Notes and References Chapter 1 1. This view underlies the Cycle of Deprivation Studies which were set up jointly between the Department of Health and Social Services and the Social Sciences Research Council, encouraged by the Secretary of State for social services, Sir Keith Joseph, in 1972. 2. This view underlies the Six Towns Studies set up by the Department of the Environment in 1973 and the Comprehensive Community Programmes set up by the Home Office in 1974. 3. This is the standard pluralist view underlying most liberal academic treatments of the poverty 'problem'. 4. With Liverpool, the Coventry Community Development Project was the first of the twelve Community Development Projects set up by the Home Office from 1969. The Coventry project submitted its final report, which contained a summary of the Coventry Industry - Hillfields study, in March 1975. 5. The Marxian critique of neo-classical economic theory is now well known. As it does not add to the analysis developed in this book it will not be repeated here. Those interested may look at Rowthorn [1974] or Hollis and Nell [1975] for recent contributions to that critique. 6. For an interesting explanation of this lack of concreteness in most Marxist analysis during the past fifty years, see Anderson, [1976]. Chapter 2 1. 'In broad outline, the Asiatic, ancient, feudal and modern bourgeois [capitalist] modes of production may be designated as epochs marking progress in the economic development of society.' (A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, p. 21.) Note that all Marx's writings will be cited by title alone, rather than author and date of publication as for other writers. All page numbers refer to Lawrence and Wishart editions unless otherwise stated. 2. A use-value is something which has utility; that is, something which is capable of serving human needs or wants ( Capital, vol. 1, p. 45). 3. Marx recognises that the capitalist mode of production as defined above does not characterise every productive relationship in a capitalist society. For example, in a capitalist society there are still what Marx calls 'simple commodity producers', people who themselves produce commodities directly for sale on the market without the use of wage labour. Capitalist 274 NOTES AND REFERENCES society or a capitalist social formation is one where the capitalist mode of production dominates. The term 'social formation' is used to describe the whole set of social relations which characterise a society at a given point in time. 4. Alienation was a more specific concept for Marx than the notion of alienation which is popular today. Following Durkheim [1933], many think alienation means a deviation from the 'natural' human condition in in­ dividuals caused by the manner in which society controls them. For Marx human beings are naturally social animals and the alienation which most suffer in capitalist society is specifically related to the relations of production. For Marx alienation refers to the sale of workers' labour power. This act implies the legal or formal loss of control over the fruits of the workers' labour and the disposition of that labour power. The matter is not quite so simple because the formal or legal loss of control over workers' labour power which the act of sale implies, must be enforced during the employment period by the capitalist through disciplinary codes and other managerial strategies. There­ fore alienation is both an act, the sale oflabour power, and a process in which control over what workers do during the time they are employed is captured in practice by the capitalist. 5. 'The fact that half a day's labour is necessary to keep the labourer alive during 24 hours, does not in any way prevent him from working a whole day. Therefore, the value oflabour-power, and the value which that labour-power creates in the labour-processes, are two entirely different magnitudes; and this difference of the two values was what the capitalist had in view, when he was purchasing the labour-power' (Capital, vol. 1, p. 188). Productive activity is the unity of two processes, the labour process through which labour power produces use-values, and the valorisation process through which labour power produces surplus value. 6. This then means that the value of any particular physical quantity of commodities will fall, that is, the amount of socially necessary labour time embodied in a fixed amount of commodities will be reduced. See following paragraph. 7. Marx distinguishes the manufacturing division of labour from the social division of labour. The social division of labour is the division of employments or branches of production. As the capitalist mode of production develops this becomes more relevant for capitalists than for workers. Under simple commodity production the social division of labour meant that the butcher, the baker and the candlestick-maker were all different people and that each produced only one type of commodity. The social division of labour is based on exchange relations, that is, that people bring different commodities to market. As the worker brings only his labour power to market the social division of labour characterises his position less and less; see Capital, vol. 1, chap. 11, sect. 4. 