communists in situ

leberwurst proletariat

Tag: Marx

Capitalism as Religion (Benjamin, 1921)

BenjaminBnF

A religion may be discerned in capitalism – that is to say, capitalism serves essentially to allay the same anxieties, torments, and disturbances to which the so-called religions offered answers. The proof of the religious structure of capitalism – not merely, as Weber believes, as a formation conditioned by religion, but as an essentially religious phenomenon – would still lead even today to the folly of an endless universal polemic. We cannot draw closed the net in which we are caught. Later on, however, we shall be able to gain an overview of it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

The Controversy About Marx and Justice

2009.27_1.tif

by Normas Geras (1989)

In this essay I review a fast-growing sector of the current literature on Marx and the controversy that has fuelled its growth. During the last decade or so, the keen interest within moral and political philosophy in the concept of justice has left its mark on the philosophical discussion of his work. It has left it in the shape of the question: did Marx himself condemn capitalism as unjust? There are those who have argued energetically that he did not; and as many who are equally insistent that he did — a straightforward enough division, despite some differences of approach on either side of it. To prevent misunderstanding, it is worth underlining at the outset that the question being addressed is not that of whether Marx did indeed condemn capitalism, as opposed just to analysing, describing, explaining its nature and tendencies. All parties to this dispute agree that he did, agree in other words that there is some such normative dimension to his thought, and frankly, I do not think the denial of it worth taking seriously any longer. The question is the more specific one: does Marx condemn capitalism in the light of any principle of justice?

Read the rest of this entry »

How to change the course of human history (at least, the part that’s already happened)

246293516_aec578115f_o

by David Graeber, David Wengrow

The story we have been telling ourselves about our origins is wrong, and perpetuates the idea of inevitable social inequality. David Graeber and David Wengrow ask why the myth of ‘agricultural revolution’ remains so persistent, and argue that there is a whole lot more we can learn from our ancestors.

1. In the beginning was the word

For centuries, we have been telling ourselves a simple story about the origins of social inequality. For most of their history, humans lived in tiny egalitarian bands of hunter-gatherers. Then came farming, which brought with it private property, and then the rise of cities which meant the emergence of civilization properly speaking. Civilization meant many bad things (wars, taxes, bureaucracy, patriarchy, slavery…) but also made possible written literature, science, philosophy, and most other great human achievements.

Almost everyone knows this story in its broadest outlines. Since at least the days of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, it has framed what we think the overall shape and direction of human history to be. This is important because the narrative also defines our sense of political possibility. Most see civilization, hence inequality, as a tragic necessity. Some dream of returning to a past utopia, of finding an industrial equivalent to ‘primitive communism’, or even, in extreme cases, of destroying everything, and going back to being foragers again. But no one challenges the basic structure of the story.

There is a fundamental problem with this narrative.

It isn’t true.
Read the rest of this entry »

Durcheinander der Revolution. Umsturz als Transformation und Konstruktion

City-Skins_Marx-Engels_Berlin_2017-c-Boris-Niehaus-471x313

Von Bini Adamczak (2018)

Die Revolution, die eine gute Zukunft realisieren will, entstammt einer schlechten Gegenwart, die sie überwinden will. Ohne die gefrorene Gewalt dieser vorrevolutionären Strukturen lässt sich die entfesselte der revolutionären Bewegung nicht verstehen. Wer das stille Leid der Unterdrückten nicht sehen will, wird in ihrem schließlichen Schrei nichts anderes hören können als das Brüllen einer Barbarei, gegen die dieser eigentlich gerichtet ist. Denn zunächst ist die Aufgabe der Revolution negativ bestimmt, sie hat einen unerträglichen Zustand zu beenden. »Der Zweck der Revolution«, schrieb Theodor W. Adorno in einem Brief an Walter Benjamin bündig, »ist die Abschaffung der Angst« (Adorno 1994, 173). Insofern aber die Angst, die sich auf eine ungewisse Zukunft richtet, der Vergangenheit entstammt, ist das kommunistische Morgen nicht ohne kapitalistisches Gestern verstehbar. Die Revolution lässt sich nicht ohne Kenntnis der Welt erschließen, aus deren Zusammenbruch sie hervorgeht und aus deren Trümmern sie eine neue zu erschaffen hat.

