[Marxism] Knowledge Society and Capitalism

[Marla Vijaya kumar <marlavk@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Comrades,
I am posting an extract from a paper I had read out at the recently conducted 
seminar at our Marxist Research Centre at Hyderabad, India on "Neo-Liberal 
Globalization - Critique & Alternatives" on 22 August, 2004.
I invite your suggestions and criticism on the points raised in the paper, so 
that it can help us to work further on this subject. A number of comrades 
working for our research centre are interested in this subject.
Thank you.
Marla Vijaya Kumar

Exploring a Socialist Alternative to Neo-LiberalismM. Vijaya Kumar


(Excerpt from the paper presented at the National Seminar on Neo-Liberal 
Globalization: Critique & Alternatives at Hyderabad, India on 22-08-2004 by M. 
Vijaya Kumar)



Fighting Globalization & Capitalism



Globalization has been overhyped, conflictual, contradictory and open to 
resistance and democratic intervention and transformation and not just as a 
monolithic juggernaut of domination. Globalization involves both a 
disorganization and reorganization of capitalism, a tremendous restructuring 
process, which creates openings for progressive social change and intervention. 
The information economy represents a major restructuring of the spatial 
relations between capital and labour; this does not indicate that their 
productive relations are necessarily altered in any significant manner. The 
information society/information economy despite claims to the contrary is not 
technologically determined. Indeed, as with capitalism in general there is a 
central contradiction in the development of the information society. The 
supposition that the class struggle is over is ridiculous if the issue of the 
ownership of knowledge resources is the focus of analysis; the suggestion that 
we have moved beyond
 capitalism is rendered non-sensical if we look at the division of ownership 
and the conditions of workers throughout the information economy. Just as all 
organized resistance to capitalism appeared to be stomped out it now threatens 
to rise again from the very ground.

The ­anti-globalization movement is not against globalization per se, but 
is against neo-liberal and capitalist globalization, opposing specific policies 
and institutions. We have failed rather miserably to address the multi-faceted 
development model of neoliberalism. History suggests that defeating 
neoliberalism will not be enough; we must go beyond reformism to defeat all 
forms of capitalism. To create this movement, we need to move beyond a stance 
of protest and reform, and project alternatives. If globalization is the 
capital?s response to structural conditions, it follows there are alternative, 
socialist ways of responding to the same conditions. Economic reforms are not a 
one-way street. The direction of reform Party led coalition Government in India 
promises ?reforms with a human face? ? whatever that might mean. But 
neo-liberal reforms have no human face ?they are always Janus faced. The Left 
has to propose an alternative economic agenda.

?Does a knowledge-society have to be capitalistic in some sense? Not 
necessarily. That is the kind of thing the left should be thinking about, 
instead of allowing itself to be paralysed by the bogeyman of globalization. If 
at all there is any shift that can be called epochal, it is that instead of any 
discontinuity, we can say that capitalism had reached maturity. For the first 
time, we are seeing the effects of capitalism as a comprehensive system, living 
alone with its own internal contradictions. It has little recourse outside its 
own internal mechanisms to correct or compensate for those contradictions and 
their destructive effects?9, in the words of John Bellamy Foster.



A Socialist knowledge Economy:

The "knowledge society," or "information society," is one in which knowledge 
and information have roles more predominant than earlier days. It is now 
obvious that the knowledge and information sectors are increasingly important 
domains of our contemporary economies. But in order to avoid technological 
determinism and idealism, one should see the information or knowledge 
"revolution" as part and parcel of a new form of techno-capitalism.

According to Prof. Paul Romer, ?The Knowledge Economy is one in which growth, 
value and an improving standard of living are inextricably tied to knowledge, 
its creation and its deployment. Knowledge processing replaces the processing 
of physical things on the center stage of production?. In a knowledge economy, 
knowledge plays a key role in the economic value addition across all sectors of 
the economy. The knowledge economy concept being touted by neo-liberals is 
fraught with contradictions, which are self-defeating. A true knowledge economy 
is one in which the fruits of knowledge effort are deployed for the benefit of 
the whole of the population, for improving their living conditions ? not for 
enriching a few ? because knowledge is a social product and it can never be 
privately owned. While assuring a reasonable and just return for those that 
create and apply knowledge for productive purposes, the goal should be to 
enrich the society as a whole. In a knowledge economy, knowledge and
 information add more value to goods and services than physical labour. In 
fact, physical labour is getting transformed increasingly by automation. 
Moreover, intense human effort is required to process information and to turn 
it into useful knowledge. Such knowledge should not be owned by a few 
individuals. In an industrial economy, which I prefer to call as ?Raw-material 
Processing Economy?, economic activity has to be centralised spatially under a 
command structure with strict hierarchy to achieve economies of scale. This is 
reversed in a knowledge economy. In a knowledge economy, economy activity can 
be highly dispersed and broken up into independent cellular units. This makes 
the economic operation more efficient and cost-effective. Concentrating all 
activities under one private corporation runs counter to the very logic of a 
knowledge economy. That is why capitalism and knowledge economy are 
incompatible.

