&lt;em&gt;Labor and Monopoly Capital&lt;/em&gt; for the 1990s: A Review and Critique of the Labor Process Debate

Meiksins, Peter

doi:10.14452/mr-046-06-1994-10_4

Cited by 26 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thompson (1989) emphasized the stratification and social division of labor , particularly along the lines of sex and race . Meiksins (1994 , p . 47) reviewed the work of critics who took Braverman to task for analyzing skills that were essentially masculine and ''purely manual , objectmanipulating'' .…”

Section: Critique Of Marxismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding the Dialogue: Industrial Revolution Costing Historiography

Fleischman

Kalbers

Parker

1996

Critical Perspectives on Accounting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Critique Of Marxismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding the Dialogue: Industrial Revolution Costing Historiography

Fleischman

Kalbers

Parker

1996

Critical Perspectives on Accounting

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Therefore, even if one agrees with Burawoy and others that the workplace shapes gendered labour relations and is a site of struggle (see Meiskins 1994;Knights and Wilmott 1990), it is also important to view the labour process as part of a larger whole, which includes market competition among firms, the reproduction of labour power and state intervention. As West argues, the imperative of capital is not necessarily just to obtain cheap labour but also to create efficiency and produce good quality products (West 1990, 253).…”

Section: The Production Process De-skilling and Gendermentioning

confidence: 98%

Production processes and the gendering of industrial work in Asia

Saptari

2000

Asian Studies Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…'Semi-artistic' workers in simple cooperation are transformed into partially skilled workers in manufacture (CI, p. 504), and into versatile, unskilled workers in machinery-based production, 'to the level of an appendage of a machine' (p. 799). The deskilling thesis, however, has been criticised from a number of perspectives: that in some cases, it goes hand-in-hand with the emergence of new jobs requiring different kinds of skills than those of craft workers; that the notion of skill in Braverman is partial and takes craftworkers as ideal; that the broader social determination and construction of skills are neglected; that Braverman ignores the importance of consent and autonomy, as opposed to contestation, as part of capitalist and worker strategies; and that the corresponding role of subjectivity of workers and class struggle in the formation of the labour process is overlooked (Wardell, 1999;Meiksins, 1994). Marxist labour process theorists have argued that deskilling is a tendential law, inherent in the capitalist mode of production as an underlying force Rowlinson, 1994 andSpencer, 2000).…”

Section: In Terms Of Scope the First Chapter Of David Ricardo's Prinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge and Contemporary Capitalism in Light of Marx's Value Theory

Jeon¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This thesis has two purposes. The first is to offer a critique of existing accounts of knowledge in contemporary capitalism. On the one hand, knowledge-based models of new growth theory are criticised for privileging some aspects of knowledge whilst endogenising it on the basis of a neoclassical framing; many restrictions are placed upon knowledge, in general, and its utilisation and diffusion, in particular. On the other hand, the bold argument of cognitive capitalism theory, that contemporary capitalism is undergoing a transition to a new stage of capitalism and therefore Marx’s value theory has lost its validity, is shown to be based on flawed understandings of value theory. Externalities play essential roles in both new growth theory and cognitive capitalism theory, each being a theory of use value, although there is no place for externalities as such in Marx’s value theory. Especially, for cognitive capitalism theory, unpaid life activities are seen to contribute significantly to production, with surplus being appropriated by capital as rent, which can and should be re-appropriated as basic income. The latter is, however, understood in cognitive capitalism theory as factor remuneration derived from the production of surplus products and, in this respect, it has an affinity with neoclassical economics despite its purported commitment to Marx’s method. The second purpose is to incorporate the role of knowledge into Marx’s value theory in a consistent and coherent manner. Criticising the two contending approaches in the South Korean controversy on the value and price of information commodities, this thesis puts forward an alternative based on a structural distinction between knowledge and commodities. It is demonstrated that knowledge affects the determination of the productivity and complexity of (collective) commodity-producing labour within and across sectors, respectively, and therefore takes part in the determination of the value of commodities. This social process of virtual multiplication of labour is a relatively abstract formulation of the role of knowledge in contemporary capitalism, but it also provides a logical foundation upon which more concrete and complex, and constructive, theories of knowledge can be built.

show abstract

<em>Labor and Monopoly Capital</em> for the 1990s: A Review and Critique of the Labor Process Debate

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

Expanding the Dialogue: Industrial Revolution Costing Historiography

Expanding the Dialogue: Industrial Revolution Costing Historiography

Production processes and the gendering of industrial work in Asia

Knowledge and Contemporary Capitalism in Light of Marx's Value Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About