Read the rest of this entry »

Hans-Jürgen Krahl (1943-1970)

Studenten-Demos BRD - Besetzung der Frankfurter Uni; mitte J?rgen Krahl, Vorstandsmitglied der SDS

Hans-Jürgen Krahl points to the ceiling during the occupation of the University of Frankfurt, May 15, 1968 (AP Photo)

Dave Mesing | Hans-Jürgen Krahl, For and Against Critical Theory: Introduction

For Anglophone readers, Hans-Jürgen Krahl’s name is most distinctive as a marker for a possible alternative path within the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research.

Hans-Jürgen Krahl | Personal Information

The anti-authoritarian revolt was precisely a process of Marxist training, in which we have gradually detached from bourgeois ideologies, in which we have revealed the purely ideological character of its promises of liberation, and definitively understood that the classic forms of liberalism and emancipation, which still drive the liberal capitalism of competition, have definitively passed away. We have understood that now, in the struggle against the state, against bourgeois justice, and against the organized power of capital, in a long and certainly difficult process, it is a matter of conquering conditions that allow us to enter into organized contact with the working class and to create the historical pressures necessary for the education of class consciousness. It was a long process of education which also had to impose itself within the SDS.

Detlev Claussen | Krahl and His Conjuncture: An Interview with Detlev Claussen

The task for intellectuals is not to propagate the revolution from the outside, but to develop emancipatory needs which go beyond work—an emancipatory consciousness of the totality. In 1969, the world in Europe still seemed so open, the Italian Hot Autumn and the September strikes in Germany made such a task seem appropriate.

Read the rest of this entry »

Which Feminisms?

IMG_5578

Frauenkampftag, Berlin, Mar 8. 2018

By Susan Watkins (New Left Review 109, January-February 2018)

Of all the opposition movements to have erupted since 2008, the rebirth of a militant feminism is perhaps the most surprising—not least because feminism as such had never gone away; women’s empowerment has long been a mantra of the global establishment. Yet there were already signs that something new was stirring in the US and UK student protests of 2010, the 2011 Occupy encampments at Puerta del Sol and Zuccotti Park. In India, mass rallies condemned the gang rape of Jyoti Pandey in 2012 and feminist flash-mobs have disrupted the moral-policing operations of Hindutva fundamentalists. The protests against sexual assault on US campuses blazed across the New York media in 2014. In Brazil, 30,000 black women descended on the capital in 2015 to demonstrate against sexual violence and racism, calling for the ouster of the corrupt head of the National Congress, Eduardo Cunha; earlier that year, the March of Margaridas brought over 50,000 rural women to Brasília. In Argentina, feminist campaigners against domestic violence were at the forefront of protests against Macri’s shock therapy. In China, the arrest in 2015 of five young women preparing to sticker Beijing’s public transport against sexual violence—members of Young Feminist Activism, an online coalition that’s played cat-and-mouse with the authorities—was met with web petitions signed by over 2 million people.

Read the rest of this entry »

For Moishe Postone

797StarnbgBarbaraMoisheHarold600pxw.jpg

Barbara Brick, Moishe Postone, Harold Marcuse, 1979, after Herbert Marcuse’s death

by Jacob Blumenfeld

I first encountered Moishe Postone‘s work on antisemitism in the early 2000s but it wasn’t until 2008-9, when the United States was in the grips of a financial crisis, that his thinking on Marx, capitalism, and value really began to hit home. I remember making zines out of his essay, “Critique and Historical Transformation“, and distributing them in New York City to students, activists, and friends, in the hopes of starting a more critical conversation on the crisis. The point was to go beyond superficial analyses of “crony capitalism” and to see the totality of capital as a self-mediating, crisis-prone dynamic of value which cannot simply be opposed to labor. Furthermore, Postone’s critical theory challenged those of us who became politicized in the ‘anti-globalization’ movement and the anti-war movements of the late 90s and early 00s.

Read the rest of this entry »

Red Seder

Picture1.png

Bdikas khomets (Search for leaven). Illustration from the first edition of Hagadah far gloybers un apikorsim (Passover story for believers and atheists). Kharkov, 1923.

Blessed is October, dictator of the proles, who produces, distributes, and consumes the earth’s harvest.

