Work and Power in Post-Fordist Production: a Case Study of Four Machine Shops

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Work and Power in Post-Fordist Production: a Case Study of Four Machine Shops University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Doctoral Dissertations Student Scholarship Spring 1994 Work and power in post-Fordist production: A case study of four machine shops Stephen A. Sweet University of New Hampshire, Durham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation Recommended Citation Sweet, Stephen A., "Work and power in post-Fordist production: A case study of four machine shops" (1994). Doctoral Dissertations. 1796. https://scholars.unh.edu/dissertation/1796 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material bad to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9506431 Work and power in post-Fordist production: A case study of four machine shops Sweet, Stephen A., Ph.D. University of New Hampshire, 1994 UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor. MI 48106 WORK AND POWER IN POST-FORDIST PRODUCTION: A CASE STUDY OF FOUR MACHINE SHOPS BY STEPHEN A. SWEET BA, State University of New York at Potsdam, 1985 MA, University of New Hampshire, 1989 DISSERTATION Submitted to the University of New Hampshire in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology May, 1994 This dissertation has been examined and approved. Dissertation Director, Cynthia M. Duncan, Associate Professor of Sociology ~5 L t c Khleif, Professor of Sociology Sally Ward, associate Professor of Sociology Nina Glick-Schiller, Assistant Professor of Anthropology Wiliam Harris, Associate Professor of History Date ii DEDICATION To the best parents any son could wish iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many people have helped me through the intellectual process and emotional travails involved in writing this dissertation. Cynthia Duncan labored with me through the numerous proposals and chapter rewrites. Without her help at each stage, the quality of this work certainly would have been considerably diminished. Nina Glick-Schiller, William Harris, Bud Khleif, and Sally Ward all were instrumental in guiding me to appropriate literatures and helped rid me of some blinders. Thanks also to The Institute for Policy and Social Science Research for a grant which facilitated field research. Wesley, Dory, and Nelson Rooker provided inestimable support in a pilot study which preceded this research. Jonathan Sweet rekindled my fire by sharing his work experiences and by showing sincere interest at a time when my enthusiasm was lagging. Denise Colbert was one my best sounding boards. Susan Frankel and Marcia Ghidina were both wonderful in guiding me through the final stages of writing and defending this dissertation. Mark Campbell provided a masterful job of proofreading and Deena Peschke was very helpful in bringing this project to completion. But most importantly, I extend my thanks to the men and women of Machinist Valley, who generously shared their time and lives. Of course I am solely responsible for any shortcomings. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION.................................................. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS........................................... iv LIST OF TABLES............................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES.............................................. vii ABSTRACT.................................................... ix CHAPTER PAGE INTRODUCTION................................................ 1 I. FROM FORDISM TO POST-FORDISM.......................... 6 II. METHODOLOGY............................................ 59 III. OPPORTUNITY AND ECONOMIC REWARDS UNDER POST-FORDISM.................................... 84 IV. OWNER CONTROL IN POST-FORDIST PRODUCTION.............. 107 V. WORKER CONTROL IN POST-FORDIST PRODUCTION............. 157 VI. CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION.............................. 192 BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................ 201 APPENDIX A: WORKER INTERVIEW GUIDE......................... 216 APPENDIX B: EMPLOYER INTERVIEW GUIDE....................... 232 APPENDIX C: CPI ADJUSTMENTS................................. 234 v LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Summary of the Differences Between Fordist and Post-Fordist Eras 4 5 Table 2.1 Employment Opportunities for Machinists in Machinist Valley: Changing Size of Machine Shops, 1960-1990....................................... 69 Table 3.1 Number of Machine Industry Establishments in The United States, 1970-1990............................ 86 Table 3.2 Employment Opportunities for Machinists in the United States: Changes in Employment in the Machine Industry........................................ 87 Table 3.3 Employment, Payroll and Yearly Income in the Machining Industries, 1990............................ 91 vi Table 3.4 Average Employee Income in the Machining Industries, 1974-1990.................................. 93 Table 3.5 Percentage of Large and Small Businesses Offering Fringe Benefits, 1986....................... 96 Table 3.6 Property Taxes on a Median Priced Home in the Town of Liston, 1970-1990.............................. 102 Table 5.1 United States Union Membership for Selected Years, 1953-1986.............................. 160 Table 5.2 Percentage of Employees at Different Sized Companies Who are Unionized..................... 161 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Machining Enterprises in Machinist Valley 1960-1990.............................................. 71 Figure 3.1 Employment in the Machining Industry by Enterprise Size, 1970-1990............................. 88 viii ABSTRACT WORK AND POWER IN POST-FORDIST PRODUCTION: A CASE STUDY OF FOUR MACHINE SHOPS by Stephen A. Sweet University of New Hampshire. May, 1994 American industry is shifting to a "post-Fordist" approach to production. The post-Fordist approach includes expanding use of advanced manufacturing technologies, decreasing organizational sizes, decreasing bureaucratization of the work place, and the abandonment of Tayloristic managerial practices in favor of increasing worker participation in decision making processes. This study examines the effects of the post-Fordist approach upon power relations in four work places in the machining industry. Interviews with 44 machinists, employers and community leaders in the case study site "Machinist Valley" show that the shift to post-Fordism is accompanied by declining incomes, fewer employment opportunities, lower benefits, and less job security in comparison to machining work during the Fordist era. While machinists exercise greater skills in the work place, they have less power to determine the pace and pay of their work. Declining worker power primarily results from ix owners' abilities in Machinist Valley to instill and take advantage of the feeling of individual and collective job insecurity that pervades workers' consciousness. These findings point to the need for further evaluation of the shift to "flexible specialization." Findings of this study suggest that the optimistic scenario of craft control theory (Piore & Sable 1984), which asserts that increasing craft skills enhance worker power in the work place, is unlikely to be born out of post-Fordism in the current market conditions. The experiences of workers in Machinist Valley are more consistent with the projections of fragmentation theory (Lash & Urry 1987), which projects decreasing worker power due to declines in workers' class capacities. x INTRODUCTION In the early decades of the 20th century, a new approach to production dramatically changed the shape of American manufacturing work. Huge factories replaced the small craft shops of the 19th century. Highly specialized machines geared for mass production, such as the assembly line, replaced simple craft tools (Hounshell 1984). A bureaucratically organized work place replaced the informal "simple" methods of organizing and controlling work (Edwards 1979). A new method of "scientific management," that separated
Recommended publications
  • Care and Freedom
    Care and freedom Author: S. Umi Devi Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/4083 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Berkeley, CA: Center for Working Families, University of California, Berkeley, 2000 Use of this resource is governed by the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons "Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States" (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/) Care and Freedom S. Uma Devi* October 2000 *S. Uma Devi is currently on sabbatical from her position as Chairperson of the Economics Department at the Univeristy of Kerala, India, where until recently she was also the Director of Women’s Studies. S. Uma Devi was a visiting scholar at the Center for Working Families during the Spring of 1999-2000. ÓCenter for Working Families, University of California, Berkeley Acknowledgments I am grateful to the Vanguard Foundation for generously funding my research on globalization, human development, and gender