor affirm He wanted primarily to negate This critique is of course not a critique for critiques sake It criticises the perverted forms of capital in order to bnnt be lore their social foundation, that is the human basis of their existence Marx's critique, then, is subversive: the ique of the perverted forms entails their conceptualisation as forms of human existence and thus as forms through which human mn subsists in the mode of being denied In short, it seeks to make visible what is hidden behind the so-called structures and their apparent incestuous relations with themselves, their self-relations, and to reveal the human being which stands condemned as a mere resource or as a factor of production, as he basis of human existence. The Foul* ^man existence can only be human being herself 8 .-A), economic: theoo ,f l Man ( -ption ln contrast to Marx's radical >! uialvticaJ derivation, U ry. and with it all theory that announces a proj< L . k# n< annoum ,orld where the human b ^ o b t a i n s ed to accept the world o Hal as a ^ - - • '~_^ ^ i m p r o v e its effect ^ l o| production that requires more fine tuning to

Werner /*/>

//v

'

t.it,- in ...

eni. and economic usage. The analytical derivation ol human existence m the preauppoted world ol hypothesised structures not only accepts with gan that work is liberating. It also accepts the cornjuestion the de.ull meal levement. The modified existence of human social pra< tice as histoi circumstance that these structures presuppose the bloody grimace of exploit ther quietly overlooked or prudently forgotten In short, the dem the human being from presupposed Structure* is not only traditional in al approach and perspective but. also, politically ictionary. The ures does not inquire derivation of the human being from hypothesised st about the foundation of the human world and instead presupposes that this 1 comprehension — it is said to reside in the invisible undation is be hose hand makes the world ^o round. The acceptance of the invisible hand as the administrator ot not really lead to a >us circle of metatheories It leads, in fa^t, to the return of traditional theory's most pressing conrn. f ro legitimate I mg relations of power. The "original position" of I of an ancilla mU [servant to existing powers]. political th world we inhabit is our world, rather The weapon of critique shows tha than the world ot capital, a world created by human practice, dependent upon human social practice and open to the constitutive power of human practice. Thus the Marxum notion that the emancipation of the working class can only be the work of the working class itself This emancipation can not rely on the ^e labour is already a perversion; it is age relation The category ot pren on human social practice as a commoditied practice. However "real" this perversion, it only supplies an understanding of the movement of fetishised forms It does not provide an understanding of the constitution of these forms. m shows the absurdity of a world in which humans critique or I ist, and exist so with necessity, in the form of personified conditions of production, the personification of things. The standpoint of critique shows the other side — i.e , the social constitution — ol this strange, and murderous, personification It shows human sensuoi tivity, an activity which exists against n the commodified form of wage labour. Thus the critique ol capital I individualised, alienated labour, a labour amounts to a critique of "labour whose social existence confronts the individual producers as an external and ndent thing. Capitalist social relations rest on the divorce of the mass ot the population from the means of production. This divorce was the result ol primitive accumulation and it is the presupposition on which the capital] vploitation of labour rests. Capital, as Marx (1972, p. 492) argues, is "the form .sumed by the conditions oi labour" and t! . .f labour that is free from n mean bject-less free labour* (Marx, 1973, p. 507) "under the command ipital" (ibid., p. 508). M critique of political economy reveals the human

haait of capital!

rme. Thia com

">*•&** Mjnngcomr mode ol produ, tiorj on which bourgeois pur » d feed, was exposed It stood n T ! i ' M

, n d lKa!

'**

of a ,tabl1

"d

nIU1

*«* * • n e g a t i v e d of h. \ ° ' ^ ph,,oso h humanity «s not a resource but a purpose P .V at In sum, Marx's call for revolution stands ,n J. attempts of supplying a theory of the state Pn . L ^ ' ^ * in Mai language or not , m o u n t s fo ~ ^ ~ Aether couched ence in the capital relation more agrL xT?** dered redundant m favour of a more F™ iheoi ination

prCS t^"* ^ ' communism is ren-

the state, is that of becomin^corm^ . U v™ hich it is officially opposed ' " ^ ^

" * * * °F *nd '

III The human being ,s inseparable, th. can not be un|e$s through fo , „ d violence, into an , ir o f p r n amj rated from ,t. a political being endowed with the n, n s h l p In b o , r . geois sot however this separation is real in practice: the separat -he human being from the means of production and thl !u ted these as capital, underlies tlu n between the polid nom. i c The "logic .aration" is th, al generation pi ^ I()' 2 | 2) and "the whole system ol Jist production is based on th that the workman sells his labour-power as a commod >83, p It { 1,sse ' I labour from her means that supports the convent! MU the atomic In other the state as a structure which while the economist treats human purposeful a produt.tion.tli. us of the polit. falls on the den ntiiiKhn i the social and political rights and dun* en However, the as a person endowed so-called human factor ol production is no le< with ec|ual rights and conversely the citizen is no less a factor of production as a wage-labouring commodiJ the the theory of the state, is fundamental! flirmaiive theor ahon, and that is a theory of pc is our. Utituted powei It presupposes the existence of labour as object-le as a labouring commodity and. because ol this presupposition, contributes to the containment oi labour as a bun factor ot production. The sep I lab rom her n nst.tut.ve of the apparent relative autonomy of the political from the econon ad conversely, the rela

rntr bone ft Id autonomy of the economic from the political. In bourgeois society, the eman i pation of the political from society amounts to the creation of a political svste that administers the common concerns of bourgeois society and supervises th proper conduct oi bourgeois exchange relations. The political emancipation of the state entails its role to guarantee the relations of abstract equality. Th emam ton of the rests on these relations and that is, it is based on the separation of living labour from her means and secures the continuous reproduction of this separation through law and order. Hence, the attempts of political theory to construe the state as a distinct form of political organisation that resides outside social relations and that merely intervenes from the "outside," into society to secure and guarantee the foundations upon which the society of burghers rest: the rights of private property. Everybody is equal before the law and as equals, all are treated identical as abstract citizens endowed with standardised rights. The state, in sum, guarantees the equality of rights in the inequality of property. The state then supervises the commensurathe relations of inequality with the relations of equality — the reducdifference to equality in law and money. The specific character of human beings is thus denied and their existence as mere character-masks of exchange relations is affirmed as if these were a person apart. Auschwitz, as Adorno reminds us, not only confirmed the violence of the bourgeois relations of abstract equality and abstract identity. It also confirmed the bourgeois exchange relations of pure identity as deatl In sum, the critique of political economy amounts to the critique of the form of the state: the form of the state does not stand outside history but it is rather the organisational form of a capitaiisticall; mg and bourgeois {burqerlich) constituted society. The form of the state, as Marx put it in the Grundri is the concentration of bourgeois society. The then, is the political form of bourgeois society; it is the form in which the safeguarding of the equality of rigl focused politically. The law of the (labour-) market presupposes, as its conditions, the capitalist state that protects the inequality in property through the safeguarding of the equality of rights, of abstract equality. Every social crisis which upsets the political sounds the death warning of this separation of the human being into, on the one hand, an economic factor of production, and citizen on the other. The constitutive basis of bourgeois society is the inseparable essence of human existence: living labour While, in other words, "the subdivision of labour is the assassination of a people" (Urquhart, quoted in Marx, 1983, p. 543), it consolidates the "original" separation of labour from its conditions through further and further fragmentations of the social labour process. Yet, however much social labour is fragmented, divided and subdivided, human cooperation remains "the fundamental form of the cap-

206

™*frtos**m*mmac*im u.tlist mode of production" (Marx, 1983

^I7\

their would be neither production nor^xchan TV ^""^ c o o P e r * i o * against itself in the commodity-form that i n t e e r ^ . k • c o o P e r a t i o n «""* aMa sina pie" with the respectful forms equal and fr, u * «"°n of a p, excha tected and safeguarded by the state " g e relations that are pro-

IV

mate law and money. Within the framework of bour^ii. P.—i-I *_ . »n terms of bourgeois freedom, "individual" freedom is the freedom of contract betw een equals regardless of their inequality in property. The law in its abstract majestic form treats poor and rich as equals. It treats the owners of the means of production and the free labourer as identical subjects, as legal subjects. The law is blind to privileges. It is a law of equality Contractual relations represent the form ,n which, according to law freedom obtains in the form of a legally bound recognition of private individuals in their relation to one another. The contract is the juridical form of freedom - the master of the contract is the state. Neither does the law "announce" itself as if it were a force in its own right. Nor does the law "enforce" itself. The law requires the maker of the law to fill it with material force, that is to implement it indiscriminately, imposing upon social relations the abstract quality of their existence as personifications of formal equality The capitalist state rests on the social constitution ol these rights and protects them through the regulation of law and money. This, then, is the subordination of social relations to the law of private property, that is equality, freedom and Bentham. The treatment of all as equals before the law characterises the form of the state as an "illusory community" (i Marx and Engels, 1962). It treats the real existing individual as constituted "character-masks" or "personifications" (on this Marx, 1983). and espouses the interest that is common to all character-masks: their universal existence for each other as a resource, as a utility The capitalist state posits the political lorm of the separation of human social practice from her means. The abstract citizen endowed with human rights and the wage-labourer endowed with the freedom of contract are two sides of the same separation. Each individual is treated as an equal in law Instead of despotism, the state imposes order through law; instead of relations of conflict, the state administers contractual relations of social interaction; instead of privileges, the state imposes upon social relations the free and

r Btfr

d market relations thl in tl ge tela (he co< le^ ion« I* the coer va

politii rganisatu.n «»l the working class IK. m ol the state entaila — or, rather, u n of social emaiu i] our of the [ualit) This guarantee of the rights of pri ter of the it forbidl poor and

juallv to steal bread. respond to, or reproduce, ecoThe political relations do not primarik relat I both relations merek followed their own separate laws of pment. Rather, the political implements the i as, together, dit ent forms of th imental class antagonism. The political guaranntract amounts to tl nment of labour in the perverted form of wage labour, that is the commodity form through which human productive po apitali l a capitalist state not because the bourge< I the good offices ol the state. It is a capitalist state because n: the sej the political trom society. This separation rests on the original separation of the mass ot the population trom the means of sub>n of the state from society entails the e and production. The sepai llence ot the original accumulation of capital as the master of the law, the state monopolises the violence ol the original separation in terms of law and order, that is it imposes the condition of separat of expropriation, upon I labour power through the enforcement ol the law of abstract equalit The content of the state is thus expressed in i rm, that is the emancipation the political from the economic. This emancipation is a mode ot existence of the separation ot labour trom her means and their existence as capital. The m ot the capitali ate » unction to guarantee the separation ot om her means through the pr< the rights of private properot the capitalist its on this separation. The other side The existe labour's existence as a labouring commodity whose rights an ed through law and order. The law does not discriminate. It tre.< all owners ommodities as equals. The separation of the political trom the onomic entails the state as an apparently "impartial regulator of the rule of abstract equality, protecting the owner of labour power I the owner ot the of prott iuallv against theft the state guarantees the rights ot between capital and labour and thereby safeguard* the propei rights of capital as rights ot exploitation and appropriation. This, then, is what azzzi (1995) refers to as the im tion of work through the commod rm, an imposition that is poll! ised in the form of the state as the ol the law <'I ai i equaltl The law of capital con

through the , n i .gressive exploitation of |„. I n g | a b o herewith surplus value. The individual capitalist T *" ^ °f Value a n d capital, in order to preserve ltl hut extend it he ca m C ° n s t a m l y t o c x Pa n < ; gressive accumulation" (Marx, 1983, p 555) ^ " ^ l e X C e p t b-v m e a n s rf promediated through competition, personified capil] " ^ ^ " ^ dlv bent on making value expand itself T* ^ ^ t * * a C t , ° n ruthlessly forces the human race to produce for produc ^ ^ ^ *#* -the mass of human beings exploited bv him" fflSTT ^ \ ""****«« "object-lees labour." Each individua 1 L. , P^ dtt*nd* °" has to be e x p e l l e d form production so as to reduce neces a n l a b 7 ""* tutive site of surplus labour, to its utmost The r e l a T T \ imosl . 1 J I IL , . ine relationship between necessarv labour and surplus labour ,s that ot the constituent parts of the working d a ^ S the class r e l a u o n ^ istitutes it Capital , - onl v ,n ^ t h e s i s t ,g 8 labour as the substance o value. Yet, this anti-thesis v m m e t n c a l ln that ,tal can not liberate itself from labour. This is only possible on labour's side Capital has to reduce necessary labour to increase surplus labour and a same time i m p o s e necessary labour upon the worlds working class so as to assert itself as a "perennial pumping-machine of surplus labour" (Marx, l%o. p 822). Labour, in short, does not stand external to capital. Rather, il ,s a presence - a constitutive presence - in capital. Labour is the substar. value. Let us recap. T h e state enforces the norms of private property and therewith safeguards the social recognition of these norms. This relation of the state to so* implies that private individuals exist as abst< ndividuals endowed act citizens. The politi with standardised rights and, as such, treated as regulation ol law a n d order denies the existence ass. At the same time, behind the sanction o f the right of property there lies the doubly tree labourer n the hands of capital. Behu and the concentration of the mean formal equality and formal freedom lie d reproduction in the form of t a I The formal safeguarding of rights entails the substantive gu.i exploitation, rendering the state inseparable from the economic and v The guarantee o f exploitation through law and order obi ihrough th antee of contract, that is the legal form through which the exploitation ol labour inverts hem «1 its exalted transcends subsists. T h e form ot tl >n as the incarnation o f political emancipation, to the political master of the of ualitv. safeguarding expl. >n through the guar and pr

tionol ti ided reproduction of the divorce of the

mass of humanity from the means ol production This can be achieved onl\ 308

hiding the commod

d u c t i v e p . , - . thai i s h age-labouringThe form content as the political organiser of the "republic of the market