In Berlin 5777, a new communist Haggadah for a Red Passover Seder was brought forth into the world. It replaces the communist Haggadah of  Brooklyn, 5771. This new one is the first Red Haggadah since the Jewish Bolsheviks used them in the 1920s. I now offer it here for use (the Hebrew text came out backwards, unfortunately). The historical background text is below, but to do an actual seder, one must download the Haggadah and follow the steps. Love live October 5778!

Download the Haggadah for a RED SEDER: to read/ to print

Read the rest of this entry »

Umrisse der Weltcommune

kosmo

Von Freundinnen und Freunde der klassenlosen Gesellschaft, 2018 – Kosmoprolet #5

1. Nachdem die Möglichkeit einer anderen Welt lange Jahre fast nur noch in Botschaften aus dem lakandonischen Urwald oder von Leuten behauptet wurde, die darunter kaum mehr verstehen als die Einführung einer Finanzmarktsteuer, hat sich das Bild angesichts der schweren Weltmarktgewitter seit 2008 verändert. Entwürfe einer postkapitalistischen Gesellschaft entstehen seither zuhauf und schaffen es mit etwas Glück sogar auf die Bestsellerlisten. Auch Radikale denken wieder vermehrt darüber nach, wie es anders sein könnte. Allerdings gilt für alle derzeit diskutierten Alternativen, dass sie eher am Schreibtisch ausgebrütet als auf der Straße erfunden wurden. Von den Kämpfen der vergangenen Jahre – sei es der arabische Frühling, die Occupy-Bewegung oder das Aufbegehren gegen das neue Massenelend in Südeuropa – sind sie vor allem negativ geprägt. Weniger deshalb, weil diese Kämpfe auf ganzer Linie gescheitert sind. Weitgehend außerhalb der Produktion angesiedelt und auf die Realisierung »echter Demokratie« gepolt, haben sie die Frage nach einer anderen Gesellschaft nicht wirklich aufgeworfen.

Read the rest of this entry »

Der Prolet ist Ein Anderer. Klasse und Imaginäres Heute

cover-9783957573988

An ihren Begriffen sollt ihr sie erkennen. Dass Begriffe nicht einfach nur neutrale generalisierte Bezeichnungen von Dingen, Vorstellungsinhalten und Praktiken, oder reflektierter: von zuvor selbst erst gesetzten Differenzen sind, wie das der Commonsense oder die Wissenschaftstheorie annehmen, sondern potentiell immer auch politische »Kampfformeln« (Eric Voegelin), vermittels derer Sachverhalte und Verhältnisse zugespitzt und einer politischen Entscheidung zugetrieben werden, das hat die politische Rechte unserem Verständnis von Begriff hinzugefügt. Ein Virtuose dieser Form von Begriffsgebrauch war Carl Schmitt. Begriffe sortieren Gegenstandsfelder nicht nur, sondern richten sie aus; und sie werden selbst zu Kennmarken, nach denen sich – gut schmittianesk – Freund und Feind gruppieren. Dabei spielen weniger analytische Trennschärfe und Präzision der Begriffe eine Rolle als die affektive Ladung, die sie als Elemente von Sprache nolens volens immer aufweisen und die selbst in der kältesten Wissenschaftsprosa nie ganz neutralisiert werden kann. Das eigentlich poetische Moment jeder Theorie liegt in ihrer Nomenklatur, behauptet Giorgio Agamben irgendwo: in der Belehnung bestimmter Wörter (und eben gerade keiner anderen) mit Begriffsfunktion.

Ein lange gültiges Schibboleth dieser Art war »Klasse«. Wer den Begriff benutzte, kam von links, wer sich über den Begriff stritt – und da gab und gibt es einiges zu streiten! –, der stand auf der Linken; und dass »Klasse« zuzeiten sich zu einem »neutralen« wissenschaftlichen Begriff zu verallgemeinern schien (wie in den 1970er Jahren in der westdeutschen Akademie), kann als Anzeichen einer linken Hegemonie in diesem Bereich und zu dieser Zeit gedeutet werden. Und viele von denen, die irgendwann ihren »Abschied vom Proletariat« genommen haben, spüren noch oft eine leichte Wehmut, wenn sie wenigstens an jene alten Illusionen zurückdenken, die im Begriff »Klasse« wie in wenigen anderen aufgespeichert sind.