The Left in India has to propose an alternative path of development that 
ensures social and economic justice while doing away with the in built 
exploitation and injustice of capitalism. Needless to say that such project 
should be taken up by garnering the active support and participation of all 
democratic and progressive sections of the polity in a broad coalition. The 
Left has to popularize the concept of a ?Socialist Knowledge Economy?, whose 
broad characteristics I propose below. The vast and growing numbers of IT 
workforce in the country as well as the intelligentsia have to be enlisted into 
this movement. The picture I present here is not complete and definitely not 
absolute. It is only a starting point for initiating action towards building a 
knowledge economy.

1.      Information Technology, like all other technologies is a double-edged 
sword. It can be used to intensify exploitation and dis-empower the vast 
majority while enriching a few individuals. In a socialist knowledge economy, 
the same IT can be used as a tool to bring about social and economic justice 
and prosperity for everybody. It is entirely at the discretion of those in 
power to choose, which way they have to wield the sword and to serve the class 
interests they choose to serve.

2.      Our emphasis on IT initiative has to shift from cheap contract work for 
export to the development of high quality inward looking software and IT 
services that are specifically designed for India?s development needs. The 
central and state governments should spare their resources in setting up 
high-end research centers to conduct core research in computer software, 
industrial process automation, bio-informatics, virtual reality and multimedia 
applications, geographical information systems, e-governance facilities etc., 
which can be utilised for our own needs, without depending on outside MNCs. 
With a huge pool of IT and scientific experts, it is not an insurmountable 
task, provided we have the political will to execute.

3.      In the case of bio-technology, India produces a large number of 
bio-tech specialists, but a majority of them are jobless. Foreign MNCs use 
Indian expertise and experiment on Indian farmers. With vast variety of crops, 
irrigation and environmental conditions, which differ from district to 
district, the need to develop new varieties of crops to suit local conditions 
is imperative. We can gainfully employ our bio-technology specialists to do 
research locally and develop genetically modified crops that suit our needs, 
without endangering the environment and safeguard bio-diversity. There is no 
limit to the degree of penetration of bio-technology into our agricultural 
sector and the consequent benefits it showers on our economy. We do not need 
multinationals to do this for us. The cost of setting up bio-technology lab 
facilities as well as the software for conducting research is coming down 
sharply, enabling smaller firms to enter this field, which till now is the sole 
domain of
 large MNCs. The core genetic research can be conducted by central and state 
level laboratories. Thus a three-tier approach will be most effective.

4.      The handloom sector in India is in ruins. Successive state governments 
and the neoliberal policies of the central government have virtually killed the 
handloom co-operatives. This condition can be reversed and we can bring back 
light into their lives by utilising advances in IT. Our young engineers can be 
entrusted with the task of manufacturing and maintaining computerised automatic 
weaving machines, which can be supplied to our weaving communities at 
affordable cost. Power looms should be allowed only in co-operatives. Weavers 
co-operatives can help the weavers? families to add more value by producing 
ready made garments and help market them. We have before us the experience of 
the Benetton Co-operative in Italy (The popular ?United Colors of Benetton? 
brand). Such a project is entirely viable and necessary. Besides improving the 
lot of the weavers, it will gainfully employ a large number of engineers and 
computer specialists locally.

5.      We can draw on the experience of innovative projects such as Canada?s 
Newfoundland Knowledge Hub Project, where locally available IT expertise is 
integrated into the local economies to develop local resources such as 
agriculture, fisheries, food processing, traffic management, community health, 
tax collection etc. Vast amounts of satellite data can be utilised by local 
expertise to develop geological information systems and maps that can be 
employed for water conservation and irrigation systems, flood and drought 
management, desalination and fresh water supply systems, non-conventional 
energy sources, micro-hydel power plants, roads, rural administration etc., 
that will enrich local economies. We can draw on the experience of China in 
developing micro-hydel power plants that can be run by local communities. 
Distributed power generation utilising locally available resources and managed 
locally is increasingly being seen as a more effective and environmentally 
friendly
 alternative.

6.      The inter-linking of water bodies and water management and conservation 
should be taken up in a bottoms-up approach, with the task of building and 
maintaining irrigation and water conservation projects entrusted to local 
bodies. By bringing about more area of waste land to use, we can distribute 
land to the landless poor, help them to set up agricultural co-operatives that 
provide a safety net against adverse weather conditions and consequent crop 
failures, distribute fertilisers, pesticides and agricultural machinery and 
market their products. Local educated talent will have enormous opportunities 
in running such ventures. Agricultural reforms will be meaningful only when 
aided by such measures.

Much water has flown under the bridge. It is neither feasible nor is it correct 
to propose a centralised planned economy in this age of information. It is now 
possible, with the help of IT to build a de-centralised planned socialist 
economy that can effectively function in a democratic environment, by 
empowering local governance. Developing localised centers of excellence by 
unleashing local talent should be the goal of the socialist knowledge economy, 
while eliminating exploitation and social and economic injustice. To paraphrase 
Lenin?s statement, in today?s context, socialist knowledge economy is local 
governance plus deployment of IT for empowering the masses.



M. Vijaya Kumar

Ph: 091-40-2302 1684 marlavk@xxxxxxxxx


                
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism