File spoon-archives/lyotard.archive/lyotard_2001/lyotard.0112, message 59


Subject: Re: Greenspan: Globalisation vs Terrorism.
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 09:42:11 +0800


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.


Steve,

Yeah, that is what I was thinking (to oversimplify), the growing complexity of everyday life does not allow for specialisation in the old sense, but rather a conformity to end up as problem solvers or something similar. So that we are all actually the same type (of problem solvers) but just different scales. We all become dromologic warriors.

Glen.
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: steve.devos
  To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:59 AM
  Subject: Re: Greenspan: Globalisation vs Terrorism.


  Glen
  Actually given that the economy demands that more and more people function in less specialised ways than in the taylorist economies (pre-postmodern economy). At least that is in the G20 countries and if you are part of the 50% of the popolation of the local G20 economies that has a reasonable standard of living and functions  in the inter-disciplinary manner required in the postmodern - then its reasonable to assume that the "further exploitation..." suggests that he doesn't have a clue how the economy actually functions....

  regards
  steve


  hbone wrote:

Glen wrote:
I wonder what he means by "further exploitation of the values ofspecialisation"?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~He means the Adam Smith concept of assembly line manufacture.  Each employeeperformsa specialzed, simple task.Making nails. Instead of  three persons making each nail,  one cuts wire,one shapesthe head of the nail, one sharpens the point of the nail.  Their totaloutput is much greater than it would be if each of the three performed allthreetasks using all the tools/machines required.Specialized machinery enables  inexperienced workers to make shoes andclothing, many other household and commercial items with very littletraining.  This was the basis of the Industrial Revolution which, withEnclosure Acts and Corn Laws ended cottage industry, forced rural peopleinto mines and city factories, produced child labor and other horrorsdescribed in Dicken's novels.  Rural communities were a "third world"available for exploitation.That process cont
inued domestically in countries that are now leadingindustrial nations.In the decades after WWII preceding end of the Cold War, labor unions anddemocratic action in Western Europe and the U.S. greatly improved wages andworking conditions, workers rights and entitlements.In those years there was significant international trade, some inmanufactured goods, much in raw materials.Expanding air transport, computer and communications technology, madeinvestment and control of operations in third world countries a realopportunity, especially after the Cold War ended.You could call the begiinng of globalization:  IR2, or the SecondIndustrial Revolution.Third World countries could now get their populations off their homelandsintomines, timber harvesting, massive, mechanized,  farm operations,  factoryoperations, and thus they have become, are becoming, industrialized..There is an important difference.  Most
of the raw materials, most of themanufacturedproducts and most of the profits are sent to the major industrial nationshalf a world away.  This is Globalization.In a book called "The Trap", Sir James Goldsmith explains how highunemployment inFrance and other European countries came about because 50 or more workers inpoor countries can be employed for the cost of one worker in France.  OtherG-7 countries have had similar experience.This situation encouraged  specialization in investment.  Factories andfunds are exported to those countries whose workers can produce the highestquantity and quality of exportable goods at lowest cost.regards,HughThat's why factories are exported, and most U.S clothing arepart of globalization.



HTML VERSION:

Steve,
 
Yeah, that is what I was thinking (to oversimplify), the growing complexity of everyday life does not allow for specialisation in the old sense, but rather a conformity to end up as problem solvers or something similar. So that we are all actually the same type (of problem solvers) but just different scales. We all become dromologic warriors.
 
Glen.
----- Original Message -----
From: steve.devos
To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:59 AM
Subject: Re: Greenspan: Globalisation vs Terrorism.

Glen
Actually given that the economy demands that more and more people function in less specialised ways than in the taylorist economies (pre-postmodern economy). At least that is in the G20 countries and if you are part of the 50% of the popolation of the local G20 economies that has a reasonable standard of living and functions  in the inter-disciplinary manner required in the postmodern - then its reasonable to assume that the "further exploitation..." suggests that he doesn't have a clue how the economy actually functions....

regards
steve


hbone wrote:
Glen wrote:

I wonder what he means by "further exploitation of the values of
specialisation"?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

He means the Adam Smith concept of assembly line manufacture. Each employee
performs
a specialzed, simple task.

Making nails.

Instead of three persons making each nail, one cuts wire,
one shapes
the head of the nail, one sharpens the point of the nail. Their total
output is much greater than it would be if each of the three performed all
three
tasks using all the tools/machines required.

Specialized machinery enables inexperienced workers to make shoes and
clothing, many other household and commercial items with very little
training. This was the basis of the Industrial Revolution which, with
Enclosure Acts and Corn Laws ended cottage industry, forced rural people
into mines and city factories, produced child labor and other horrors
described in Dicken's novels. Rural communities were a "third world"
available for exploitation.

That process cont inued domestically in countries that are now leading
industrial nations.
In the decades after WWII preceding end of the Cold War, labor unions and
democratic action in Western Europe and the U.S. greatly improved wages and
working conditions, workers rights and entitlements.

In those years there was significant international trade, some in
manufactured goods, much in raw materials.

Expanding air transport, computer and communications technology, made
investment and control of operations in third world countries a real
opportunity, especially after the Cold War ended.

You could call the begiinng of globalization: IR2, or the Second
Industrial Revolution.
Third World countries could now get their populations off their homelands
into
mines, timber harvesting, massive, mechanized, farm operations, factory
operations, and thus they have become, are becoming, industrialized..

There is an important difference. Most of the raw materials, most of the
manufactured
products and most of the profits are sent to the major industrial nations
half a world away. This is Globalization.

In a book called "The Trap", Sir James Goldsmith explains how high
unemployment in
France and other European countries came about because 50 or more workers in
poor countries can be employed for the cost of one worker in France. Other
G-7 countries have had similar experience.

This situation encouraged specialization in investment. Factories and
funds are exported to those countries whose workers can produce the highest
quantity and quality of exportable goods at lowest cost.


regards,
Hugh









That's why factories are exported, and most U.S clothing are
part of globalization.









Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005