Read the rest of this entry »

Hegel and Freud

Georg_Wilhelm_Friedrich_Hegel_-_Dorotheenstädtischer_Friedhof_-_Berlin,_Germany_-_DSC00377

Mladen Dolar (2012)

Hegel and Freud have nothing in common, it would seem; there is everything to oppose them. On the one hand: the speculative philosopher of absolute spirit whose system encompassed every sphere of being – logic, nature, and spirit – and who is reputed to be the most obscure and difficult in the entire grand philosophical tradition; on the other hand: a man of medical formation, a therapist who in all his work took clinical practice as his guideline and only gradually extended some psychological insights into larger circles of culture, civilization, and history. On the one hand: not only a philosopher, but a philosopher par excellence, the paradigmatic example of a philosopher who managed to encapsulate in his system all the themes and achievements of the metaphysical tradition; on the other hand: a man of natural science who adamantly opposed philosophy as such and even saw attempts to turn psychoanalysis into a new philosophical current as one of his discipline’s greatest dangers. On the one hand: not only a German, but seemingly a German par excellence, a model of German spirit, or even the Prussian state philosopher, as the adage goes; on the other hand: a Jew who already in his young days experienced the pressure of anti-Semitism and eventually, despite his fame, lived his final days in exile, his books burned by a regime that was, ironically, evoking Hegel. And finally, on the one hand the philosopher who relied more than anyone else in the history of philosophy on the powers of reason, concepts, and knowledge; on the other hand someone who more than anyone else took his cue from something that inherently escapes those powers or presents their fissure – this fissure forms the very object of psychoanalysis, of entities such as the unconscious and the drives.

Read the rest of this entry »

Marx and Freud

Herbert-Marcuse

by Paul Mattick (1956)

A review of EROS AND CIVILIZATION. A PHILOSOPHICAL ENQUIRY INTO FREUD. By Herbert Marcuse. The Beacon Press, Boston, 1955, 277 pp., $3.95.

Marcuse’s book renews the endeavor to read Marx into Freud. Previous attempts, by Reich and Osborn for instance, failed miserably. Instead of overcoming a bewailed inertia, Reich’s theories hardly sufficed to sustain a ridiculous private racket. Osborn’s work, a product of the Stalinist popular-front period, designed to attract the petty bourgeois, was soon forgotten by both the Western petty-bourgeoisie and the bolshevik regime. Psychoanalysis did not become part of, or a new basis for, a radical doctrine but merely a way of transferring money from the analyzed many to the analyzing few. By providing a new terminology for the various social “ills,” the ideological inertia, as part of the general inertia of capital stagnation, could at least verbally be ended. The re-interpretation in psychoanalytical terms affected all and everything; literature, the arts, the social sciences and politics. Psychoanalysis, moreover, became an independent branch of social activity developing vested interests of its own. Once installed, it perpetuated itself in competition with other ideological instrumentalities by continuously re-creating “demand” for its services through the discovery of new and more “ills” falling into its domain. It is now part and parcel of the prevailing social structure which commercializes all ideas and makes a business out of tangibles and intangibles alike.

Read the rest of this entry »

Abschied von der Klassenmetaphysik

call-center

Formwandel der Klassengesellschaft, Paralyse der Kritik. 

„In die gleichen Ströme steigen wir und steigen wir nicht; wir sind es und wir sind es nicht“ (Heraklit)

  1. Der Abschied vom Proletariat

1980 erschien in Frankreich ein Buch mit dem programmatischen Titel Adieu au prolétariat, zu Deutsch: Abschied vom Proletariat.[1] Sein Verfasser, André Gorz, traf damit den Geist der Zeit. Denn die Verabschiedung alter marxistischer Gewissheiten hatte zum Zeitpunkt der Veröffentlichung bereits seit einigen Jahren Konjunktur unter Linksintellektuellen verschiedener Provenienz. Neben dem einschlägigen Frontalangriff des Poststrukturalismus auf Subjekt, Geschichte und Emanzipation entstehen auch verschiedene Versuche einer Erneuerung des Marxismus, die diesen modernisieren wollen, ohne das Kind mit dem Bade auszuschütten. Ob es sich dabei um den libertären Ökosozialismus André Gorz‘ oder den linken Populismus von Ernesto Laclau und Chantal Mouffe handelt – das verbindende Moment dieser und weiterer durchaus heterogener Revisionen war eben jener Rückzug von der Klasse, wie die amerikanische Historikerin Ellen Meiksins Wood bereits 1986 feststellte.[2]

