post-Fordism and geographical scattering of the points of production

https://www.mail-archive.com/marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu/msg07154.html



post-Fordism and geographical scattering of the points of production c b Tue, 13 Oct 2009 05:20:36

https://www.mail-archive.com/marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu/msg07154.html


[Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scattering of the points of production

CB: The leaps in communication and transportation through computerization, satellites, robotics, containerization allow the scattering of the points of production geographically, globally.

In _Capital_ Marx's analyzes the fundamentals of modern industry , machinery and cooperation here: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm

Part IV: Production of Relative Surplus Value

Ch. 12: The Concept of Relative Surplus-Value Ch. 13: Co-operation Ch.

14: Division of Labour and Manufacture Ch. 15:

Machinery and Modern Industry

The modern factory system that Marx analyzed there concentrated workers in one location , co-operation the classic Leninist giant factory site, and employed machinery ; both cooperation and machinery increased the rate of surplus-value, relative surplus value.

The cyber developments in communication and transportation of the last 35 years allow the negation of co-operation ( big factories, and industrial cities and regions, like the US Midwest) _without loss in production of surplus value_ .

This is a dialectical negation in that one aspect of the united contradiction negated the other ; machinery is negating cooperation. Machinery developed through comuperiztion, robotics, satellites, containers, just in time production, et al, such that it allowed the negation of the other fundamental aspect of the contradiction, co-operation ( concentration of workers in one plant and industrial cities , like Detroit where Henry Ford of "Fordism" was, and regions, like the US midwest.) The points of production can be scattered around the globe without loss of production of surplus value, and with the added benefit of separating workers from each other. Recall that Marx emphasized that the concentrations of workers in factories and certain cities was important in their sensing their potential power and helped with communist organization. The capitalists are glad to scatter them and separate them from each other.

I'm thinking computers in truck driver cabs is an advance in the unity of mental (symbolic) and physical labor in one worker, and thus an overcoming or negation of ye olde antagonism between predominantly mental and predominantly physical labor ( workers of the head and workers of the hand). Overcoming this antagonism, this original specialization, is considered an achievement of the coming communist society. So, were cb radios, but this is even a bit ( in the computer language puny sense) more than cb radios.

It increases the socialization, division of labor ( in Marx and Durkheim sense; organic solidarity) and cooperation of labor. Labor is already highly socialized in capitalism in the 1800s, early 1900's, mid 1900's. This increased the interconnectedness of workers , in their technological location, so increases the socialization of the labor process.

Walmart's increased efficiency is increased socialization and cooperation , too. Just like the Fordist assembly line and truck and train connected factories with telegraph communication , then telephones were.

These electronic communication systems increase cooperation of labor that is not face to face or within one building , plant, or city. It allows the points of production to be more scattered geographically/in space relative to prior levels of development of the means of production which are communication systems. Computers allow the likes of just-in-time delivery. World cars, for example, are produced from computer coordinated globally scattered points of production.

Workers of the whole globe, unite ! Hardt/Negri's Commonwealth as reviewed in WSJ c b cb31450 at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 11:04:19 HST 2009 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Voyou voyou1 Yes, and nothing in H&N's argument goes against this. The idea of a shift from Fordism to post-Fordism doesn't mean that the economy is shifting from widgets to symbols. It means that changes in symbolic forms of production have an affect on widget-based production. The way in which the number of people involved in industrial production has expanded is an example of this, as the ability of western companies to use manufacturing labor in non-western countries was enhanced by various developments in symbolic labor (the logistical ability to manage longer supply chains, for example). The paradigmatic post-Fordist company isn't Microsoft, it's Walmart, which directs the production and distribution of material goods from all around the world. ^^^^^^^ CB: The leaps in communication and transportation through computerization, satellites, robotics, containerization allow the scattering of the points of production geographically, globally. In _Capital_ Marx's analyzes the fundamentals of modern industry , machinery and cooperation here: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm Part IV: Production of Relative Surplus Value Ch. 12: The Concept of Relative Surplus-Value Ch. 13: Co-operation Ch. 14: Division of Labour and Manufacture Ch. 15: Machinery and Modern Industry The modern factory system that Marx analyzed there concentrated workers in one location , co-operation the classic Leninist giant factory site, and employed machinery both to increase the rate of surplus-value, relative surplus value. The developments in communication and transportation of the last 35 years allow the negation of co-operation ( big factories, and industrial cities and regions, like the US Midwest) _without loss in production of surplus value_ . This is a dialectical negation in that one aspect of the contradiction , machinery, developed through comuperiztion, robotics, satellites, containers, just in time production, et al, such that it allowed the negation of the other fundamental aspect of the contradiction, co-operation ( concentration of workers in one plant and industrial cities , like Detroit where Henry Ford of "Fordism" was, and regions, like the US midwest.) The points of production can be scattered around the globe without loss of production of surplus value, and with the added benefit of separating workers from each other. Recall that Marx emphasized that the concentrations of workers in factories and certain cities was important in their sensing their potential power and helped with communist organization. The capitalists are glad to scatter them and separate them from each other. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hardt/Negri's Commonwealth as reviewed in WSJ c b cb31450 at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 16:01:35 HST 2009 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- shag carpet bomb At 02:20 PM 10/9/2009, Eric Beck wrote: >On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Voyou wrote: > > Yes, and nothing in H&N's argument goes against this. The idea of a > > shift from Fordism to post-Fordism doesn't mean that the economy is > > shifting from widgets to symbols. It means that changes in symbolic > > forms of production have an affect on widget-based production. > >Precisely. I amazed that people still make arguments like the one >Matthias makes here. Either they aren't reading well or they are >reading in bad faith, though it could also be that H&N are not as >precise in these arguments as is, say, Virno, who emphasizes that >dashboards are still being produced in the world, but that industrial >work is being restructured to be like communicative, symbolic work. >Has anyone else noticed that truck drivers have computers in their >cabs? I haven't read any of their work, but could you or someone explain why computers in their cabs matter -- other than to make the walmart supply chain superefficient? if that's too much of a 101 question, ignore. I'll wait until I after I move to read the book. :) shag ^^^^^ Hey Shag ! chaz I'm thinking computers in truck driver cabs is an advance in the unity of mental (symbolic) and physical labor in one worker, and thus an overcoming or negation of ye olde antagonism between predominantly mental and predominantly physical labor ( workers of the head and workers of the hand). Overcoming this antagonism, this original specialization, is considered an achievement of the coming communist society. So, were cb radios, but this is even a bit ( in the computer language puny sense) more than cb radios. It increases the socialization, division of labor ( in Marx and Durkheim sense; organic solidarity) and cooperation of labor. Labor is already highly socialized in capitalism in the 1800s, early 1900's, mid 1900's. This increased the interconnectedness of workers , in their technological location, so increases the socialization of the labor process. Walmart's increased efficiency is increased socialization and cooperation , too. Just like the Fordist assembly line and truck and train connected factories with telegraph communication , then telephones were. These electronic communication systems increase cooperation of labor that is not face to face or within one building , plant, or city. It allows the points of production to be more scattered geographically/in space relative to prior levels of development of the means of production which are communication systems. Computers allow the likes of just-in-time delivery. World cars, for example, are produced from computer coordinated globally scattered points of production. Workers of the whole globe, unite ! _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis Previous message View by thread View by date Next message [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scattering... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical s... Matthew Birkhold Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographic... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographic... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geogra... Matthew Birkhold Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and ge... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism a... Matthew Birkhold Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordi... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordi... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordi... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b Reply via email to Submit The Mail Archive home marxism-thaxis - all messages marxism-thaxis - about the list Expand Previous message Next message The Mail Archive home Add your mailing list FAQ Support Privacy 5c2e4d230910130520h697cd5cbm8ca4ed0f2115dac3@mail.gmail.com CB: The leaps in communication and transportation through computerization, satellites, robotics, containerization allow the scattering of the points of production geographically, globally. In _Capital_ Marx's analyzes the fundamentals of modern industry , machinery and cooperation here: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm Part IV: Production of Relative Surplus Value Ch. 12: The Concept of Relative Surplus-Value Ch. 13: Co-operation Ch. 14: Division of Labour and Manufacture Ch. 15: Machinery and Modern Industry The modern factory system that Marx analyzed there concentrated workers in one location , co-operation the classic Leninist giant factory site, and employed machinery both to increase the rate of surplus-value, relative surplus value. The developments in communication and transportation of the last 35 years allow the negation of co-operation ( big factories, and industrial cities and regions, like the US Midwest) _without loss in production of surplus value_ . This is a dialectical negation in that one aspect of the contradiction , machinery, developed through comuperiztion, robotics, satellites, containers, just in time production, et al, such that it allowed the negation of the other fundamental aspect of the contradiction, co-operation ( concentration of workers in one plant and industrial cities , like Detroit where Henry Ford of "Fordism" was, and regions, like the US midwest.) The points of production can be scattered around the globe without loss of production of surplus value, and with the added benefit of separating workers from each other. Recall that Marx emphasized that the concentrations of workers in factories and certain cities was important in their sensing their potential power and helped with communist organization. The capitalists are glad to scatter them and separate them from each other. I'm thinking computers in truck driver cabs is an advance in the unity of mental (symbolic) and physical labor in one worker, and thus an overcoming or negation of ye olde antagonism between predominantly mental and predominantly physical labor ( workers of the head and workers of the hand). Overcoming this antagonism, this original specialization, is considered an achievement of the coming communist society. So, were cb radios, but this is even a bit ( in the computer language puny sense) more than cb radios. It increases the socialization, division of labor ( in Marx and Durkheim sense; organic solidarity) and cooperation of labor. Labor is already highly socialized in capitalism in the 1800s, early 1900's, mid 1900's. This increased the interconnectedness of workers , in their technological location, so increases the socialization of the labor process. Walmart's increased efficiency is increased socialization and cooperation , too. Just like the Fordist assembly line and truck and train connected factories with telegraph communication , then telephones were. These electronic communication systems increase cooperation of labor that is not face to face or within one building , plant, or city. It allows the points of production to be more scattered geographically/in space relative to prior levels of development of the means of production which are communication systems. Computers allow the likes of just-in-time delivery. World cars, for example, are produced from computer coordinated globally scattered points of production. Workers of the whole globe, unite ! Hardt/Negri's Commonwealth as reviewed in WSJ c b cb31450 at gmail.com Fri Oct 9 11:04:19 HST 2009 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Voyou voyou1 Yes, and nothing in H&N's argument goes against this. The idea of a shift from Fordism to post-Fordism doesn't mean that the economy is shifting from widgets to symbols. It means that changes in symbolic forms of production have an affect on widget-based production. The way in which the number of people involved in industrial production has expanded is an example of this, as the ability of western companies to use manufacturing labor in non-western countries was enhanced by various developments in symbolic labor (the logistical ability to manage longer supply chains, for example). The paradigmatic post-Fordist company isn't Microsoft, it's Walmart, which directs the production and distribution of material goods from all around the world. ^^^^^^^ CB: The leaps in communication and transportation through computerization, satellites, robotics, containerization allow the scattering of the points of production geographically, globally. In _Capital_ Marx's analyzes the fundamentals