From: Paul Adler (padler@USC.EDU)
Date: Wed Oct 12 2005 - 11:30:20 EDT
Thx Rakesh. I think your comment reflects a widespread understanding of Marx's discussion of real vs formal subsumption of L to K -- an understanding that I think is insufficiently dialectical. As I read Marx (and the real trends around us), the development of real subsumption means intensified -- not attenuated -- contradictions between the labor process and the valorization process. I'll send you the paper and you'll tell me where I've got it wrong! Cheers P At 8:21 AM -0700 10/12/05, Rakesh Bhandari wrote: >> and to argue, second, that such socialization >>stands in a relation of real contradiction to capitalist >>valorization imperatives. > > >I would have thought such socialization represents not a >contradiction but an adequation of the labor process to capitalist >valorization requirements, so I am interested in how you are making >this argument. I can read it, and run the ideas >by family friends who are deep in the business. > >Not that this will be any help, but there was an interesting article >in the WSJ maybe five years back about how the high tech industries >were being routinized. The article I have in mind quoted leading high >tech attorney Larry Sonsini. Sorry I don't have proper cite, but >there were a few juicy quotes there that may speak to subjective >assessment of the changed situation. > >Yours, Rakesh > >> >>I would be very interested to get some serious assessment/critique of >>my presentation and use of these themes in historical materialism. >>Please be in touch if you'd like me to email you a copy. >> >>Thanks in advance >>Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Oct 13 2005 - 00:00:02 EDT