Read the rest of this entry »

How the Situationist International became what it was

at-the-bar

by Anthony Hayes

The Situationist International (1957-1972) was a small group of communist revolutionaries, originally organised out of the West European artistic avant-garde of the 1950s. The focus of my thesis is to explain how the Situationist International (SI) became a group able to exert a considerable influence on the ultra-left criticism that emerged during and in the wake of the May movement in France in 1968. My wager is that the pivotal period of the group is to be found between 1960 and 1963, a period marked by the split of 1962. Often this is described as the transition of the group from being more concerned with art to being more concerned with politics, but as I will argue this definitional shorthand elides the significance of the Situationist critique of art, philosophy and politics. The two axes of my thesis are as follows. First, that the significant minority in the group which carried out the break of 1962, identified a homology between the earlier Situationist critique of art — embodied in the Situationist ‘hypothesis of the construction of situations’ — and Marx’s critique and supersession of the radical milieu of philosophy from which he emerged in the mid- 1840s. This homology was summarised in the expression of the Situationist project as the ‘supersession of art’ (dépassement de l’art). Secondly, this homology was practically embodied in the resolution of the debates over the role of art in the elaboration of the Situationist hypothesis, which had been ongoing since 1957. However, it was the SI’s encounter with the ultra-left group Socialisme ou Barbarie that would prove decisive. Via Guy Debord’s membership, the group was exposed to both the idea of a more general revolutionary criticism, but also ultimately what was identified as the insufficiently criticised ‘political militancy’ of this group. Indeed, in the ‘political alienation’ found in Socialisme ou Barbarie, a further homology was established between the alienation of the political and artistic avant-gardes. This identity would prove crucial to the further elaboration of the concept of ‘spectacle’. By way of an examination of the peculiar and enigmatic ‘Hamburg Theses’ of 1961, and the relationship between these ‘Theses’ and the Situationist criticism of art and politics worked out over the first five years of the group, I will argue that the break in 1962 should be conceived as one against politics as much as art (rather than just the latter, as it is more often represented). Additionally, I will outline how the SI, through the paradoxical reassertion of their artistic origins, attempted to synthesise their criticism of art with the recovery of the work of Marx beyond its mutilation as Marxism. Indeed, it was the synthesis of these critiques that enabled the considerable development of the concept of ‘spectacle’, opening the way to the unique influence the SI exerted in the re-emergence of a revolutionary movement at the end of the 1960s.

Thesis available here

The economics of Luther or Munzer?

Luther95theses

by Michael Roberts (TheNextRecession)

Last week leading leftist economists in the UK held a seminar on the state of mainstream economics, as taught in the universities.  They kicked this off by nailing a poster with 33 theses critiquing mainstream economics to the door of the London School of Economics.  This publicity gesture attempted to remind us that it was the 500th anniversary of when Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the Castle Church, Wittenberg and provoked the beginning of the Protestant reformation against the ‘one true religion’ of Catholicism.

The economists were purporting to tell us that mainstream economics was like Catholicism and must be protested against as Luther did back in 1517.  As they put it, “Economics is broken.  From climate change to inequality, mainstream (neoclassical) economics has not provided the solutions to the problems we face and yet it is still dominant in government, academia and other economic institutions. It is time for a new economics.”

Read the rest of this entry »

How to Parent Like a Bolshevik

30slezkineWeb-blog427

Young actors in “The Blue Bird” in 1911.CreditHulton Archive/Getty Images

 Red Century

by Yuri Slezkine

The original Bolsheviks expected Communism in their lifetime. When that began to appear unlikely, they moved the deadline to the lifetime of their children.

“Fire cannot be contained,” Nina Avgustovna Didrikil, an employee at the Lenin Institute, wrote in her diary in 1920. “It will burst forth, and I am certain that if it does not burst forth within me, it will do so through my children, who will make me immortal.”