of modern industry , machinery and cooperation here: http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm Part IV: Production of Relative Surplus Value Ch. 12: The Concept of Relative Surplus-Value Ch. 13: Co-operation Ch. 14: Division of Labour and Manufacture Ch. 15: Machinery and Modern Industry The modern factory system that Marx analyzed there concentrated workers in one location , co-operation the classic Leninist giant factory site, and employed machinery both to increase the rate of surplus-value, relative surplus value. The developments in communication and transportation of the last 35 years allow the negation of co-operation ( big factories, and industrial cities and regions, like the US Midwest) _without loss in production of surplus value_ . This is a dialectical negation in that one aspect of the contradiction , machinery, developed through comuperiztion, robotics, satellites, containers, just in time production, et al, such that it allowed the negation of the other fundamental aspect of the contradiction, co-operation ( concentration of workers in one plant and industrial cities , like Detroit where Henry Ford of "Fordism" was, and regions, like the US midwest.) The points of production can be scattered around the globe without loss of production of surplus value, and with the added benefit of separating workers from each other. Recall that Marx emphasized that the concentrations of workers in factories and certain cities was important in their sensing their potential power and helped with communist organization. The capitalists are glad to scatter them and separate them from each other. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hardt/Negri's Commonwealth as reviewed in WSJ c b cb31450 at gmail.com Sat Oct 10 16:01:35 HST 2009 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- shag carpet bomb At 02:20 PM 10/9/2009, Eric Beck wrote: >On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Voyou wrote: > > Yes, and nothing in H&N's argument goes against this. The idea of a > > shift from Fordism to post-Fordism doesn't mean that the economy is > > shifting from widgets to symbols. It means that changes in symbolic > > forms of production have an affect on widget-based production. > >Precisely. I amazed that people still make arguments like the one >Matthias makes here. Either they aren't reading well or they are >reading in bad faith, though it could also be that H&N are not as >precise in these arguments as is, say, Virno, who emphasizes that >dashboards are still being produced in the world, but that industrial >work is being restructured to be like communicative, symbolic work. >Has anyone else noticed that truck drivers have computers in their >cabs? I haven't read any of their work, but could you or someone explain why computers in their cabs matter -- other than to make the walmart supply chain superefficient? if that's too much of a 101 question, ignore. I'll wait until I after I move to read the book. :) shag ^^^^^ Hey Shag ! chaz I'm thinking computers in truck driver cabs is an advance in the unity of mental (symbolic) and physical labor in one worker, and thus an overcoming or negation of ye olde antagonism between predominantly mental and predominantly physical labor ( workers of the head and workers of the hand). Overcoming this antagonism, this original specialization, is considered an achievement of the coming communist society. So, were cb radios, but this is even a bit ( in the computer language puny sense) more than cb radios. It increases the socialization, division of labor ( in Marx and Durkheim sense; organic solidarity) and cooperation of labor. Labor is already highly socialized in capitalism in the 1800s, early 1900's, mid 1900's. This increased the interconnectedness of workers , in their technological location, so increases the socialization of the labor process. Walmart's increased efficiency is increased socialization and cooperation , too. Just like the Fordist assembly line and truck and train connected factories with telegraph communication , then telephones were. These electronic communication systems increase cooperation of labor that is not face to face or within one building , plant, or city. It allows the points of production to be more scattered geographically/in space relative to prior levels of development of the means of production which are communication systems. Computers allow the likes of just-in-time delivery. World cars, for example, are produced from computer coordinated globally scattered points of production. Workers of the whole globe, unite ! _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis Previous message View by thread View by date Next message [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scattering... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical s... Matthew Birkhold Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographic... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographic... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geogra... Matthew Birkhold Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and ge... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism a... Matthew Birkhold Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordi... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordi... c b Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordi... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b [Marxism-Thaxis] post-Fordism and geographical scatt... c b Reply via email to Submit The Mail Archive home marxism-thaxis - all messages marxism-thaxis - about the list Expand Previous message Next message The Mail Archive home Add your mailing list FAQ Support Privacy 5c2e4d230910130520h697cd5cbm8ca4ed0f2115dac3@mail.gmail.com