8. Marx distinguishes machines from tools in that for tools the motive force behind the instrument oflabour is human, while for machines it is some other natural force (Capital, vol. 1, p. 352). 9. 'Modern Industry' is the term used in the Lawrence and Wishart edition. In some ways the term 'Machinofacture', used in the Everyman NOTES AND REFERENCES 275 edition, is better, particularly because a succeeding stage of the capitalist mode of production is often distinguished thereby making the term Modern Industry' somewhat contradictory. The most recent English edition of Capital, the Penguin edition, uses the term 'large-scale industry'. For me this term is not much better than Modern Industry because for me the succeeding stage of the capitalist mode of production, Monopoly Capitalism, is distinguished by widespread monopoly power enjoyed by large-scale firms. 10. A higher rate of exploitation of living labour will discourage the replacement of that labour by machinery. Similarly the replacement of adult men by women and children, which actually reduced wages below the value of labour power, slowed down the spread of machinery in early industrialising England (Capital, vol. I, pp. 365-72). II. Marx distinguishes four layers to the reserve army - floating, latent, stagnant and the sediment (Capital, vol. I, pp. 600-3). The floating layer consists of those temporarily thrown out of work by technical change or slumps in demand. The latent layer comprises those thrown out of agriculture. The stagnant is those irregularly employed, coming from decaying domestic industry and manufacture sectors. The sediment is the paupers, the sick, the old and the mutilated. For the purposes of this book it will be sufficient to divide the reserve army into only two categories-active and latent. The active reserve army will include all those immediately available to work for capitalists in the modern industry, and later the monopoly capitalism, sector. The latent reserve army is all the rest, including those underemployed in agriculture, petty commodity producers going bankrupt and those working in domestic industry. Marx's divisions are based on the social conditions of people, while mine is based on their availability to capitalists. The latent reserve army will compete directly with the active reserve army for jobs in the medium term if relative wages rise in factories or if conditions deteriorate further in their current pursuits. 12. If ell', the organic composition at capital, rises and if slv, the rate of exploitation remains the same, then s will fall since: e+v s (slv) e+v (ell') + 1 See Capital, vol. 3, pt 3. Chapter 3 I. In so doing I have rejected the term 'Imperialism'. In part this is because the word has come to represent a relation between advanced capitalist countries (or capital emanating from those countries), and less developed countries, rather than a stage of the capitalist mode of production (in spite of Lenin's clear insistence on the latter interpretation; Lenin [1916]). Also my 276 NOTES AND REFERENCES interpretation of this stage is quite different from Lenin's, as will become clear. I have also rejected the Communist Party's label, State Monopoly Capitalism. While the rise in monopoly power among certain firms has proceeded to the stage where a qualitative change in the mode of production may be discerned, the State has always crucially affected capitalist accumulation. The term 'Monopoly Capitalism' therefore distinguishes more precisely the stage of the capitalist mode of production from the end of the nineteenth century (see Baran and Sweezy [1966], pp. 75-6). 2. ' ... those who, as participants, contribute information to group decisions. This latter group is very large; it extends from the most senior officials of the corporation to where it meets, at the outer perimeter, the white and blue collar workers whose function is to conform more or less mechanically to instruction or routine. It embraces all who bring specialized knowledge, talent or experience to group decision-making. This, not the management, is the guiding intelligence - the brain - of the enterprise. There is no name for all who participate in group decision-making or the organisation which they form. I propose to call this organisation the Technostructure' (Galbraith [1967], p. 80). 3. Baran and Sweezy recognise that smaller firms are also part of Monopoly Capitalism, but for Baran and Sweezy their role is secondary. 'From the point of view of a theory of monopoly capitalism, smaller business should properly be treated as part of the environment within which Big Business operates rather than as an actor on the stage' (Baran and Sweezy [1966], p.