* ^entails

Werner BonefelJ

In sh the political guarantee of contract, the provision of law and i enforcement, involves the state in the containment of labour's constitutive presence in the capital relation not only through the legalisation of the social relay s of production but, also, their stratification. The legalisation of social rela>ns presupposes their stratification, and vice versa. The state, then, does not intervene" into bourgeois society Rather, it is the organised force of bourgeois society • and as such seeks to secure the reproduction of the social relations of production in politically supervised, legally controlled, non-conflictual forms; in short in ^ i\ ilised forms of violence. The bourgeois separation, then, between the political and the economic, the so-called relative autonomy of the political, is real — it has a real existence. It is real in terms of the formal mode of existence of the political. It is, in other words, as real as the fetishism of the value form which reports a human world that obtains merely as a derivative of the relations between the things themselves. The critique of fetishism shows a different world, a disenchanted world that rests on human social practice however perverted or enlightened this prace might be. The acceptance of the constituted fetishism of the state as an independent power, as a power in its own right, merely espouses the bourgeois identification of the state as an indispensable protector of private property. The form of the state thus indicates formal freedom and formal equality as "community, the content of which is the "perpetuation of the labourer" — the "sine qua non of the existence of capital" (Marx. 1983, p. 536). The "autonomised power of the state" (cf. Marx, 1974, p. 882) entails its content of upholding the rights of contract. This puts the state right back into the society of burghers. The state and economy, then, do not exist as two different form of social organisation. Rather, the state is a bourgeois state. It is inseparable form bourgeois society. It is, as M a r x (1973, p. 108) put it the "concentration of bourgeois society." In conclusion, in contrast to Poulantzas' attempt at a political theory of the state, Marx's critique of the state as the "concentrated and organised force of socie Varx. 1983, p. 703) entails the critique of the fetishism of the state form as something that guarantees the universal rights of M a n and whose power is such that, given the right conditions, it can be used to implement and secure these rights against the special interests of capital. The state no doubt appears as an impartial administrator of political space and impartial upholder the right of property independently from each commodity owner. However, >bject-Iess" and because of this is condemned the circumstance that labour to perform as a commodity under the command of capital, gives the game away The "concentration of the coercive character of bourgeois society in the form ot the state" (Agnoli, 1990) posits the state, in regard to labour, as an instance ol oppression (containing labour as wage labour) and, at the same time, An

The CafutahM Stau ///,„.,

mce ol her wage-labouring existence m ci I 18 ol pril m ludes the g, ( t e e oHhew " " Wagt nteti the property nh> !nc w o r k e r • . <• * • V " l calthe

<* ^ e state • . i e p e r p e t u ^ K "« ^ " '•P- 3 3 > ^ co,. ion.th ZZij!"* l-litical philosophy lenses

atmg and therewith p.

ng, or peace-making, deceitful

pul

*

nsus cre-

Marx argued m the 18th Brumaire, that all political upheavals h perfected the state instead of smashing it There is no doubt th, J_ _ heavals" are quite incapable of realising Marx's ideal of 'the so ol the free and equal" (cf. Agnoli, 2000). The existence of the > ] * as an ap, entlv distinct form of social organisation presupposes the notion of bourg. revolution. Bourgeois revolutions allow mere r the pol emar the individualised individual as a bearer of the universal ngh equality. Capital's perpetual requirement lor new beginning* less d destr perpetual new beginning for labour, for labours product) power upon whose containment capital depends Within the established relations of the class antagonism between capital of labour, bourgeois revolutions merely allow for a history with a bloody and grotesque grimace — a grimace whose violence is as elementary as it is meaningless > In short, they manifest the delusions of bourgeois freedom — bt nulate abstract wealth I mutation I sake. In these I, the promise ol I better world, a human world, where human digm: is the < of the society of the free and equal, where humanity is a purpose sed as the freedom of private property, i freedom where humanity obi as an exploitable resource. The political guarantee of abstract equaln edom and Bcntham lm OH so relations th nditions of their existence as mere 'lions the accumulation of abstract wealth The gi tee. then, of th piW right al involves tin- attempt to bin guarding! alidation of monetary claims on the future « riofla form ot the in the present through for. , In tins process, the eelf-contrad I he "harmonies' last refuc - h*r™™* °' " j mal equality and formal freedom upon which exploitation I The state as the harmonies luge represents thus nmunal interest **

211 210

grantee it guarh

rtgela

imposing I

hang*

|uality through the a.-

mg 0 |

MI rela' he meaning rormofnumc ition of mom ivolves the political safeguarding of economic freedom as td abst average of equality, the ii n of which is mm I he state entatiw ol "money" as the most elee as the collecm e property, involving law and order control as its prementary torm of pi mdition, premise and result The imposition of the value form involves not onlv the subordination of social relatio 0 money capitals impossible, but no less and necessanl lent, quest ol making money out of money but, more fundamentally the monetary decomposition of class relations on the basis of the age relation. 1 0 Capital has to contain labour as the condition of its own existence. The antagonism between capital and labour involves, as already reported, the contra >n that capital has to impose necessary' labour upon the arid a working class and at the same time reduce necessary labour to the utmost so as to increase surplus labour. The other side of the exploitation of bour's productive powei ipitalist overaccumulation — bette overaccumulation is the false name that is given to overexploitation. From labours perspective, then, the exploitation of her productive power leads not only to the overaccumulation of capital. The development of her productive power is also limited by capital. Full employment is intelligible as the ideal state urs only in a society where humanity does not exist as an exploitable resource but as a purpose. For labour, then, her freedom, the free development of her productive power, entails the transformation of the means of production into means of human emancipation. Such emancipation stand in direct contrast to the surrogate community that the state presents. The perpetual increase in labour s produ e power is based on the capita equirement to produce exchange value, ie. money, at the same time as abstract labour, in the form of money, transcends its capitalist form. The other hen. of labour's productive power is the potentially irredeemable accumulation of unemployed capital, of debt. Marx (1966, p. 438) characterised this situation as the abolition of the capitalist mod production within the capihst mode of production itself.'' Within capitalist society, this contradiction can only be contained through force (l ilt) including not only the destruction of productive capacities, unemployment, worsening conditions, and widespread poverty, but also the destruction of human life through war and starvation. I meaningless and elementary as money. Labours antagonism to, its constitutive social power against capital is the other side of money's "i cendental powc Money is now pregnant" (ibid., p. 393) with a future which threatens to push it into the museum of history. The politics of money is intimity oppressive. Everybody is equal before money. M o n e y k n o w s no special

212

privileges, it treats poor and rich as Mluls Tt,. -'I'V 0 volvc ,..e b n p o r i t L of Z Z C C ' " t ^ ™ S power lual exercises over the a. .L * w h i c h each II L .L i otuviiy ot others or over social«.,,i.uh „, n him as the owner of exchange values, ofmmonev TK J T one v T h e ,j a | p o ^ r a e «.,.!! M u:. L . _ J , . individual

equality; it is the social foundation upon which the state rests The violence of capital's original beginning is not abandoned in the imposition of abstract is. Rather, it subsists through the "civilised" forms equality upon social rel law and order, of equality and freedom. These forms are the constituted forms of violence - violence as civilised normality 11 The state of money is the state of law and order. With Marx, we might wish to argue that "theoretical mysteries find their rational solution in human practice and in the comprehension of this pra< (Marx, 1975, p. 5). The productive and destructive power of labour needs, then, to be made manifest theoretically and practically Without such a manifestation of labour's power, history will remain a history of bourgeois revolutions, revolutions that deny human dignity in the name of freedom — the freedom of capital. For social practice to be free and equal, another revolution is required — a revolution where humanity leaves behind its sell-imposed immaturity and becomes a subject in possession of her own affairs. Such a future rests on the abolition of the conditions that render human existence a resour exchanged and accumulated in the form of money and guaranteed by the

VI erThe core "problematic" of Marx's critique is this: how is it possible to undermd the circumstance that human social practice is const.tudve at lime time as human beings appear to be ruled by already existing abstractions. « From within political philosophy, this question is posed, at best, in terms a cr d gap between a less than perfect political real »d the pleasant norms
e|li

I

p. h In this section < rma*& Marx sketches the oj the hoiirgt elation repro. ion as follows everyone ii on everyone else, and each person can only reproduce himself m a s . h as all Others be S means for him. Furthermore, each individual can only pursue and re w n partu ul.ir interests when his conditions of reproduce identical to those of everyone else, are accepted, respected, and »sed by e \t else. The particular will of the individual obtains thus all individuals are u I, which is common to all that through a will in v ersal This universal interest" denotes the bourgeois condition of exis:hrough which particular interests are realised. The individu. ho rule in these conditions — leaving aside the r power must assume the form of the state — have endow their will, which is determined by these definite conth a universal expression as the will of the state, as law. an expression whose content is always determined by the re ns of this class, as the civil and criminal law demonstrates in the clearest possible way. Just as the weight of their bodies d< n their idealistic will or on their arbitrary decion. so also the fact that thev enforce their own will in the form and at the same time make it independent of the personal aj triness of each individual among them, does not depend on their ideal will. Their personal rule must at the same time assume the form of average rule. Their personal power is based onditions which in their development are shared by many individuals* and the continuation of which they, as ruling luals, must preserve in opposition to others while at the ime maintaining that they hold these conditions to be for the good of all. The expression of this will, which is determined their common interests, is the law It is precisely because individuals who are independent of one another assert themselves and th vn will, and because on this basis their attitude to another is bound to be egotistical, that self-denial is made necessary in law and right (ibid., p. 31 ! and assumes the form of the state — the master of the I Marx irk ICH uses on forms, at first on forms of consciousness (i •"" and la hen later on the forms of capital. The focus on forms was identic I the inverted forms of social existence, an existence conhuman s< pra< All thesi .btain as inverted forms 0

"community' that is external to the individuals and f r m they must emancipate themselves in order ever to be abU t ° hviduals" (ibid., p. 700. This central ,dea is D r " ^ ^ ^ * l ° t h e r "" The German Ueoloay: T h e reality [fc, A t f , W l T ! ^ ""P^ticalU co precisely the real [wUUkk] basis for r e n d e r i n g ™™«nisin creates should exist independently of individuals, m so far a l T r ? ^ is thus a matter of deciphering the appearance r&A«»l (

J

u * - < c f . « « , , 8 3 . p. „ , ,„ d ,K„ C

;

.P'

tf. Wrog... of c™™,™*- p.*. ,L, "7, t t ^ J ^ T ** N allowmg I h world, human world, allowing human as character-masks, but Marx sees M-M — c this new

;

^

,

-

;

-

ab l,sh,n £ " °' ° « "wi.l, P ™~1 « % *from the beings to enter mto relationsh.n . beings to enter into relationsh.p with one a L h e T no as social individuals. figure of society anticipated in the

community of revolutionary proletarians, who extend their own control over the conditions of their own existence and those of all members of society. It is as individuals that the individuals participate in it It is exactly this combination of individuals (assuming the advanced stage of modern productive forces, of course) which puts the conditions of the free development and movement of individuals under their control — conditions which were previously abandoned to chance and had won an independent existence over and against the separate individuals precisely because of their separation as individuals" (Marx and Engels, 1962. p 74). aT comparison In sum. the critique of the state is not satisfied with a ' between a less than perfect political reality, on the one hand, and the pleasant norms of equality and liberty, on the other Instead, it scrutinises these normae rights and reveals them as rights which presuppose exploitation and expropriation There is no place for the form of the state in a communist society or in a revolutionary movement. The state is a capitalist state. Its role is to secure the rights of private property through law and its enforcement In conclusion, the form of the state presupposes the separation of the mass of the population from the means of production This separation is the socal basison which the form of the e rests. A so. where the free development of each is the condition for the free development ol all. can not rest on this separation It is this separation that renders human productive power a commoaV The determination of the state as the "concentrated and organised force ot I based on the insight that the idea of 'equal rights is m principle a

TkeCapUalm bourgeois right. In it utent. a right ol inequality (see Marx, \%h n their labour and the sale of their Hen udgcment that all who live |af utelv opposed to the Form in which, hitherto, the mdr hich ts. I given themselves collective m, tthe State; in order, therefore, to assert themselves as indil u a k they must overthrow the S Uld Engels, 1962, p. 77).

OntW .Onthi

Bonrfeld(1995«);„dN. -M. ,dB<

,9

TO1

ii,

>

Spa

Forbid*

draw

''

«thv dbcuuion of this point P«,.

ReicMt (2000).

13 For a

'

Th,s

f>an

.it endorsement of this see. Cdlin*

Hi

Many friends supplied comments I would like to acknowledge in particular ia Dinerstein's useful advice. The usual disclaimers apply. 2 0ntl eeGunn(l 3 On this see Bon K>1) A See Backhaus (1997) for a succinct account on Marx's work as a critique of tegories *UWJ ph aid be wrong, hov r( to view the state deri\ kite in this wholesale w a \ While some contributors derived the state from the anatomy of bourgei' ery and its so-called objective laws of capitalist development \ .iter, 1978), others rejected this economic reductionism and analysed the state as a form of class struggle (Holloway and Picciotto, 1978). The rgument of this chapter builds on this critical contribution (see also Bonefeld. 1992) On the state derivation debate, see Clarke (1991); Holloa nd Picciotto (eds) (1978). The state derivation debate and Poulantzas theory of the state overlap in Hirscl ution. Political theory. i\V t or not, views conflict in essentially constructive terms The characterisation of conflict as a constructive conflict is intnns he notion of a pluralist society and has been influential in the study of a ariet olds such as industrial relations and theories of parliamentary democracy. The understanding that conflict is endemic in a pluralist sociedoes not mean that conflict should be provoked. It means that rules, procedures, and laws are invoked which regulate conflict and through which conflict i an express itself in constn e forms. A theory of the functionality ol I is presented, for example, by Coser (1956) and has been developed within the Marxist framework by Poulai 1975). See also Agnoli ntnbution to this volume. 8 On this see especial is "Contribution to Critiq* Hegel's Philo* °* Intro n," c 182, in Colt •. vol. 3, Lawrence & V irt, London.

Agnoli, J . (1990) Die Transformation der Demokratie und andere Schnhen zur Kntik der Politik. Qa ira. Freiburg -noli, J, (199 destruction as the ermination ot the Scholar ,n Miserable Times," Common Sam, no 12, reprinted in tl Jurm -noli, J . (2000) 'The State, the and the End oi I i n Bone.eld. W. and K. Psychopedis (eds.) The VoL ,M\\^t Lo n d o n Altvater, E. (1978) "Some Problems 0 Intervention, in Holl rid S. Picciotto (eds) 1978. Backhaus, H.G (1997) DuiUknk hr I <;A ira, Freiburg. Benjamin, W (1965) ZurKrUtk \ // tuk b* Suhrkamp, Frankfurt. Bonefeld. W. (1992) "Social Constitution and the Form of the Capital in Bonefeld, W. etal. (eds) Open Man L I. Pluto. London. Bonefeld. W { ] 99 I as Subject and the I Lab in Bonefeld etal (eds.) OptnM vol. Ill, Pluto, London. Bonefeld, W. (1995a) "Money, Equality and Exp! Q Bo d W and J . Holloway (eds.) Globa tfbmdl mi* the PMiL Macmillan, London. Bonefeld, \V (2001) "KapitaJ and if lbtitln the Meaning Critique ( apittil 1117. Bonefeld \\ a n d . I Hollv inBoneh ind J

Polii

5. Wicfo

lone toadtkt

\foney> Macmillai. Londoi

Call., Clarke

,, A (2000) Eij

Coser, i Gun

\

v, Polity, Cambridge. ate Debate. Macmillan. London )

islr,

nMaxUm vol. 11 Pluto4 Londoi «!..,. (. ., , "Tho S u t e Apparatus an.

J. uid S Picciotto («U.) W78.

d.m.mBonefel.

etal (eds

uJi\M id Reproducoon Hollow.

rtifr

fomef

H o l l o w ^ J (I m Scream of Refusal to Scream of Power, u, Bonefeld, W. etal (eds.) Open Mi m vol. Ill, Pluto, London, Hollov, J. and S. Picciotto (1978) Introduction: Towards a Materialist Theory or the State,'' in Holloway, J . and S I (eds) 1978. Holloway. J and S. Picciotto (eds) (1978) State and Capital Arnold. London. >5) "Money in the World Crisis," in Boneltld. W. and J. (eds.) Global Capital, National State and the Politic of Money, Hollov lillan, London. Marx, K. (19t>~l) Zur Jtuknfmgct in MEW 1, Dietz, Berlin. Marx, K *66) Capital vol. III. Lawrence & Wishart, London. ^ MEW Dietz, Berlin. Mb 1968) Kritik fa Gothaer Program* Marx, K <1%9) Die Kta+renk&mp/e in Frtuikreicb 1848 bis 1950, in MEW 7, Dietz, Berlin. urplus Value Part III Lawrence & Wishart, London. Marx, K (1972) Theorie. Marx. K ( 1973) Grundrisse, Penguin, Harmondsworth. Marx, K. (1974) Grundrisse Dietz Berlin. M K (197 Theses on Feuerbach," Elected Works, vol. 5, London, Lawrence & Wishart. Marx, K. (1983) Capital vol. I. Lawrence & Wishart, London. Marx, K and F. Engels (1962) Die deutsche Ideology, MEWZt Dietz, Berlin. Neary, M. and G Taylor (1998) Money and the Human Conditum, Macmillan, London. Negri, A. ( 1 9 9 1 ) The Savage Anamoly University of Minnesota Press, Minnesota. Negri, A. (1999) Insurgencies, University of Minnesota Press, Minnesota. Poulantzas. N . (1973) Political Power and Social Classes, N e w Left Books, London. Reichelt. H 000) "Jurgen Habermas' Reconstruction of Historical Materialism," in Bonefeld, W, and Psychopedis, K. (eds.) The Politics ol hange, Macmillan, Londoi

12 FROM THE REVOLUTION AGAINST PHILOSOPHY T o THE REVOLUTION AGAINST CAPITAL

Mike Rooke

" n p h e chief defect of all hitherto existing materialism - that of Feuerbach 1 included - is that the thing (Geg. reality, sensuousness, is conceived only in the form of the object (Objekt) or of contemplanon (Anschauun but not as human sensuous activity, practice, not subjectiveh The conclusion to Marx's critique of bourgeois philosophy, was summed up with characteristic simplicity in his first thesis on Feuerbach. written in 18The materialism Marx refers to represented the most advanced form of bourgeois philosophy at that time, conducive to the rising bourgeois class in struggle against feudal power. Science was its inspiration and its guide, and lor Marx it had assumed its most radical form in the work ol Feuerbach. The that he had grasped importance of Marx's recognition of this "chief de the limitations of, and therefore transcended the epistemological dualism at the heart of. this materialism. This was a breakthrough of immense importance for Marx's thought The theory of knowledge which ran as a connnuous thread through the work of the British empiricists and the French materialists of the 17th and 18th centunes rested on a view of the human subject as the passive receptor of sti, ttli from the external world. Its progressive aspect lay in the implication that human subjects were the product of the environment and nature, not divine providence. This materialist epistemology depended on 1i dualist^conception o the world - one divided into subject and object. According to Marx it was turn, contemplative and mechanistic. eternal world Conte m plat,ve in the sense that the subject relates , o £ ^ through a process of passive cogn.t.on. thus ^ r m . m n g h_p H for this matenalism: the truth or o«herw,se ol our knowledge

218

219

ke rid Hut the question ofth j thi leat et j

m a b»t

ol k n o w l e d g e w a i ding to MJU I, hum. IUOUS a< tivity" ii left oui I materialism had ignored, leaving it to idealism to ntribution that the sub makes in the proces knowl-

ion (as "sensuous contemplation")

Mechanistic in the sense thai cognition u eived a ie-way causal mnecting tnd independent!; mg ab ona — and object For Ms to the extent th \ talk about a knowable t be understood as the relational result ol human sensi V|mg the external world as it e.\ independently ol human knowledge of it has no importance for M - it non question. For him there is • pre-human, ol i\c world, or even Kantian "things-in-themselves." The knowable world is at once the product of human selection, classification and n u n This is what means when he talks of world object ill, oncept derived from Hegel that denotes the creation ol the world through the social labour of human beings. The world, nature, is man's creation — hence Marx's phrase: nature is man's inorganic body rting and end point ol inquiry is how S o whereas lor materialism rfu the external world, nature n be known, and known objectively, tor Marx thr rting point is an inquiry into the social labour of human beings, for it is by virtue of this pra J activity that the world is produced. It follows that this inquiry implies the construction of a natural science of man. produ ivity has evolved over time such Furthermore, insofar as n a science must be historical While in a philosophical sense Marx may be seen thetheor rom the plane of epistemology (theory ot to have shit I being), there has in tact been a knowledge) to that of ontology (theoi sui hilo h.1 Marx had arrived at the point of const! fig a materialist natural ice that was both his* d and dialectical. Hist' d in thai iti raw material was the productive ivity ot human beings bour) conducted under definite and changing social relations, and dialectlin that ,W has dissolved the separation ol sub|e bject into the notion of labour as world obje ation. For Marx as for Hegel dial ed tl n ol subje d object By the mid 19th century the consolidation of bourgeois economic and >al po ted in the emergence of \ ism as a dominant ideology, sed m learly in the social sciences, it developed to a further degree imna- t of th > the dualism By s t e matised i ional In its ixI e on the empirically given, raw sen its ol the external world (the positivist mod I though' pensed with a nstituting subject (Kant), or .lity (Hegel). The separation of the indh/1

ilienAgc

he ft.

lM|

ml from the external world was expr< at th I uneworlc ft . ! °f knowledge. hich li.v the dominant inter, a t h a l ol "mology.3 T h i s f u n d a m e m a , d o r b o u r g e o . . 8 o c I a | thee. gave rise to a he intinomit ween thought and w>,, ^.^,, u i u u g n r a n d a c t i o n th TT

)ud I "ought") end, MA ^ ' ^ ^ uu m 6 h ends and means, etc Havinj nscended this epistemological dualism M an intell, r e w o r k that w o l ^ ^ T ^ ^ & £ E K g 0 n e . The starting point and the pivota, ^ was ™ „ ..pprehended in a unique way. Marx was alone in askimj the all importantquestion: what kind of labour is it that produces value? Hil answer Ilay in the conc e p t of abstract labour, that is labour rendered abstract by virtue of i* angeabdity m the market as a commod ex; c .. labour power bought and Thus, value, abstract labour, and therefore sold in advance of its consumpi ali ed labour, are aspects of the same social relation Arising from th « labour-capita) relation are the economic categories of capitalism, syste. ed in bourgeoi onomy and expressing the phenom >mm, fetishism. Lul xtended and generalised the effect ommodity Fetishis in his notion of reification - the reflection in thought of the perceived autonomy of a fragmented and objectified world beyond human control. At root is only the human contemplation of labours alienated a Thus the gory of labour, which for Marx is the necessary mediation between subject and object (and the means to dissolve this separation), is developed to the point of uncovering the secret of capitalism: the extraction of surplus value from the direct producers. Hut for Marx t iuitation of labour and the alienation of labour cannot be separated. Paying labour its full reward v 1 not end alienated labour, For these both rt in a mode of prod' n where labour is rendered ab he purpose of producing value — labour becomes a commodity. The negativ >l labour, which drives the class struggle. d» ot only from the mechanism of exploitation but from the character ,pital In this sen^ truggle al the point of prodi l a revolt not iu against inadequate payment but against the inhuman eh er of work under capitalist nd tl prefigures the abolition of the '<»on id the reific msciousness that goes with it Tl eal and lull import oft! >min ubject-ol dualism which Luk ed in his 1923 I and I 'r.lht ms, ible from the capitalist system (ol hich npossibilitj >g the former without igthe Is lutes it and th ITte, tariatl identical sul obje. m its struggle agam' ure labour Wh * philosoph nnc.palK ,n ther h * and H e g e l ) h om.ng the dual

m. n

«

d

valu

*

ttkt R ism of subje* id object on the plane ol philosophy. Marx's great achievement is to ground it in the proletarian revolution against capital. 4 The first movement lor proletarian emancipation aj Marx was the Second International, its principal institutional force German Social Democracy The major theoreticians of this movement were Engels, Kautsky Plekhanov and Labriola. In its fundamental philosophy the Marxism of the ond International has been described as "naturalist/* signifying a conception of dialectics as the science of the same general laws governing both nature and humani History was conceived as a succession of modes of production, emerging and declining with a necessary inevitability, and it was the task of ists to identify these objective laws in order to work with the grain of historical progress. It followed that given the immutability and inevitability of the orking of such laws, intervention to create history was seen to be less important than gaining knowledge of it: given the inevitability of the decline of capitalism, it was also inevitable that the working class would eventually win power. Its methodological leaning was epistemology: correct knowledge was the mark scientificity. a view reflecting the enormous prestige held by natural science by the end of the 19th century. Second International Marxism thus reproduced the fundamentals of the contemplative and mechanical materialism that Marx had earlier reiected, and an approach to history that was rigidly deterministic. This was in fact an enormous retreat from the theoretical vantage point reacht MaiX. Most of Marx's insights into alienated labour and commodity fetishism, and the implications of these for the nature of the socialist revolution were never absorbed by the theoreticians of the Second International (partly, it has to be said, because the IMA Manuscripts were not available to that generation of Marxists). But this was really just one aspect of the failure to appreciate the importance of Marx's philosophical revolution against contemplative materialism. Ignoring labour as the mediating category between subject and object, Second International Marxism reintroduced dualism into the heart the Marxist project. Moreover ignoring the importance of the category of labour in Hegel meant that Hegel could be cast in the role of a hopeless idealist, and once inverted, Marx could be treated as an epistemological materialist (ie., a more radical version of Feuerbach!). The Second International's determinist and evolutionist approach to history presupposed a proletariat that w a s subordinate to the party. 11 the course ol history was inevitably determined, the patient and gradual marshalling of elecral forces was a sufficient strategy for arriving at a socialist commonwealth Substituttonism lay at the heart of this conception of theory and practice; the party acted on behalf of the class, and the very conception of socialism was a re-configuration of the categories existing under capitalism. The socialist com-

222

ur , , , , , * « a commodity, ol , )r king class as a class, had no p U e m the Social De~ In was relegated to the distant future t h r ^ T h T ^ ^ ^ programme into minimum and maximum parts The effect f k f T ™ ° f ^ scend materialist epistemology was to set in place . ™lv; °i '* t 0 tran " privileging scient.tu knowledge of the worlS ,n t ^ ^ S . T ^ *

This amounted to the return and triumph of the objeenve at the h 1 c Marx Marxism. Party, Cass, theory and practice were ^ S t £ t i n e , r se non and objective paraThis state of affairs was in some ways a reneuion of the stage of develop ment reached by the class struggle at the end of the 19th century. Workers in their newly formed mass trade unions and political parties were searching for ways to express their political independence. The contradiction at the heart of working class socialism was that the task of overthrowing still remaining feudal social and political structures (in essence republicanism) overshadowed the anti-capitalist revolution proper (abolition of wage labour). This was true of states like Germany and Britain, but even more so for the backward Czanst state in Russia. But the bureaucratic and substitutionist political practice of the leaders of Social Democracy was quickly overtaken by new forms of the class struggle, first intimated in the Paris Commune of 1871. and further reinforced bv the 1905 Russian revolution. In the Commune workers had taken power directly and proceeded to construct the rudiments of a proletarian state. In the St. Petersburg workers and soldiers soviet a similar embryonic form of state power emerged In these two revolutionary- outbreaks the soviet or workers council rkhad made its first appearance in history These upsurges of autonomou ity found their expression within the rank Social Democra ing class in the debate over the role of the mass strike tactic. Against the Kautsk; •liter and the Bernsteinian right were ranged a group of "K - most prominently in the persons of Rosa Luxemburg, Anton Pannekoek. Otto Ruhle — all initially members of the Second International, who were attempnng to give theorem u | political expression to these new forms of the class struggle. The importance of these "lefts'* was that they brilliantly anticipated the ution opening of a new era of the proletarian struggle, and their political took them in the course of twentv vears (1900 to 1920) from being leh-Social Democrats to "left" or council communists Although Luxemburg never idennned as a council communist, she trenchantly a ed the gradualist reformism

223

ke revoluti. rman ' hflingtto ni_ tml went Oil to idem he mass strikes breaking out in oi the mas nam - t h e war as an expi democracy and prol an Bui Intotl Pani ek took tht- debate much lurth Marxist Th< and Revolut; 5 He develth hi a ol international capitalism was leading to forms of uggle that v \ o n d the bounds set by SocialDeinON filamentary institun These anticipated new ived brilliant confirmation in the revolutionary nta in Russia in rtnany Austria and Hungary in [918, and Italy in 1920. In each case soworkers con e thrown up by workn struggle, assuming ind military functions in situations of dual power Th of what cam be the council communist position was that >rkers council entirely nev ms of struggle thrown up by the >rkers themselves, independently of party and trade union leaderships, but Iso the embrvoni. ins of the future proletarian state, forms which sion. between legislative and admin»uld combine, and thus overcome the ist< e power (as foreshadowed in the Paris Commune of 1871). And in their ion at the point of production they overcame the division of the al that underpins bourgeois hegemony. This form of >nomic and the p« proletarian struggle that expressed the revolution against the commodity form laboi t the same time a revolution against the whole edifice of bourgeois political power. he Bolsheviks, although they incorporated the experience of the Soviets into then revolution programme, never allowed this expression of autonomous class power to fundamentally challenge, let alone displace, that ol shevik party Although Lenin's State am* Revolution was a recognition oi t power as the ba >r a new proletarian order, by the tune ot the Lenin m — An InfantiL I the Council Communists were un« heir anti-parliamentarism, and the substituting ol the party for the class at all levels of the workers state was underway. 7 Antonio Gramsci aher engaging in a path-breaking theorisation ol the Italian workers council movement oi 1920 gradually relaxed this orientation as he moved closer to rappn nent witl Communist International (taking up the leadership of the in 1 924), which by that time was actively suppressing the agitation of the il commum nks. The connecting thread linking the Second International of Classii al Social the Third Communist International was their objectivist conrid their lubstitutionisl political practise. The Bolsheviks ception of hi? rom Kautskyism in the strategy and tactics of seizing power, but this

( i l i |,rence l)f lu

has, in the hands ,,l later Marxists, been mistak i I pli.losophi. ad m e t h o d o W a l s' p

,

atedinto

°ne

U more to w.th the pec utiai instances p r e T l ' '' ^ iduring the revolution. Notwithstanding Lenin's brill ^ " ^ ^ P n 0 r * t caste of mind, he shared, and ultimately nevT/ ^ T T* ™d vo|un u n Phi '°* s o p l l I t a | interpretation of Marxism he had absorbed rrT plekhanov.H The Bolshevik viev Mar x l s m d i d J^*"™ ^ l l k " of

that constn the major theoreticians of the S e c o L l l ^ ^ Second International the decades before the First World War In keeping with this theoretical and political affi of the Russian revolution the Bolsheviks I m J R ^ £ ^ m the factory committees and then the Soviets. This is not someimpulses M thing that can be blamed exclusively on the isolation and poverty of the youiur workers state, as has been the tendency of those in the Third and Fourth International traditions. By substituting the party for the class and thereby elevating the state over and above the producers, labour as the sovereign element in the revolutionary process was suppressed. Nationalised property and planning become "objective" "means" to construct so< m lor the producers, not the activity of the producers themselves What would be revolutionary ai the practical expression of new social relations, remains the effect of "things the producers This reification prevents revolutionary transformation; it d mes the reality of communism in the first stages of the revolution The view of h tory which emanates from this substitutionisrn is one in which "forces ol history act on human beings, an approach which Stalinism codified into an idealist metaphysi *s ("Historical Materialism' or "Histomat m

Second International socialism was distinguished not only by its retormi parliamentary strategy for winning power, but by its conception i ialism as state ownership and direction of the means of production, a model we ma state monopoly socialism. It would rest on the mass organisations of the labour movement as the working class response to the newly monopolised stage wh capitalism was entering at the turn of the century This strategy of socialist industrialisation was also a I nal one - internationalism, as the response of the Second Intel onal to the First World War showed, was for rhetorical purposes only \lthough the Bolshevism of Lenin and Tn was by contrast nrmly intern lalist, it continued the emphasis on state ownership and planning. The socialist industrialisation debate of the twenties conducted principal\y between Preobrazhenskv and Bukhann. was never informed by the question of abolishing wage labour or the direct democracy of the producers at the poi of production (Kollonta,'. 1921 pamphlet "The Workcri 0 ^ . t » o n d ^ t h the latter question and her portion was denounced by both Un.n and Trotsky

225

Mike Riwke as a danger to the revolution!) In view of the importance Trotsky was to have in the struggle against Stalinism it is important to remember that he was the architect of the militarisation of labour in the early twenties, and an advocate of industrialisation and collectivisation that differed from the Stalinist version of the late 20s only in the insistence on more democracy and greater consistency. >r Trotsky socialism was in the last analysis about the progressiveness of nationalised property relations and the superior rationality of planning. The absence of democratically functioning Soviets under Stalin did not negate the proletarian class character of the workers statt Trotsky's Marxism in essence shared the objectivism and substitutionism of the Second and Third Internationals. It therefore represented the most developed expression possible of the tradition of state monopoly socialism, a tradition which included the Second, Third and Fourth Internationals. While Stalinism represented the "bad" side of this tradition, so to speak, Trotsky represented the "best" side. The "best" because while it never transcended the limitations of Bolshevism, it heroically defended what it saw as the democratic side of the October revolution against the Stalinist counterrevolution. Bolshevism, and in turn Trotskyism, inherited the Second Internationals positivist cast of Marxist theory. Thus the revolution as the liberation of labour by-passed the bureaucratic official party organisations and programme. While the redundancy of the Second International was exposed in one fell swoop with the experience of >rld war, the Bolsheviks went some way towards harnessing the revolution ol They did, as we have said, fairly quickly truncate that revolution, and led to appreciate the actuality of communism; communism not confined to a in the form of the proletariat as negae goal or possibility, but in pro value, as universal negai within capitalism. The notion of the aboliwage labour present in the immediate class struggle, and by virtue of this, the immediate task of the revolution, was ultimately beyond the thinking ol the Bolsheviks. Only Council communism strove to give full expression to this new stage of the anti-capitalist revolution. The historic significance of council communism lay in the attempt Marxists to express at the level of theory and programme the new forms of proletarian struggle emerging in the early years of the twentieth cenmn" 10 The eventual decline of the council movement (following the revolutionary wave of the 1917-20 period) and the marginalisation of the council communists within the Third International, in no way negates this significance. The workers council foma was to spring up again in Spain during the Civil War and in Eastern Europe in the post-Second W W period (Hungary and Poland), Chile in 1972, Portugal in 1974. It was therefore not a historically limited phenomenon. On

226

From the Rtvolutun Agauvl Philosophy to the Revolution ^ vuvr Capital lhe

,ng

contrary, il represents the highest form taken by the stn class for its independence from capitalism

I

rL

S

Work

-

By contrast the tradition and era of state monopoly social!.™ The Stalinist version is now totally discredited, while Socul D - " *" rapprochement everywhere with neo-liberal economic K=. " T T ^ ' ' '" "* J exhaustion. Both version, ,n their ph.losophy J d t t Z ^ T P °'' ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ s e r V ed to prevent the .dependence of tne tendency of the Trotskytst movement to adapt t o S t a l l n i s m * rmg Keynes.an.sm over the last 50 years only confirm, it, generic affinity w„h , h e state monopoly tradit.cn . Trotskyists wishing to engage ,n the recons, on of Marxism Will have to look outs.de their tradition They will have to look again at the importance attached by the council communist, to the workers cound form, and appreciate that it represents in practical revolunonary activity p, cisely what Marx announced in the Theses on Feuerbach. and echoed'a few years later in The Clcuhf Struggles in France /<M?-50; A class in which the revolutionary interests of society are concentrated, so soon as it has risen up, finds directly in its ov situation the content and the material ol its revolutionary actr ity: foes to be laid low, measures (dictated by the needs of the struggle) to be taken; the consequences of its own deed, to drive it on. It makes no theoretical inquiries into it, own task.

ENIINI 1

There is an important literature arguing that Mai thought ha, an ontological rather than an epistemological methodological basis, without, it has to be said, concluding that what was involved was an end" to ph.losopl. for example: Carol Gould. Mai W Onto London 1978; Me.kle, EmntuJjum M the Thought ofKarl .U.m.x. Duckworth 1986; Michel Henrv. Marx: A PhtLvophy of Huiruw A M % Indiana 19o • lor • brillian ..osit.on of this view, see David MacGregor. The Com. 5

I'lf.il in Heifel an<>. tfar.x, Allen and Unwin 1984 The dominant form of modern philosophy since 1 -rte, has been epntemology. The reason for thi, lie, m .he character of bourgeo.s .oc.ety. he capitalist mode of production. ,upported In the rise of n MOCftto* ter, and in turn depends on a division ol -he world into ,ub,eC andob.ee.. Th,s dualism expresses the separation of the direct producer,, f ™ « * - . es" that control, order and dominate their desnny Such .epar*

227

meanN pim erlessness. and a i is

knowing the although 11

appear*

i why episte*

.1 an worU

suit leas here my ar med in Pa

mmoc

'

e the prod

L I |»-w,r, a I.

ra

at all. Tl

the know..

'ngda*

s relate directly to the

is the aim nnmunisin), the sp« »ears Knowledge is then no longer a spebut the p the activity of the

>* the im| rxs »ming of the submatenalist epistemology were initially developed in hism and Rt ition Mnnu no. 23, , Edited by I) A Smart, Pluto

the ideas ot the council communists and the experience the workc ee The Origins of the Movement for Workers Councils in Germany 1918Worker 1968 (first pub-»hed in I ) in Rutiencommunto No.3, 1938 the journal of the nmum Group of Hollan* Mark Shipway. "Council Communisn u ialun the /9th and 20th Centuries, 1 Rubel and Crum \illan 1987; many documents and articles relating \ the workers council movement are reproduced in Set/ rmu. inlum: me One, Ed Hon. Vlark Supek and Kramer, New iree accounts of this, see Maurice Brinton, The BoUlfCvfo and Worht lidai llont The M tion (1921), Sohd.« the >ry Committee* m the A m 2, 1984. munist Pamphlet 8 Anton Pannekoel his 193 >ok lyntn ad VhiLwpher argues that Lenin had a?d tl Idle-class materialism'' of Plekhar By this he meant a n ol materialism which represented no qualitative advance on the n I and < ative materialism of the I Nth century, which Marx is "Theses on Feuerbach." * v V\at£ a in his u ion to The Fate >t the RtwidA Revolutt ises instructing a "metaphysics ol the nati ased on the idea that the statificd property 01 the t as a workers sta Vlatgamna argues that there is in Trots!-. 'hmking. a lo the Forward march ol o

it is L

to« xas Pre.,

hwatbeou^kJ

L

^- d m a i n $ t r t i ;c k v :t

^.mngpanc

,lt)on

^

M

> m

M lar M

J

Kell

«lu

"«»-.

15 REAPPROPRIATIONS OF PUBLIC SPAC

Antonio Negri 1 For a good twenty years things had followed a fairly regular pattern - ar least i n c when hav,n d , e cr,s, of 971 7 d 1Q;

;:

\ J

- ^7

-

*

^

^ «*&« of the

1960s and defeat in the Vietnam War, multinational capita] relaunched its pro, ect of development in terms of liberal policies and post-industrial modernisation. These were the years in which neo-liberalism imposed itself: grey years, i number of workeven if they were illuminated, as was the case in Franct ing-class offensives (that of 1986, for example) and by a succession of student explosions - the first manifestations of the revolt of immaterial labour around which sociaJ protest attempted in vain to organise itself December 1995 in France is significant because it marked the first mass break with the political, economic and ideological regime of the liberal epoch. Why did the struggles of December 1995 represent such a powerful breakpoint? Why might we see them as the beginning of the end of the counter-revolution of the second half of the twentieth century? People have begun to give answers to these questions, and the answers are often interesting. There has obviously been a growing awareness of the process of globalisation and of construction of a united Europe, which has been espeelerated in France. There has been a feeling of betrayal of the cially Republican promise of the new presidency and a whole set of contradictions brought about by the new organisation of social labour - mobility flexibility, break-up of the labour market, exclusion, There is also the crisis of the welfare state. All this has had immediate repercussions in the process of formation and radicalisatton of the struggle. What seems to me .mportant is to define the *«w conte which the various different demands were coming about; it is a W p o l i t i c a P context, in the sense that the struggle clashes against all the ru es °f discipline and control of the overall conditions of reproduction of the proletariat. Put briefly, the struggle takes its universal meaning, becomes a struggle 231

Antonio AV
A general interest/' in the extent to which it rejects the
It is easy to give an initial answer: the protagonists of these struggles have been the "public services w o r k e r s . " It has been these w o r k e r s , on the railways, on the u n d e r g r o u n d , in tele-communications, in the postal services, in hospitals a n d schools, or in the energy sector etc, w h o have launched the struggle and guided it, and have given a general offensive m e a n i n g to d e m a n d s which had begun as principally locally-based. But unless w e ask ourselves what is new about what these sectors represent today, within the political and productive a p p a r a t u s of advanced capitalism, this initial a n s w e r is of no particular interest W h a t I mean is that there have been earlier episodes in the history of workingclass struggles in which the ability to block the circulation of commodities has been fundamental in initiating political confrontations (strikes by railw w o r k e r s , in particular, occur t h r o u g h o u t the history of working-class insurgency). Today, how within the orgai ion of a d v a n c e d capital, the ability — of w o r k e r s in public service sectors such as transportation, telecommunications, education, health and energy — to attack the system of production with determining political force becomes decisive, to the exclusion of all else T h a t c h e r a n d Reagan, those muscular initiators of liberal strategy, were well a w a r e of this w h e n , in the early phase of restructuration, they chose to make political examples of w o r k e r s in the energy sector a n d the air transport sector So, h o w do we explain all this? If we w a n t to avoid banal answers, we first have to recognise that in the s t r u c t u r e of advanced capitalism the totality of transportation, telecommum tions, education a n d energy ~ in other w o r d s , the major public services longer represents solely a moment of the circulation of commodities or an I m e n t of reproduction of wealth, but constitutes r a t h e r the global form whic

structures production itself. People have told us time and a*ain that A has become < ,n u L t , „ n , that we have to work >st-,n-time r S has to become a link in the social chain Well, the sinkers ,n th hi es have s h o w n how. by exercising an effect on one of the link. !

T 77*

n they acted aga.nst the conta.ner. the whole content had to rea, t And m,t speaking solely of the structures of production, but of the sub ae apparent through them, one sees clearly why the )e ct»ve lorces which b. J struggles ot the workers m the public servi righl l m m the ^ uhe

resented" the totality oi workers and why. in the strategic location that they occupy, their struggle an immediate attack on the global ,h e p r o . ductive iem and its new social and political dimensions To ttu* ho describe this struggle as "re. itlve» I who are particularly part.al to objective of the process of pr. non. xv « thus reply straight av , n the terms of their own M of reference, that these struggles, and their protagonists, have, quite the contrary, a atral and decisive place within the new im duction they have carried the struggle through against the truly de t " rc i and have, tor this sole reason, momentarily bloikrd it

But the p r o t a g o n i s t ! ol the struggle have not been only th< • l.« and more generally the workers in the pubh U. Thev Idso ben million men and women who. in Paris and in towns throughout in order t ivel t<< work, or simply to get have

.itim,-. H: to mas> while n notm.l

iditione that wei daily wi slog, with i user

eh/d

lit. The media d

these

.d.hcr,

highlight t h , the suffering being caue»d by the strike 11 ideology and whole iwathes ol li-

the state been telling us for years that, in poet-industrial.... selves p r o d u c e r s of the . how is .« .ha. these produ nowstartcontradicngth, against the service-sector workers and by attempnnj split them into separa. Inefl the users are", « « ofthepul P' ers" m a whole range of senses, going Irom

P°

Anient.

'7

sumption and minimum interactivity into a minimum passive consumption and maximum interactivity. In the first bracket we could put the users of energy services, and into the second, users of telecommunications, education and health. Today, in struggle, this "co-production" has displayed a very developed level of awareness. The "users" have recognised their own interest in the strug
H

-of Public Space

sists argue for a 'French-style public service." I believe that verv f , today would consider it credible to defend this leh-ov cr of the ThTJ'p **!? -

r

" »

d

M

^

S

r

-

T

x

T

-

* •

*

£

£

£

£

Resistance and the Gaulhst technocracy which still exists despite its k I1Isfll for us the struggles mean that ,t a French-style public service" " 7 ^ lU e to exist, it will pose itsel ,n completely new terms, as a first experiment i n a reconstruction of the public service within a democratic dynamic of reap propnation oJ administration, of democratic co-production of services Through these struggles there now opens a new problematic, which is a cons e n t problematic. What we have to understand is what is meant by a new er of the services" which, in permitting them to remove them"public cha selves from privatisation and from the rules of the world market, permits them at the same time to extract themselves from the ideological mystifications which are born from the globalising and directly capitalist function of the action of the national state. The awareness of this problematic has been implicit in the struggles. It represents their subversive potential. Furthermore, it it is true that the services today constitute "the global form" of all forms of productivity, whether state or private — if it is true that they reveal how central and exemplary is the role of cooperation in the totality ot production and circulation — then this new concept of "public" will constitute the paradigm of every new experiment in socialised production. To sum up: the public as an ensemble ot activities under the guardianship of the state with a view to permitting the reproducrion of the capital stem and of private accumulation, has here ceased to exist We find ourselves lacing a new concept of public. In other words a concept of production organised on the basis of an interactivity in which development of wealth and development of demo. y become indistinguishable, >ust as the inter rung of the social relationship is indistinguishable from the ^appropriation of admir. tration by productive sub The elimination of exploitation here becomes visible, it appears no longer as myth but as concrete possibility

But , „ i . new s u b . c . v e dimens.on o. .he public" ^ . - J ^ J ^ J J affects only the "soca. worker, in other words the * * * £ % $ £ •s I, omethmg which allects. as we have seen, the M,b,e ^ ^ ^ „ The state bares its capitalist aspect when it seeks to privatise- the public services. Conversely, the struggles reveal a subversive aspect going beyond the state and its function as protector of capital Even when some of the protagno-

producers of services and thus all c.ti«m who work ^ ^ ^ ^ ;. which i. seek.ng to Everyone together") slogan ol ".he / « W « ° " revealed a new community, a p r o d u c e .octal «anmuM*

fit

rhe i

on th«w

uggl their j

l

h all on the e>

hand the d\ i - it is the com

0f

he w \g , laas w n o throu k reductive

he re< ognrtion demu i f on _ ln I n * re the community in struggle in working es in order to produ< e wealth Th ^gg1 nsasapi im to which it is tending — in other v emi: ther in o r d e r to Win — is the being together" m order figure — in other v id againilism II 1 am H in s ^ that within the struggle which we have ed through, and t n those areas w h e r e public services were im ept of nmui une e n n . with essential articulable i ept oj nmu ered. even and particularly within e thinking, as thing which mystified the concrete art flattening them - a figure in which the totaltie association of social subjects was given by the unity or the function, • han ontradict on or the process of association and xJuction. In the course of th* e are analysing, we saw appearing he first time a community which is extremely articulated, a t which has within it all the iractenstics of multiplicity — and as a whole productive en r opposes itself to power. »n on the movement thus leads us to pose the problem of the tra m to a higher level of productive organisation, where the public" is d as the ensemble ot tions which, thanks to the wealth of its does not require the sep
c L

recornpose in our imaginations the real movement and the development ot ri immense, at the same time we can begin to give form to rhe Utopia of the m< lent by means c ment h translate the desir 256

printi

The slogan mbU* V 1 an d up by the movemen 1 in conj ural m. r, as n to -vers in the private sector to join ;ally tr ormed tic ike i t We have seen how the slogan £ >n, fell flat ell But it is true that the initial invitation W Wh it that the worke juridically" defined p n vat 1 not join the struggle? The explanation the fa orkers in the private sector did t come out on strike are grounded in realism they range from justifications lated to the structure of the v d workforce < iged workforce h is individualised and x\ ore subject to immed repression \ bosses in the rig from the crisis of trade unionism event ol strike action) to justifications in the private sectors of industry and servi< These c >ns, 1 ll the realism, nevertheless forget one structural element of private enterprise — the t that in it the tendenc transformation of the productive sti re into public service structure is not evident, and that it remains hidden, on the one hand by the strong continued existence of the manufacturing industries, and on the other by the baleful predominance of the rules of private profit, often reinterpreted by means of financial models. This is perhaps the moment to say th the productive functions linked to manulactunng production are, in a thousand different w on the way to extinction And that, cons* the working< lass strata within the arena of manulactunng are the most sensitive to the blackmail of unemployment, and are therefore the weakest It is precisely for this reason that they are less capable inducting offensive struggles. From no n they are locked into a paradox: at the moment when they enter into 0 des the places of produt struggle, they will be doing it in order al in whh they receive the ages, ln a sense they resemble the peasar of the French Revolution in an earlier age: they are struggling to ensure the tory not o! the em of production within which they are engaged, but another i production in which the ll be crushed. However this interpret n applies only to the working class of the private manufacturing se< If we look at the private sector as a whole hnd that service companies are becoming more and more of a presence. Large manufa «uring concerns are mas!^ putting out" more and more of their directly and indirectly e functions. They are reducing them t< nmercial serv es and inserting them into th. itext of social production. And it is within the priv. ervice sector that the redisco\ of the public, and thus the recomposition of the new prol possible It is possible in the areas where the

Anton t

fd king class elemer n the pri have as their basic char a t temporal flexibility and spatial mobility In other words, in the a r e a / T I. as .. ki in the public se. ^operation.

. principally through the e x d ' * P'oita-

ln the struggles of December 1995, the invitation extended to the private s tor to join the struggle w a s marked by delay and contusion. This invitation ^ made in the tradmonal Form of an appeal to the workers of the private manufa^ turing sector, whereas, in the course of the struggle, it turned out to be the work" ing class and the operators of the service sectors, and even of private-sector serv ho grasped the opportunity to recognise themselves in the new concept of ice public — and thus in the cooperative reappropriation of the production of wealth in the construction and democratic administration of productive society.

W e can now return to the business of identifying the subject of the D e c e m b e r struggle. If one stays at a superficial level, one recognises that we are dealing with workers in the "public services"; looking closer, these workers appear as "social workers" — in other words, as producers of social relations, and thereby as producers ot wealth, at a third and closer look, this identification is reinforced by the fact that the clients of the services, in other words citizens in general, were active in co-producing the struggle; fourthly, it appears evident that the fact that the services are public in character makes them the strategic locus of exploitation, and thus of new contradictions through which offensive uggles will be able to develop; fifth, it is clear that service workers in the private sector (in other words those majority workers in the private sector which has been restructured into services) will be drawn into this cycle of struggles. But the "social worker" is an immaterial worker. He is this because he is a highly educated element, because his work and his effort are essentially intellectual and because his activity is cooperative. Henceforth what we find at the heart of society and its structures of power is a production made up of linguisacts and of cooperative activities. S o the social worker is immaterial inasmuch as he participates in the new intellectual and cooperative nature of work. But this new nature of work is still "M*,m an entire life made of needs and desires, ot singularities and of generations succeeding each other. Those involved in the struggle of December showed, through the struggle and its objectives, that the entirety of life in all its complexity is both the object o struggle and production of subjectivity — and therefore refusal of social cooperation's enslavement to the development of capital.

238

> Public Space

Ii event — as the striking workers told the government — if you don want to recognise the freedom due to this collective intellectual nature of ass ciated I >u will soon be forced to recognise its power and to recognise that it is inescapable — and you will find that it is impossible for you to negotiate wages, social reproduction and political-economic constitution unless you take this reality entirely into account! Telecommunications and formation \tftUH\ in the sense of education and training] are the most significant class sectors from the point of view of immatee public, of the "/>//>.<" — here the General Intellect which riality, of the inter Marx foresaw as being the fundamental agent of production in advanced capitalism reveals itself as btM. In the processes of formation, the labour force constructs itself and reconstructs itself as an ongoing process, throughout one's own tot only between acti hie and through future generations, in lull interacts singularities, but between these and the world, the Umwtlk which surrounds it. constructed and reconstructed ongoingly by human activity. Given that telecommunications are shortly coming to represent the totality of circulation of productive signs, of cooperative languages, they thus constitute the exterior aspect of this constant capital which human brains have reappropriated to themselves. And it is through formation and telecommunications that the processes of production of subjectivity come up against the processes of enslavement of prodi e subjectivities and against the constrv surplus-value-profit It is thus on these articulations that the struggle over the form of appropriation concentrates — because formation and telecommunications represent the production as public service. highest point, and the most explicit structure

8 The struggles of December l l )95 are a formidable challenge for revolutior ary theory. The workers in both the material and immaterial sectors have been hegem< here — in other words, the social worker in the fullness of his productive attributes. Consequently these struggles are situated at the level of advanced capitalism or, if you prefer, post-modern and/or post industrial capitalism. The se ector workers bring the issue of social products to the efront and reveal the contradictions which are opposed to its development The problem of emaiu ip n from capitalist command and the problem of libation from the capitalist mode ol tl are here posed in new wa because the class nggle here presents itself in an entirely new manner. Manufacturing industry and the people who work in it are definitively losing the central role which they had had in the launching and leadership i ASS

8tru

gg'<

pie w h o w<

se m the

n the services, evr the ad-

B

nomiee, i

the field o( rt • net

g

trf^

d l a b o u r ) a n d "hi.

pposes itsell

nd w h i c h has by n o w become completely above all t

I inters

n the relationships w h i c h closea n d its political forme, produ<

erai

t power ol this

tions o f p r o d

nd politics, pro-

In his t i m e L e n i n had already j

he relationship b e t w e e n economic a p p n non

I the

ttion by the proletariat

reprod

. w h o w a s the I

W i t h the struggles of D e c e m b e r 1995. w e have entered a n e w phase of political practice. 1 h e fn s l p , front of the

i he was dealing, realism led him to think that the

(schools, univei die c o n s t n

W e have the possibility o f d o i n g it — a n d o f k n o w i n g what

k i n g a b o u t , because p r o d i h on' ei

roday a w o r l d o f interactive rela-

a the

al worker, in the public services, but above all in the pi

e sec-

of expressing in the broadest a n d

igest pos-

ntribution made by social subjects m education/t s et<

ng

nd in telecommunications, to n e w perspectives lor

n ol revolutionary m

nent, and to organise the c o - p r o d u c i n g

these struggles together w i t h the eitizen-as-workt B u t here emerges the second f u n d a m e n t a l p r o b l e m h o w to define a f o r m ol

enterprise, o u r liberation Utopia is radically different from

tt he proposed

f the re-opening of the struggle

the problem of h o w to enlarge a n d stren

W e also have to find w ble terms the

o have u n d e r s t o o d the necessity of combin-

,sed is obviou

after its suspension, ai

I n his time, a n d w i t h i n the rela-

ht represent a solution H o w e v e r , w i t h o u t casting asper lution

mage the totality of production a n d

in other words tl

h intellectual labour as r e a p p r o p r i a t e d constant capital

te

m order t<

Iront this n e w reality It has to w o r k

I intell

I the

ng a d m u

pl

general intellect" ( i n other words

hegemonic in

blen

L

truggh

rms on the n hin

d parti

struggle a n d o f organisation w h i c h will be coherent w i t h the n e w c "the public" in the terms in w h i c h

as e

in the struggles c

lemocracy" can constitute a n d m a n a g e . D e m o c r a c y , a pov

December. T h i s means a form of organisation w h i c h permits, increasingly, the

producers, that is the essential m o t i v a t i n g core of our work

creation of relationships and links between category demands a n d general demands for a bio-political wage, for a n extension o f public service, lor the

To budd

the publi

(he -

s against the pa the

v o r k on the basis of a democra-

^h the ( r e n e w e d

the

the d e v e l o p m e n t of services) can

ms of political d e m o c r a c y , a n d to bring to light

the political c o - p r o d i

she!

u have the n<

the social: there, in a nut

U r g e n t , a n d e x t r e m e l y alive, just like

reprodu

ve see that n u m e r o u s theoreticians of social den

are air-

osing similar problems. A whole

researchers w h o have not accepted liberalism as the on n k i n g — p a r t i c u l a r l y in th

itry that is the q u e e n of capitalism.

Ymerica — are w o r k i n g to ti<

;n g r o w i n g ut tt

tl

>lem o f the rel

n a n d the p r o d u c t i o n of democrat

ruggles ol I December go w e l l beyond these thematics, b

ose the i

lem not simply as a pos

ite the solution here oes it m e a n to revolut

diov

. but as a necessity, b

that den

>l the multitude

ne. w h i c h is far I r o m second* emocratically re

>se IM

evealed — that o f

reorganising themselves at the territorial l e v e l ^nd b r e a k i n g w i t h the t r a d i t i o n al professional di

>ns o

trade unionism — could be t a k e n u p as a

p a r a d i g m for a unifying

the obje<.

general f o r m in w h i c h the struggle organisation prefigure n e w rank

the struggles w h i c h b r o u g h t them into being. hen w e take a

Clearly, the capacity whic h the w o r k e r s in struggle ha

n o f capital, to identify the forms in which revealed

ai

reappropriation ol administration.

truggle a n d for the I n a sense these forms <

file and mass politic

stances (in otru

words

i longer simply trade urn

recom

ng w i t h the organisational origins o f the labour n

tral I lemei

the p o s t - F o r d i

interests as re^ tion from tl

tt the I

pe< ti

egor

wages and

>-

n really does nee of

ggle over the conditions ol »m this si rich

«nd ol

fu-

.tion of the

time it is precise!

struggle for a t n

ly b I —

nd unitar

or the genei

ihat it w i l l be J

lation of a d m i m

— parade

gamsation of p r o d u

sion. T h i s local, territorial, mt< seem t<' present a solid b a

i hey reveal

hat w i l l be i demo

ig positi ve o1

reprodu* tnd 1 pro-

ble o f o p e n i n g a per-

Editor's Preface to Antonio Neg.

Constituent Republic'

W

orking in the "autonom, radition of Marxism, a group centenn* m Para around the journal FuiurAnUnar has formulated categories which This theorisation has attempt a theonsation of todays revolutionary prat continued in ?<*>€. The central concepts of this theorisanon that Negri's chapter brings to the fore, include "immaterial labour/' "mass int tuality" and "new constitution.' - The point of departure is a section of Marx's Gruniri* manuscript of 1857-58. This section reads: Nature builds no machines, no locomotives, railways, c telegraphs, self-acting mules, etc These are prod
1975, p. 706)

Thus Marx: the relevance of the passage should be clear in the light of debates concerning new technology, and as a | -rtul counterblast a t I the technological determinism with which disci n of the new technolog o often linked Bui Negri and his comrades delve deeper still in the passage, not a U opposing technological determinism but seeking to .den i new const.tum of revolutionary subjectmtx which empowers itself in. and against, present day times. The most comprehensive discussion of tins argument can be found in Hardt, M. and A. Negri, Empin. I U r w d U. 'ress. 200U

14 CONSTITUENT REPUBLIC

Antonio Negri

1. "To

BACH

GENERATION

ITS O W N C O N S T H

When Condorcet suggests that each generation might produce its own political constitution, on the one hand he is referring to the position of const tutional law in Pennsylvania (where constitutional law is on the same footing ordinary law, providing one single method for creating both constitutional principles and new law), and on the other he is anticipating the French revolurionary constitution of 1793: "Un peuple a tou)ours le droit de revoir. de reformer et de changer sa Constitution. Une generation ne peut assujetter a ses lois les generations lutures." (A people always has the right to revise, reform and change its constitution. One generation may not subject future generations to its own laws.) [Article XXVI11] Standing at the threshold of present-day developments in state and so as they were to be brought about by revolution, science and capitalism, Condorcet understood that any preconstituted blockage ot the dynamic ol production and any restraint of liberty that goes beyond the requirements ot the present, necessarily lead to despotism. To put it another way. Condorcet undc mds that, once the constituent moment is past, constitutional fixity becomes a reactionary fact in a society that is founded on the development of freedoms and the development ol the economy. Thus a constitution should not be granted legitimacy on the basis of custom and practice, or the ways of our ancestors, or classical is of order. On the contrary, only life in a constant process of renewal can form a constitution - in other words, can continually be putting H to the test, evaluating it and driving it towards the necessary modihcat. om tins poilit of view, Condorcet* recommendation that "each generation should have its o w n constitution" can be put alongside that of M a c W U l , who

\ntprtL

rt

d th. li g i in order to escape the corruption of powt tl outin IministratlO] ild return to the principles of the v —a urn" which is a process of building, an ensemble of | ,,,| e s n ml from the past bui nothing newly rooted. uld our own generation be construe ting a new Constitution 7 Whe •ok bark e reasons which the earlier creators of constit us gave for k constitutional reneu as so urgent, we find them entirely present in our ov >n today Rarely has the corruption of political and administrative I I• be >rrosive. rarely has there been such a crisis of representatio icy been so radical. When people talk of rarely has disillusionment with den they are effectively saying that the democratic State no "a crisis of polu longer functions — and that in fact it has become irreversibly corrupt in all its pr >les and organs: the division of powers, the principles of guarantee, the single individual powers, the rules of representation, the unitarian dynamic of powers, and the functions u\ legality, efficiency and administrative legitimacy. There has been talk of an end of history," and if such a thing exists we might • in the end of the constitutional dialectic to which liberalism e had tied us. To be specific, as from the 1930s, in and the mature capitali the countl the capitalist West there began to develop a constitutional sysm which we would call the 'Fordist" constitution, or the labourist welfarestate constitution; this model has now gone into crisis. The reasons for the cnis are clear when one takes a look at the changes in the subjects which had >rged the original agreement around the principles of this Constitution: on the id the national bourgeoisie, and on the other hand the industrial working class organised within both the trade unions and the socialist and communist parties Thus the liberal-democratic system functioned in such a way as to he n industrial development and of the shanng-out of global come between these classes. Constitutions may have differed more or less in their forms, but the "material constitution' — the basic convention covering the sharing on and counter-powers, of work and of income, of rights id freedoms — was substantially homogeneous. The national bourgeoisies renounced and gu ed their powers or exploitation within a system onal income which — reckoning on a context of continushanng-out of ous growth — made possible the construction of a welfare system for the mal working class. For its part, the working class renounced revolution Now, at the point when the crisis of the 1960s concludes in the emblematic of 1968, the state built on the Fordist constitution goes into crisis: the subjects of the original constitutional a J in effect undergo a change. On the one hand, the various bourgeoisies become internationalised, basing their power on th. J transformation of capital, and turning themselves into abstract re;

246

Itturnt Republ of w e f o n t h e otncr th sen *» P ° ; ' * industrial working class (in the wake of re .^dical transformations in the mode of production - victory for the automation of industrial labour and the computerisation of social labour) transforms its own cultural, social and political identity. A multinational and finance-based bourgeoisie (which sees no reason why it should bear the burden of a national wel fare system) is matched by a socialised, intellectual proletariat - which, on the one hand, has a wealth of new needs, and on the other is incapable of maintaining a continuity with the articulations of the Fordist compromise With the exhaustion of "real socialism" and the etching of its disaster into world history at the end of 1989, even the symbols - already largely a dead letter - of a proletarian independence within socialism were definitively destroy* The juridico-constitutional system based on the Fordist compromise, strengthened by the constituent agreement between the national bourgeoisie and the industrial working class, and overdetermined by the conflict between the Soviet and American super-powers (symbolic representations of the two conflicting parties on the stage of each individual nation) has thus run out its time. There is no longer a long-term war between two power-blocs at the international level, within which the civil war between classes might be cooled down by means of immersion in the Fordist constitution and/or in the organisations of the Welfare State; there no longer exist, within individual countries, the subjects who could constitute that Constitution and who might legitimate its expressions and its symbols. The whole scenario is now radically \ hanged. So what is the new Constitution which our generation is going to have to to construct?

2. "ARMS A N D M O N I

Machiavelli said that in order to construct the State, the Prince needed 'arms and moi. So what arms, and what money, are going to be required for a new Constitution? For Machiavelli. the arms are represented by the people {tipopdo)i in other words the productive citizenry who, within the democracy ,une. become a people m arms The question is, what popolfi or peoounted on today for the creation of a new Con >on? Do we ple could have I gene *n opening itsell to a new institutional compromise that will go beyond the Welfare State? And in what terms would it be disposed to organise If. to arm If. to this end? And what about the "money'' side of things. Is the multinational finance bourgeoisie willing to consider a new constitutional and productive compromise that will go beyond the Fordist compromise and if so, tl

hat terms?

-

u*tUu/nt Rr

Within the soi ial system Kordism, the concept ol "the people id must be fined And not only the com ept of "the people," but also th that fraction <>t the dti • pie in arms" — in other W< work produces wealth and thus makes possible the reprod cs a whole It can claim that its own hegemony over social labo be registered in constitutional term The political task of arriving definition ot the post-Fordist proletariat by now well anced. This proletariat embodies a substantial section of th working class that has been restructured within processes of production that ar autom >mputer-controlled processes which are centrally managed bv an ever-expanding intellectual proletariat, which is increasingly directlv engaged in labour that is computer-related, communicative and in broad terms eduv mative. The post-Fordist proletariat, the popolo or "people" repre)t is imbued with and constituted bv sented by the "social worker (lopera ontinuous interplay between technics ntific activity and the hard work of by the entrepreneurialiry of the networks within which producing cornmt this inter n is organised; by the inci ugly close combination and recompo labour time and lire-time There, simply by way of introduction, we .e possible elements of the new definition of the proletariat, and what •:. in all the sections in which this class is being composed, it intellectuality. Plus — and this is crucial — another element: is essential! fhin the scientihc subsumption ot productive labour, within the growing ab tion and sot ia on of production, the post-Fordist labour form becoming increasingly cooperative, independent and autonomous. This combination or autonomy and cooperation means that the entrepreneuruil potentiality i inxprc r labour u* hen. npUtely in the bar the letanat. The very development or productivity is what constitutes this e n o r m o u s independence of the proletai is an intellectual and cooperative base, as economic entrepreneur! . The question is, does it also constitute it as A entrepreneunaJity. as poln iomy ? ttempt m s w e r to this qu* n once we have asked ourWe can orselves w h a t exactly we mean money" within this historic development In other words, in today's world, what happens to the bourge* as a class, and to the prodi ns of the industrial bourgeoisie? Well, if what we have new definition of a post-Fordist proletariat is true, »t lollows that the interna? I bourge now lo ictive runctioi hat if becoming reasingly parasitic — a kind of Roman church of capital It now expresses itself only through financial command, in other words a command which is cornple liberated from the exigencies of production — money in the post-classical and post-Marxian sense, "money" as an alienated and &W

J.

.:\

.-^

livirte, "mo - the opposite of labour, of intelligencc, the immanence of life and i e. "Money" no longer function! as mediation between labour and commodity it ,s no longer a numeric rationalisation of the relationship between wealth and power; it is no longer a quantified expression of the nation*s wealth. In the face of the entrepreneurial autonomy of a prolevhich has mat embraced within itteU also the intellectual forces of production, money" becomes the Artificial reality of a command which i* despotic, external, empty, capricious and cruel. It is here that the new fascism reveals itself - a postmodern fascism, which has little to do with Mussolinian alliances, with the illogical schemas of Nazism, or the cowardly arrogance of Petainism. Pastmodern fojcum seeks to match itself to the realities of post-Fordist labour cooperation, and seeks at the same time to express some or its essence in a form that is turned on its head In the same way that the old fascism mimicked the mass organisational forms of socialism and attempted to transfer the proletariat's impulse towards collect nationalism (national socialism or the Fordist constitution), so post-modern fascism seeks to discover the communist needs of the post-Fordist masses and to transform them, gradually, into a cult or differences, of the pursuit of individualism and the search for identity — all within a project ot creating ovei ng despotic hierarchies aimed at constantly, relentlessly pitting rences. singularities, identities and individualities one against the other. Whereas communism is respect for and synthesis of singularities, and as such is desired by all on ot the financial comthose w h o love peace, the new fascism (as an expi >ne against everyone, mand of international capital) produces a war of e< produces religiosity and wars of religion, nationalism and wars of nations, corporative egos and economic wars So, let us return to the question of "the arms of the people We are asking: what is this Constitution that our new gen going to have to bu is another asking what are the balano he compromises, which the new post-modern proletariat and the new multn >al employing class are going to have to institute, in material terms, in order to organise the Mud »s next productive the class struggle. But it true, does this question still make sense ' What possibility e now constitutional compro: in a situation where a huge degree of proletar peration stan I the opposite pole to a huge degre I and parasitical command imposed by multinational capital? A situation in which mon mds in opposition to production. . Does il .till make sense to ask ourselves how right! •< " m.ght be I production no onger has reciprocally calibrated, given that the dialeu workers . ,l muring in the w H«rt of the product.ve relahonship.