The path to the parents’ immortality was the children’s happiness. “You are happy, and you will be even happier when you realize just how happy you are,” wrote Didrikil in 1933 to one of her daughters on her 17th birthday. “You are the youngest and strongest, and the whole life of your society is young and strong. My wish for you, in your 17th spring, is that you continue to move closer and closer, in all your interests, feelings, and thoughts, to the camp of the youngest and strongest: to Marx, Engels, Lenin and all the true Bolsheviks.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Der Begriff der Arbeit in Karl Marx’ «Kapital»

Xmarxherbstschule

Karl Marx’ «Das Kapital» feiert 2017 seinen 150. Geburtstag. 2018 folgt der 200. Geburtstag von Marx selbst. Der Fokus der Marx-Herbstschule lag diesmal auf dem Begriff, der wie kein anderer sowohl Marx’ Kapital als auch die Geschichte des Marxismus beherrscht: Arbeit.

Der Arbeitsbegriff zieht sich wie ein roter Faden durch die gesamte Entwicklung des ersten Bandes, ausgehend vom «Doppelcharakter» der Arbeit, dem «Springpunkt, um den sich das Verständnis der politischen Ökonomie dreht», über die kapitalistische Anwendung, Verwertung und Ausbeutung der Arbeitskraft und ihre Kämpfe bis hin zum historischen Ursprung der kapitalistischen Lohnarbeit durch die sog. «Ursprüngliche Akkumulation».

Read the rest of this entry »

Marx Collegium 2017 (Videos)

poster-marx-50x70-web

Marx Collegium 2017 – After the eruption of the international financial crisis in 2008, Marx’s Capital received renewed academic and popular attention. Leading newspapers throughout the world discussed again the contemporary relevance of its pages. Faced with a deep new crisis of capitalism, many are now looking to an author who in the past was often wrongly associated with the “actually existing socialism”, and who was hastily dismissed after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.

For many scholars, today Marx’s analyses are arguably resonating even more strongly than they did in Marx’s own time. This international conference brings together several world-renowned sociologists, political theorists, economists, and philosophers, from diverse fields and 13 countries. Its aim is to explore diverse scholarly perspectives and critical insights into the principal contradictions of contemporary capitalism and, in so doing, to draw attention to alternative economic and social models.

The presenters will critically reconsider Marx’s Capital as a work that continues to provide an effective framework to understand the nature of capitalism and the transformations of our times.

Read the rest of this entry »

Capitalism: Concept & Idea (audio)

The Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy (CRMEP) presents:

Capitalism: Concept & Idea

150 Years of Marx’s Capital: The Philosophy and Politics of Capital today

As a counterpoint to the retreat of the concept of communism from history to ‘idea’, this conference will mark the 150th anniversary of the first volume of Karl Marx’s Capital: A Critique of Political Economy by asking the question of the meanings of ‘capital’ and ‘capitalism’ today as at once (explanatory structural-historical) concepts and (political) ideas.

In particular: What is the current standing of the different philosophical interpretations of Marx’s Capital? What light do they thrown on capitalism today? How have historical developments since Marx’s day changed the concept of capitalism? Has ‘neo-liberal’ capitalism rendered the concept of crisis redundant, for example? Is capitalism governable? Or is capital itself now the main form of governmentality? What is the precise character of Capital as a text – in terms of theory and in terms of literature? What does it mean to be ‘against capitalism’ today?

Read the rest of this entry »

Platform capitalism and value form

maxresdefault

By Matthew Cole

According to the speculations of techno-futurologists, left and right, the machines are here to liberate us. Most of the discourse is dominated by the neoliberal right such as Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee and Andrew Haldane, chief economist of the Bank of England. Their arguments, avoiding questions of exploitation, are naturally popular with the establishment. McAfee’s best-selling book The Second Machine Age has been lauded by leaders at the World Economic Forum.

On the left, however, Paul Mason welcomes our new robotic overlords, in an intellectual synthesis that spans Marx’s 1858 ‘Fragment on Machines’ (treated by Mason as a prophecy), Bogdanov’s 1909 novel Red Star and Martin Ford’s 2015 Rise of the Robots, not to mention Andre Gorz. Nick Srnicek and Alex Williams offer a more qualified welcome to the possibility of full automation and a workless future. But even the best of these analyses, and even the most alluring visions of networked insurrection and high-tech communist utopia, have to face up to how these technologies have been used, historically, to deepen exploitation rather than overcome it. It is far more likely, in short, that new technologies will intensify drudgery and further limit human freedom. And it on this basis that we have to evaluate the impacts of platform technologies on the capitalist mode of production.

Read the rest of this entry »