Re: [Marxism] Should IT workers unionize?

["daniel r" <dddrrr84@xxxxxxxxx>]

French Sociologists Eve Chiapello and Luc Boltanski wrote in 2005 a
book on the topic of contemporary labor world, entitled Le nouvel
esprit du capitalisme. Their claim is that since the 1960's labor
under capitalism had to become more flexible and individualistic, and
more project-oriented than workday-oriented. They attribute the change
to the capitalist system having to cope with emerging demands on
issues such as self-expression, individual liberty etc (rather than
regular wage and workday issues). A very interesting text, which
touches subjects from work ethics under IT companies to advertising
and consumer culture. I'd say it is the ultimate culture critique text
of neoliberal capitalism.
The book was translated to English under the title The New Spirit of Capitalism.

some info on the book:
http://www.versobooks.com/books/ab/b-titles/boltanski_chiapello_new.shtml
http://www.amazon.com/New-Spirit-Capitalism-Luc-Boltanski/dp/1859845541

a very interesting article which analyses Chiapello and Bultanski's
arguements and deals with them (French):
http://multitudes.samizdat.net/spip.php?article1287


"
Joonas Laine wrote:

Could you expand on this? It sounds interesting, because it touches a
topic I've spent a while thinking about lately.

Some time ago a group of Finnish autonomists put forward a thesis in
their pamphlet that the kind of "timeless spaceless" work where you work
at projects, always with different people, here and there, even on your
free time, is the new *paradigmatic* type of work in the post-fordist
capitalist era (instead of the fordist "mass worker"). They also quote
Marx (Grundrisse and all) very approvingly, though I think they miss the
point somewhat, and understand only his revolutionary spirit (a good
thing in itself), though not so much the actual economic theory.. (not
that I would be a master, but anyway).

Anyone read any good books on the "high tech revolution", and what it
really means? Is it a paradigmatic shift in capitalism, or more or less
the same shit in a different package? The autonomists' material is heavy
on impressionistic philosophizing, but very lean on any numbers.
*Politically* though I think it's worth responding to, all the more so
because they do make very good critical points e.g. on the social
democratic left's orientation towards the "wellfare state".
"

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu