Cardinal Facts of Capitalist Production (1894)

2008 ◽  
pp. 100-100
1983 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 405-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
R Hudson ◽  
D Sadler

One expression of the changing international division of labour and the generalized crisis of capitalist production during the 1970s was that the steel industry in the European Community slid into a deep and seemingly intractable crisis with rapidly falling profits or escalating losses. In an attempt to restore profitability, private capital, national states, and the supranational EEC (European Economic Community) initiated a series of severe capacity and employment cuts, which were unevenly distributed within the EEC, concentrated both at national and at regional scales. This distribution was intimately related to the strategies of those directly employed in the steel industry and those indirectly dependent upon steel employment in contesting proposed closure plans. This paper examines in detail anticlosure campaigns in the Northeast of England and in the Nord and Lorraine in France, interpreting them in terms of territory and class as bases for social organization, and attempts to draw some more general theoretical and political implications from these specific cases.


2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 3-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Post

AbstractThe notion of the labour-aristocracy is one of the oldest Marxian explanations of working-class conservatism and reformism. Despite its continued appeal to scholars and activists on the Left, there is no single, coherent theory of the labour-aristocracy. While all versions argue working-class conservatism and reformism reflects the politics of a privileged layer of workers who share in ‘monopoly’ super-profits, they differ on the sources of those super-profits: national dominance of the world-market in the nineteenth century (Marx and Engels), imperialist investments in the ‘colonial world’/global South (Lenin and Zinoviev), or corporate monopoly in the twentieth century (Elbaum and Seltzer). The existence of a privileged layer of workers who share monopoly super-profits with the capitalist class cannot be empirically verified. This essay presents evidence that British capital’s dominance of key-branches of global capitalist production in the Victorian period, imperialist investment and corporate market-power can not explain wage-differentials among workers globally or nationally, and that relatively well-paid workers have and continue to play a leading rôle in radical and revolutionary working-class organisations and struggles. An alternative explanation of working-class radicalism, reformism, and conservatism will be the subject of a subsequent essay.


2020 ◽  
pp. 213-224
Author(s):  
Silvia M. Lindtner

This concluding chapter reviews the labor and sites that have long challenged the inevitability of technological progress and its violence. The socialist pitch and the production of hopeful anticipation depend on happiness labor — the labor that produces a feeling of optimism and hope despite the proliferating sense of rising precarity. If one attends to the labor and the instruments of affect that finance capitalism needs, one notices the vulnerability of capitalist production — that is, one notices that the relationship between technology, life, and markets can be otherwise. The chapter then argues that if we attend to the labor that is necessary to nurture and sustain entrepreneurial life, we can mobilize other feelings to subvert the political economy of affect that runs on the promise of happiness. We can subvert the seemingly endlessly spiraling displacement of technological promise if we reframe what counts as intervention by moving away from the ideal types of countercultural heroism.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document