concerns. This paper, part of that ongoing project, would not have been possible but for Professor Arlie Hochschild’s keen interest and investment of time, energy, and care. She reversed the global chain of caregivers. I also thank Professors Arlie Hochschild and Barrie Thorne as co-directors of the Center for Working Families, for inviting me to affiliate with the center. Their team, consisting of Bonnie Kwan, Chi-Shan Lin, and Janet Oh, have gone out of their way to provide assistance with loving care. I will always cherish the cordial work atmosphere of the center. I also wish to thank Professors Hochschild and Thorne for their comments on an earlier draft of this paper, and Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Culture and Development Economics: Theory, Evidence, Implications
    39-62b.qxd 22.10.2002 13:12 Page 39 POLSCI PAPERS CULTURE AND DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS: THEORY, EVIDENCE, IMPLICATIONS Michael Woolcock * Vijayendra Rao ** Sabina Alkire *** 1 The only way to offer universality for one's scientific judgement is to use other disciplines that can contribute to that judgement - or, at least, this seems to be the latest consensus among scholars. Economics is a complex domain which cannot function well without the help of other sciences. Cultural variables are relevant for the economic studies because various forms of cultural behaviour have to be tested by economists for the success of developing and implementing economic strategies. Although economics has the arrogance to consider itself self sufficient, quantitative data must be sustained for accuracy by qualitative interpretations supplied by sociology or anthropology. One can, after using cultural data, find new research questions and raise more accurate theories. This article argues that multidisciplinary studies are the best cure for superficial and unfounded conclusions Key words: economy, culture, multidisciplinarity, development, social capital, epistemology * Michael Woolcock is social scientist with the Development Research Group at the World Bank and an adjunct lecturer in Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University ** Vijayendra Rao is senior economist with the Development Research Group at the World Bank *** Sabina Alkire is research writer for the Commission on Human Security and Senior Research Associate with the Von Hugel Institute, University of Cambridge 1 Our thanks to Anthony Bebbington, Lynn Bennett, Michael Cernea, Paul Clements, Shelton Davis, Kreszentia Duer, Katrinka Ebbe, David Ellerman, Scott Guggenheim, Robert Klitgaard, Alexandre Marc, Stephen Marglin, Deepa Narayan, Ron Parker, Frank Penna, Nicholas Sambanis, Amartya Sen, Marco Verweij, Michael Walton, and Anna Wetterberg for comments on earlier drafts of this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • A Critique of the Fordism of the Regulation School
    A Critique of the Fordism of the Regulation School Ferruccio Gambino1 Introduction Some of the categories that people have used in recent years to describe the changes taking place in the world of production, such as Fordism, post-Fordism and immaterial production, have shown themselves to be rather blunt instruments.2 Here I intend to deal with the use of the concepts “Fordism” and “post-Fordism” by the regulation school, which has given a particular twist to the former term, and which coined ex novo the latter. The aim of my article is to help break the conflict-excluding spell under which the regulation school has succeeded in casting Fordism and post-Fordism. From midway through the 1970s, as a result of the writings of Michel Aglietta3 and then of other exponents of the regulation school, 1 The English version of this paper appeared in 1996 in Common Sense no. 19 and was subsequently published as a chapter in Werner Bonefeld (ed), Revolutionary Writing: Common Sense Essays In Post-Political Politics Writing, New York, Autonomedia, 2003. 2 For a timely critique of the term “immaterial production”, see Sergio Bologna, “Problematiche del lavoro autonomo in Italia” (Part I), Altreragioni, no. 1 (1992), pp. 10-27. 3 Michel Aglietta, (1974), Accumulation et régulation du capitalisme en longue période. L’exemple des Etats Unis (1870-1970), Paris, INSEE, 1974; the second French edition has the title Régulation et crises du capitalisme, Paris, Calmann- Lévy, 1976; English translation, A Theory of Capitalist Regulation: the US Experience, London and New York, Verso, 1979; in 1987 there followed a second English edition from the same publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • February 11, 2016 Curriculum Vitae Stephen A. Marglin EDUCATION
    February 11, 2016 Curriculum Vitae Stephen A. Marglin EDUCATION Ph.D., Harvard University, 1965 Cambridge University, 1959-1960 A.B., Harvard University, 1959 PRINCIPAL ACADEMIC POSITIONS Walter S. Barker Professor of Economics, Harvard University, 1984– Professor of Economics, Harvard University, 1969–1984 Associate Professor of Economics, Harvard University, 1968–69 Assistant Professor of Economics, Harvard University, 1965–68 Assistant Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1964–65 Research Associate (India Project), Center for International Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, New Delhi, India, 1963–65 Junior Fellow of the Society of Fellows, Harvard University, 1960–63 Henry Fellow, Pembroke College, Cambridge University, 1959–60 OTHER ACADEMIC POSITIONS Research Adviser, World Institute for Development Economics Research (United Nations University), Helsinki, 1985-1993 Directeur d'Études Adjoint, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, Paris, 1982 Visiting Scholar, Concordia University, Montreal, 1978-1984; Visiting Professor, 1974–78 Visiting Professor, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1974 Visiting Professor, Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi, 1967–68 ASSOCIATIONS Econometric Society (Fellow) World Economic Association (Founding Member) World Future Council (2006–2009) BOOKS Dismal Science: How Thinking Like An Economist Undermines Community, Harvard University Press, 2008 Perdiendo el Contacto, Cochabamba and Lima: Cai Pacha and PRATEC, 2000 Growth, Distribution, and Prices,
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 the Golden Age of Capitalism
    The Golden Age of Capitalism Luiz Carlos Bresser-Pereira Chapter of the book being written, Rentiers’ Capitalism. March 2020. In the nineteenth century Western Europe and the United States experienced a remarkable economic and cultural progress but was tarnished by the domestic exploitation of the workers and by the reduction of the peoples of Asia and Africa to the condition of colonies. This was also a period of peace among the major potencies under the leadership of Britain, which had begun with its victory over the France of Napoleon. A period that end tragically with the irrational 1914-18 First World War, whose main cause was the resentment of Germany and Italy. The internal division of these two countries retarded their industrial revolution and lost the opportunity of building a colonial empire as The UK and France had been able to build. This war divided and fragilized Europe, opener room for the socialist 1917 Russian Revolution. and marked the transition of the dominant country from The UK to the United States. The post- war 1920s were euphoric years in the US, but, not surprisingly, ended up with the 1929 crash of the New York Stock Exchange and the 1930s’ Great Depression. Followed a huge fall in GDP, mass unemployment, the discredit of the gold standard and of economic liberalism. The time was, now, for fascism in Italy and Germany, for Stalinism in the Soviet Union, which falsified the Democratic Revolution of the turn of the twentieth century, but was also the time for the New Deal in the United States, which showed that capitalism could be made democratic despite the power of capital and or organization – that a compromise was possible between capitalists, technobureaucrats and the workers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Domestication of Ford Model T in Denmark
    Aalborg Universitet The Domestication of Ford Model T in Denmark Wagner, Michael Publication date: 2009 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link to publication from Aalborg University Citation for published version (APA): Wagner, M. (2009). The Domestication of Ford Model T in Denmark. Paper presented at Appropriating America Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. ? Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. ? You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain ? You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Downloaded from vbn.aau.dk on: September 24, 2021 The domestication of Ford Model T in Denmark By Michael F. Wagner, Institute for History and Social Studies, Aalborg University Ford Motor Company started to operate on a commercial level in Denmark from 1907 by appointing a sales agent, Bülow & Co., as importer of Ford automobiles to the Scandinavian market. The major breakthrough for the company on a global scale came with the introduction of the Model T by the end of 1908.
