From: Rakesh Bhandari (rakeshb@STANFORD.EDU)
Date: Wed Jun 25 2003 - 12:57:34 EDT
Jerry wrote: > >The point remains that Marx did _not_ write that struggles over >the length of the working day can be conceived as "defensive" >struggles. And -- more to the point -- regardless of what Marx >did or did not write, struggles over the length of the working >day are expressions in part of the aspirations of the working class >for additional leisure time which collide with the drive by >capital to -- wherever possible -- increase absolute surplus value. >To conceive one-sidedly of such struggles as primarily "defensive" >fails to grasp what workers are fighting *for*. In his brilliant book Modern Times, Ancient Hours: Working Lives in the 21st Century (Verso, 2003) Pietro Basso provides a careful analysis of the 35 hour work week in France. Basso shows that this gain has been won at the cost of increased intensification and flexibilization (more shift work, less overtime pay, employer determination of working schedules). Perhaps would some argue that capitalist progress in the reduction of working time should not be measured in terms of the length of the working day or the hours worked in the course of a week or in the number of weeks worked per year; rather progress has come in the form of the reduction of work in the course of a lifespan. That is, while life spans have almost doubled in the last one hundred years, the absolute number of hours worked by a proletarian over the course of his lifetime has even decreased a bit. Is this proof of the continued progressiveness of capitalist development? Basso thinks not for clearly specified reasons. What do others think? Basso's book raises questions of fundamental importance. Could not be recommended more highly. Yours, Rakesh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 26 2003 - 00:00:01 EDT