[n/on j.»l capitali »mm. the form in which tht \\ id mul' Con itutionpi II '«'om the viewpoint ot 11MS8 intellr. nr I tv ! establishing how it might be possible to build oviet In order to define the problem, let us begin b lling some of the co A >ns which we have assumed thus far The first of these conditions derives from the tendential hegemony ofimm il laboui I thus from the increasingly profound reapproprntion of te« "nico-scientir nico-scientilu knowledge by the proletariat. O n this b knowledge can no longer be posed as a mystified function of command, sena rated from the body of mass intellectuals di

The second condition derives from what 1 referred to above as the end of all distinction between working I nd social life, between social life and individual life, between production and life-form. In this situation, the political and the economic become two sides of the same coin. All the wretched old bureaucra distinctions between trade union and party, between vanguard and mass, and so on, seem definitively to disappear. Politics, science and life function together it tie) produces subjectivity. is \\ ithin tin mework that the real j The third point to consider arises from what has been said above: on this terrain the alternative to e x i t i n g power is constructed positively, through the pression ol potentiality {potenxri), The destruction of the State can be envisaged only via a concept or the reappropriation of administration. In other ords, a reappropriation of the social essence of production, of the instruments of comprehension of social and productive cooperation. Administration is wealth, consolidated and put at the service of command. It is fundamental I us to reappropriate this, reappropriating it by means of the exercise of individual labour posed within a perspective of solidarity, within cooperation, in order to administer social labour, in order to ensure an ever-richer reproduction of irnulated immaterial labour. Here, therefore, is where the Soviets of mass intellectuality are born. And it is interesting to note how the objective conditions of their emergence chime perfectly with the historical conditions of the antagonistic class relationship. In this latter terrain, as I suggested above, there is no longer any possibility of constitutional compromise. The Soviets will therefore be defined by the fact that they will express immediately potentiality, cooperation and productivity. Ine Soviets of mass intellectuality will give rationality to the new social organisation of work, and they will make the universal commensurate to it- The exprc sion of their potentiality will be without constitution. The constituent Republic is thus not a new form of constitution: it is neit er Platonic nor Aristotelian nor Polybian, and perhaps it is no longer eve Machiavellian. It is a Republic which comes before the State, which comes out

t.'tttunxi Republic

sideoftfu

Thee*

mal paradox ol I

lent Republ

n the fact thai the constituent } ss never closes, that the revolution does not ,1K to an end. th tutional law and on y law refer back to one single source and are developed unitanly within a single democratic procedure. Here we are, final I the great problem from which everything starts and ivarda whi< h everything tends the task of destroying separation and inequal it\. and the power which reproduces separation and inequality. Now, the ets of mass intellectuality can pose themselves this task by constructing, outside ol the state, a mechanism within which a democracy of the everyd*; can or^ e act ommuni >n, the interactivity ol citizens, and at the same time produce increasing ee and compl vities. All the above is only a beginning. Is it perhaps too general and abstrat Certainly But it is important that we begin once again to talk about communism — in this form — in other words, as a programme which in all its aspect goes beyond the wretched redu as x\. have seen being enacted in hi ry. And the fact that it is only a start does i take it *ss reai ss intellectuality and the new p; at which have been constructed in t! struggles again pitalisl development and through the expression of cons' tutive potentiality ^nt beginning to emerge as true histonc subject — when The moment of the new, the new happening, the "Angelus no they arrive — will appear suddenly. Thus our generation can construct a ne institution. Except thai it will not be a constitution. And perhaps this new happening has already occurred TF

D BY

In 44. 48, 50, 63.

INI

I- PERSONS Foucault.

Fo>

no. Theodor Agbessi I

17-20,

Bonazzi. Giuseppe 106, 110 Boneleld. Werner 8

!

Atfhe KM 106. I Agnoh Johaa > 185

v4, 36. 17

Agrippu neniu AJquati. Romano 65. 68. 106. 109-110 husser. Lor vater. Elmar ! Andtr inther 192 Anderson. Per J. 185 isah.k • 110 Arendt Hannah 118 \t 0 Armstrong. P 185 Ar< tx. S 15-1 I -1 B Backhaus. H. G 76-77. 84, 184-18 17 Bakunin. Mikhail 28 Bar red A. Andres i 185 Beck, Bees. Julian 155 MarieBelis Bourguignan, Claude 109 Bel: rdo 109, 1

If Benjamin. Walter 217 Benson. G 177. 185 Bentham. Jeremy 175. 207 rnstem. Irving 95, 107-11 lak.m 67 ir. AJain 109 Bologna, Sergio 34, 49. » H. 106. 110. 186

169,

171

174-175, 18-J 17 >erup. Esther 148. 157 Bottomore. Tom 1 05. 112 Boycr. Robert 89, 105, 110. 184. 186 Brintoa Maunce 228 Bnrtan. Samuel 181 .er. Robr Bruntlan ! («ro Harlem 152 Bukharin. Nikola. 4 J Bu. ,-abeth 1 Bumham, P 184. 18 Bush, George H W 67

Cai

C George 115. 117. I ^ - I 2 S . 131, 138, 157 Callinp os. Alex 1' Cantor, Gcorg 131 Cecefta, Ana Esther 167 Cerny Ph.I, 7$. 186 Chauvin. Nicholas 35-36 Chee, Yoke Ling 151 Cianerti, To oleila O 158 muel 84, 184. 186Clark.

Dalla Costa

vajma

13': 139, 148-149 159. 184

p,.^

Gamb.no. Ferru-

157

n o 111 Harold

DaJla Costa, Mariarosa 47, 55 5, 65-66. 70-71, 132.135 139. M8-H9. 155. |fi7. 159, 180. 184, 186 Davis, Jim 132 Davis, Mike 110 de Man. Henrik 105-1 Oh. 112 de Rnutlgnac. Ann Lucas 66. 69 Del Genio. Giovanni 143. 158 euze. Gilles 47. 61. 65, 67t 71. 196 Descartes. Ren* 227 Di Fax..,. William 116, 131 Dinerstein. Ana 216 Ditfarth, Jutta32, 36 Drache. Daniel 184. 186 Duke, David 67 Dunayevskaya, Raya 65 Qyer-Witheford, Nick 71

Eberts. Ray and Cindelyn 107, NO Emery. Ed 104, 197,241,253 Engek Fnedrich 30. 207, 212. 214-216.218.222 Esteva. Gustavo 66, 69

187 . Cleaver. Hair 84. 140. I •ceo, Giuseppe 67, 70 Cockburn, Alexander 177, 186 ndorcet. Manui 245 Coppo. Ptero 158 Coriat, Bcniamm 68. 89. 93-94, 100. 105, 107, 110 \mlre" 67 Coser. Lewis A 2 16-2 I Cotton. Arthur 142 Crump, Macmillan 228

HO

D

. ai. 109-NO. 113.

mtos, Hedene

• 5*« 1^6

F Fatoumata Diarra, Agnes 148.

u Fed.

.Ivia 47, 128-1 132, 138. 155-166. 158. 173, 186 Ferrari Bravo. Luciano 1 10 Feuerbach, Ludwig219 Fuhte,JohannGo.il.rl>J6 Fleron. d r . Frederic J 111

l

6.

HI

George, Susan 181, I Gerratana. Valentino 105 Gerstenbergei . monat, Ludovico 33. 37 -nthony 172. 1^

(card d Bataing, Val« R 162. 158 bbini, Mauro 10c». 110 Goebbels. Joseph 27 ethc. JohanW.Kg A ng27. 29 Gomez. Luis 1 .168 Gorz. And. 8, 70 Gottl-Ottlilienltdd. Friedrich von 11 I • aid. Carol 227 Gramsci. Antonio 105-106, 111. Guattan \X 47, 64, 61. 67.69.7! I i.lla.n. R • III inn. Richard

84, 158 186.216-217

ll-.,r • Hirach, Joachim '0, 109, 111, 1 7 schi Thomas 132 H U M PJ 4, 187 Hitler. Adoll 103 \ lobson, John A. 4 1 Hfilderlin. I Holli 103-104.

1. 16 18" 8 Horkheimer, Max 174. le rvat, Branko 228 Hounshell. David A 108. I l l 1 Ingrao.

1 [aidei J Org I Hall Stuai Halliday, Jon I07( 111 Han rtna 126 Hard.. John P 105, i l l Hard., Michael 16, I 43

Karman 81. 18 Han 171, 18 Hayek, Priadrich I He* -rgW 8. 63, 190. 220 Ht 28 Held, David 1

M 109. U 3

Jame< Jamev Selma 4 14> sop. Bob 7 84, 90, 106, 111 •hnson. Linton K w « -2 hnson. Robert hnson Chalme '.111 h. Keith 180. 187 K Kahn. Herman 107 II hV O 113

H Eiabcrmaa, durgen 23, 2

105

111 84, II" 113.

ta. Sai

Kant. Immant 220 K Karl 222

Kellri

Labhola. Ant< .'2 Laclau Ernes' Laz.zarato, Maunzio 68 Le Pen. Jean-Mar Le' el 66 Leibniz d Wilhelm Le, ad.rn.r I A\ M225 -age, Jean-Loup 107. 112 ncoln. Abraham 9 Linebaugh. Peter I L.p.e. 06. 112 183 Luhman, Niklas Lukics. Gyorp Lung. r k 109-1 I Luxemburg. Rosa 17. 223

latitat, Wanga; >avid . .

andel. Ernst 185 Mao Zedong 12! 187.208 u-cuse. Herbert 7 Markovic^ M m Karl -. 9,

25, 28.

40, 42-43. 47, 53-54. 58-61, 63-64 83. e

127 130 132, 135-13 155-155, 158. U 171, I 4, 17 l

:9

Kc rck 8 Keynes. John M 47 Ki am mark \\Knigge. Adolf Freihcrr von 28. 34 Koike. Kazuo 107, I KoUontai. Alexandra 2 J8 Kortch. Karl 229 Kraimr II

Matgamna. Sean 22? Paul 182-183, 187 Maxxini, Giusepp Cormack 107 111 oil, Brian 8 LaUan, David 132 141 ! Meyer 111. Stephen 108, 112 Mezzadra. Sandro 10b, 1 I

113 Mi. hel. Andre* 148, 159 U Fever. M W I

0-

In. ulantaas, N 14

i <:- !-

18

Stack. Michael 132 ilin. Jos. •'

raxhei

I'aul I

vn 171-172. U WrigHl ima.< S I lo. 132 I T» ? »1 Louliei

Nahekn Nakanc

Una 151 ">5

•\ike 185. II Antonio 47. 4' 110. 115-116 185 l

I

II id 10t )te. t Novaiis 1

Connor. Jam*

I 09, 1

K Ramir«v Hrui 132 Ramm TKilo I 13 Ra :ie P 106, I I Reagan. K Re Helmut Revelh. ,M, 08. M3 ardo, D 121, 131, 1 187 ph 18r». 187 vnna 157, 159 Rifkin. J « 115-116, 118120, I. Robertson, William 176. 187 nilien Rome nuel 108. 113 kookc. MilRose. Nil Rossanda. Rossana 108-109. 113 Rnth. Rola. Mil Rubel Ruhli 13 Ruigrok

Ilium 105, I

Pado\ Pallout, ( Pann<

188 Sumpdon. Jonathan 180, 187 Supek, F

I . i h o n . M a n . ' - H l . i n . \u

Taylor. Frederick W 96, 106 I Graham 186. 1 21 Margaret 232 lompson. Grakame 184, 187 IV 17-18.6 70. 73 >tsky, Leon 225-226. 228-. Tugendhat. Krnst 26 •h 184. 188 Twain. Mark 1 U Urquhart. David 206

van Tulder. Rob 184. U n Wolferen. Karel 107, H Vcrcellone, Carlo d7. 70 Vincent, J can-Marie 65 /.ra 107. 113 Vollmer. Antje 52, 36 Itaire, Francois-Marie Arouet

I

ul K 65 .an 104. 113 24.

ii 188

intilli. < . i an carlo 68

K1 I I uidia 177,

!\unih

Ranicro 65. I

113 159 Peters iI "

Shaw 10

D rp irl 63 >0

kmidt, A ,7. 70 Shipway, M 28 Ski M-* 146. 148-149. 152-1

222. 2

nuel Joseph 19 • erstein. Ken I 77. \f Sinzheimrr. I lug inner. Andrew S \H4 Smart D A 228 »th. Adam* I. 173. 184 Sormano. Andrea 6 Souyi >IN 107, " 1!

W Wakelu-ld. E Gibbon 138 i Walter. Andrew 179, 188 Weber. Max 32. 190 W. la 184. 188

Za

Emiliano 135. 147-148. 187 ,list. Andrew 108. I l l