Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:09:42 -0700
Subject: Re: AUT: back to crisis theory
From: Sharon Vance <canito3-AT-earthlink.net>


Thanks for the reply.
So if people have been refusing work or trying to minimize work, which is
understandable, since the inception of capitalism, and we still have
capitalism today... I can see how this is a necessary first step, because it
frees up time for other things, but I don't see it as a strategy that brings
us closer to an end to capitalism.
And here's another big question.
And what would a post-Capitalist economy look like? Would it still have
markets and world trade? How could we have the same level of technological
development in a post-capitalist world (eg computers without super-exploited
'women on the integrated circuit' making the microchips)?
I know Marx, and even Emma Goldman said that the details of the new society
will be worked out along the way. But I think that more people, at least in
the US, were more critical of capitalism when they were in the process of
prolitarianization, and when they still had in their memories a
pre-capitalist past, and a vision for an alternative economic future in
their imaginations. As much as Marx made fun of the Utopian Socialists, and
as unsystematic as some of their schemes, plans and theories were, some of
them did have the ability to inspire people's imaginations and allow them to
envision an alternative economic world. You are probably more familiar with
some of these writings, especially from the Progressive Era, than I am. I
don't see such a vision today. I was in the book store the other day,
looking at some titles with the words "Post-Capitalist", can't remember the
exact titles and the authors names, but there were a few out. And I was
struck by how they basically saw a post-capitalist society as one that
simply called for people to 'end their dependence on the corporations', with
such advice as "invest in socially responsible stock, work for small
business and non-profits, don't buy food from chain stores" etc. As if
post-capitalism consisted of getting rid of the largest multi-national
corporations, but keeping the basic relations of production and class
relations the same. As if getting rid of capitalism was just a matter of
middle class consumer choice! Those Progressive Era writers that Howard Zinn
quotes were so much more radical than that. And I think the reason for it
was that they had a concrete idea, a vision of what an alternative political
economy could look like. And when Marxists and Anarcho-Communists refused to
engage in such 'speculation', they left a vacuum.
Now for the first time since the 1950s people outside the left are beginning
to question the benefits of capitalism. But their life experiences and their
historic memories don't predate capitalism, and so their vision of what an
alternative could look like is limited because we have no models. And so I
think that we need to start speculating, and start developing some
alternatives and trying to answer some of these questions.
Sharon

> From: "Harry M. Cleaver" <hmcleave-AT-eco.utexas.edu>
> Reply-To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 21:30:57 -0500 (CDT)
> To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Subject: Re: AUT: back to crisis theory
> 
> On Tue, 29 May 2001, Sharon Vance wrote:
> 
>> My question has to do with the the refusal of work. I can see how that would
>> push the Capitalist and State Capitalist systems into crises, but I don't
>> see how it gets us closer to bringing down capitalism.
> 
> In two ways that are essential, necessary but not sufficient: one, it
> undermines accumulation, twarting capitalist plans, in other words it
> breaks our subordination to capital, two, it makes time and
> energy available for the development of alternatives.
> 
>> Even in the 60s,
>> there were people who could afford to refuse work, and those who could not,
>> ie undocumemted immigrant workers. I know from listening to my father, a
>> newspaper vendor and old timer, what he felt about 'welfare cheats' etc
>> (ironic thing is that when he got sick, he left two dependents on welfare).
>> I don't see how this strategy can unite the working class, or bring us
>> closer to a post-capitalist society.
> 
> First, that unemployed people look for work is hardly surprising in the
> absence of other forms of income; they need the wage. Wanting a wage
> is not necessarily wanting to work. If you want to see how people
> fell about work, talk to those who have jobs. Second, those who refuse
> work according to the capitalist rules of the game are not necessarily
> those who "can afford it" as you you suggest, evoking I suppose rich
> hippies of the 1960s living off of trust funds --to the degree that such
> actually existed. The whole long history of the struggle to shorten the
> working day --a struggle well documented-- is a history of the refusal to
> have one's life and energy subordinated to work. Some, like young people,
> can sometimes make en either/or choice, either get a nine-to-five job, or
> panhandle on the streets. For most people it is a question of degree, not
> absolutes. Many of us are in the waged labor force but seek to minimize
> the amount of our life time and energy we give up to capital. Third, the
> struggle against work is not a strategy, it is a phenomenon that has been
> around throughout the history of capitalism. Once in a while it has become
> a "strategy" as in Italy in the late 1960s where it was articulated as
> such, but that is rare.
> 
>> Once again, excuse me if I'm covering old ground that everyone on the list
>> has already covered. Then again, if we want to unite the working class we
>> first need to unite the Left, no? And being able to explain things to the
>> uninitiated is part of that process, no?
>> In solidarity,
>> Sharon Vance 
> 
> You need never justify asking a question as far as I am concerned. While I
> don't think the "Left" will ever be united --I suspect it will be
> superseded before that happens-- trying clarify things to each other is
> the least we can do. Nor, I might add do I see any liklihood that the
> working class will (or should) be united on anything more than opposition
> to capitalism as a way of life.
> For more on this issue of the refusal of work see url:
> http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3843/cleaver.html
> 
> 
>> 
>>> From: Peter Jovanovic <peterzoran-AT-hotmail.com>
>>> Reply-To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>>> Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 12:58:32 +1000
>>> To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>>> Subject: AUT: back to crisis theory
>>> 
>>> hi all
>>> 
>>> this list has been very quiet for a while so i thought i'd try and spark
>>> some discussion by revisiting a topic that was discussed a bit a few months
>>> ago, autonomist crisis thoery. I asked something like 'do autonomists claim
>>> that only class struggle can cause capitalist crisis or is it just one
>>> possible cause?'
>>> 
>>> is it possible to distinguish between two sorts of capitalists crisis? are
>>> there crises of social control which almost by definition would have to be
>>> caused by class struggle and 'mere' crises of reduced profit which could be
>>> caused by other things?
>>> 
>>> also what's the class struggle explanation for the worldwide crisis of the
>>> early 90s or the continuing japanese crisis?
>>> 
>>> I understand that much if not most class struggle takes place at a fairly
>>> subterranean level and thus isn't too visible. is widespread individual
>>> refusal to work hard the cause of some capitalist crises?
>>> 
>>> peter
>>> _________________________________________________________________________
>>> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>> 
> 
> ............................................................................
> Snail-mail:
> Harry Cleaver
> Department of Economics
> University of Texas at Austin
> Austin, Texas 78712-1173  USA
> 
> Phone Numbers: 
> (hm)  (512) 442-5036
> (off) (512) 475-8535
> Fax:(512) 471-3510
> 
> E-mail: 
> hmcleave-AT-eco.utexas.edu
> PGP Public Key: 
> http://certserver.pgp.com:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=hmcleave
> 
> Cleaver homepage:
> http://www.eco.utexas.edu/faculty/Cleaver/index2.html
> 
> Chiapas95 homepage:
> http://www.eco.utexas.edu/faculty/Cleaver/chiapas95.html
> 
> Accion Zapatista homepage:
> http://www.utexas.edu/students/nave/
> ............................................................................
> 
> 
> 
> --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---