    [Show full text]
  • The Paradox of Positivism
    Dylan Riley The Paradox of Positivism The essays in The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences contribute to a historical and comparative sociology of social science by systematically com- paring the rises, falls, and absences of ‘‘methodological positivism’’ across the human sciences. Although all of the essays are of extremely high quality, three contributions develop the argument most fully: George Steinmetz’s introduction and William H. Sewell Jr.’s and Steinmetz’s contributions to the volume. My remarks focus on these three pieces, drawing on the other contributions to illustrate aspects of the argument or to suggest tensions that need exploration. What Is Positivism? What are the authors trying to explain? The term positivism has at least three meanings. It can be a commitment to social evolution in the sense of Auguste Comte and Emile Durkheim. It can refer to an articulated philosophical tra- dition: logical positivism. Or it can refer to a set of scientific research prac- tices: methodological positivism. It is the last meaning that is most relevant for Steinmetz (2005c: 109). Methodological positivism refers to a concept of knowledge, a concept of social reality, and a concept of science. First, it is an epistemology that identifies scientific knowledge with covering laws—that is, statements of the type ‘‘if A occurs, then B will follow.’’ Second, it is an ontology that equates existence with objects that are observable. Third, it is associated with a self- understanding of scientific activity in which social science is independent
    [Show full text]
  • “Comparative Urbanism” in Post- Fordist Cities
    Journal for interdisciplinary research in architecture, design and planning contourjournal.org RESEARCH ARTICLE COMPARING HABITATS The Challenges of “Comparative Urbanism” in Post- Fordist Cities: The cases of Turin and Detroit AUTHORS Asma Mehan 1 AFFILIATIONS 1 CITTA - Research Center for Territory, Transports and Environment. University of Porto UP . Portugal CONTACT [email protected] 1 | September 15, 2019 | DOI https://doi.org/10.6666/contour.v0i4.92 ASMA MEHAN Abstract In 1947, the U.S. Secretary of State, George C. Marshall announced that the USA would provide development aid to help the recovery and reconstruction of the economies of Europe, which was widely known as the ‘Marshall Plan’. In Italy, this plan generated a resurgence of modern industrialization and remodeled Italian Industry based on American models of production. As the result of these transnational transfers, the systemic approach known as Fordism largely succeeded and allowed some Italian firms such as Fiat to flourish. During this period, Detroit and Turin, homes to the most powerful automobile corporations of the twentieth century, became intertwined in a web of common features such as industrial concentration, mass flows of immigrations, uneven urban sprawl, radical iconography and inner-city decay, which characterized Fordism in both cities. In the crucial decades of the postwar expansion of the automobile industries, both cities were hubs of labor battles and social movements. However, after the radical decline in their industries as previous auto cities, they experienced the radical shift toward post-Fordist urbanization and production of political urbanism. This research responds to the recent interest for a comparative (re)turn in urban studies by suggesting the conceptual theoretical baseline for the proposed comparative framework in post-Fordist cities.
    [Show full text]
  • Ownership in the Electricity Market: Property, the Firm, and the Climate Crisis
    MPIfG Discussion Paper 20 / 5 Ownership in the Electricity Market Property, the Firm, and the Climate Crisis Gregory Ferguson-Cradler MPIfG Discussion Paper MPIfG Discussion Paper Gregory Ferguson-Cradler Ownership in the Electricity Market: Property, the Firm, and the Climate Crisis MPIfG Discussion Paper 20/5 Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung, Köln Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, Cologne April 2020 MPIfG Discussion Paper ISSN 0944-2073 (Print) ISSN 1864-4325 (Internet) © 2020 by the author(s) About the author Gregory Ferguson-Cradler is Associate Professor in the Department of Law, Philosophy and International Studies at Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Lillehammer, Norway. Email: [email protected] MPIfG Discussion Papers are refereed scholarly papers of the kind that are publishable in a peer-reviewed disciplinary journal. Their objective is to contribute to the cumulative improvement of theoretical knowl- edge. Copies can be ordered from the Institute or downloaded as PDF files (free). Downloads www.mpifg.de Go to Publications / Discussion Papers Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies Paulstr. 3 | 50676 Cologne | Germany Tel. +49 221 2767-0 Fax +49 221 2767-555 www.mpifg.de [email protected] Ferguson-Cradler: Ownership in the Electricity Market iii Abstract Electricity is a key area in climate mitigation. The sector needs to significantly expand while transitioning to renewable production, all in an extremely short timeframe. This paper fo- cuses on ownership and control in the electricity sector in an era of climate change. Bor- rowing substantially from classical American Institutionalism, heterodox theories and his- tories of the firm, and legal institutionalism, this paper discusses the historically constituted nature of the categories of property, capital, and the firm and how these literatures provide helpful frameworks for analyzing the recent history and possible futures of electricity sec- tors.
    [Show full text]
  • Culture and Public Action
    SUP_Rao.qxd 3/30/20042:58PMPagei Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Culture and Public Action Culture andPublic SUP_Rao.qxd 3/30/2004 2:58 PM Page ii Contributors Anita Abraham Sabina Alkire Arjun Appadurai Lourdes Arizpe Fernando Calderón Monica Das Gupta Shelton H. Davis Mary Douglas Simon Harragin Carol Jenkins Arjo Klamer Timur Kuran Jean-Philippe Platteau Vijayendra Rao Amartya Sen Alicia Szmukler Marco Verweij Michael Walton SUP_Rao.qxd 3/30/2004 2:58 PM Page iii Culture and Public Action Edited by Vijayendra Rao and Michael Walton Stanford Social Sciences an imprint of Stanford University Press Stanford, California 2004 SUP_Rao.qxd 3/30/2004 2:58 PM Page iv Stanford University Press Stanford, California © 2004 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433 Telephone 202-473-1000 Internet www.worldbank.org E-mail [email protected] Chapter Three © 2004 by Arjun Appadurai All rights reserved. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent.The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work.The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is copyrighted.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nature of the Labor Exchange and the Theory of Capitalist Production
    The Nature of Labor Exchange and the Theory of Capitalist Production* HERBERT GINTIS ABSTRACT: This article compares the neoclassical and Marxian theories of the firm. The neoclassical, interpreting the social relations in the production process, in particular the relations of authority and inequality, as flowing from the nature of technology and atomistic preferences, is shown to be incorrect. The Marxian theory which interprets the social relations of the production process as the outcome of class struggle, is supported theoretically and empirically. The Marxian analysis presented herein starts with the labor/ labor-power distinction, and derives the relations of authority, control, al forms of inequality in the capitalist firm from the dynamic of extraction of surplus value. ***** Introduction tions and preference structures) are determined outside economic theory by the state of science and the psychology of the individual. Thus the neoclas- This paper contrasts two perspectives on the sical analysis of capitalism reduces to the examina- organization and structure of the production pro- tion of market relations among technologically and cess, neoclassical and Marxist, defending the latter psychologically determinate actors. Were this as a more accurate portrayal of capitalist produc- valid, the neoclassical of tion. Neoclassical theory, in capsule form, views the methodology theory production would follow as a matter of course. organization of the capitalist enterprise as the In Marxist theory, however, the social rela- solution to the problem of finding a least-cost tions of capitalism cannot be reduced to technique of production given an array of factor exchange relations. The essence of prices. Marxist theory views this capitalism is the exploi- organization, tation of labor the and rather, as the outcome of a struggle (albeit an through private ownership control of capital on the one hand, and the system unequal struggle) between capital and labor over of on the other.
    [Show full text]
  • Hegelian Freedom and the Communitarian Critique of the Market
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Philosophy Theses Department of Philosophy Summer 8-7-2018 Hegelian Freedom and the Communitarian Critique of the Market Matthew Schrepfer Georgia State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses Recommended Citation Schrepfer, Matthew, "Hegelian Freedom and the Communitarian Critique of the Market." Thesis, Georgia State University, 2018. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/philosophy_theses/233 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Philosophy at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HEGELIAN FREEDOM AND THE COMMUNITARIAN CRITIQUE OF THE MARKET by MATTHEW SCHREPFER Under the Direction of Sebastian Rand, PhD. ABSTRACT Market structures have come to dominate every area of our society, and market logic—in the form of rational choice theory, the law and economics movement, and the like—has equally dominated our thinking about society. In this thesis, I will examine one critique of this state of affairs: that offered by G.W.F. Hegel. I compare Hegel’s critique of the market to the similar critique of modern communitarians like Charles Taylor and Michael Sandel, and argue that Hegel’s distinctive conception of freedom allows him to capture what is right about the modern communitarian view while avoiding most
    [Show full text]