David Laibman asked me to forward the following. Dear PEN, > > The Summer 1998 issue of Science & Society (just out; this is not the >usual promo post) has a Call for a Special Issue on the Capitalist Ruling >Class. Anticipated publication date: Spring 2000. The Call appears below. > I would like to invite PENners to submit proposals, suggestions, and >also to send me names of possible participants (or forward this post). > Expanding just a bit on the guidelines in the Call: I think there are >two questions that keep the ruling-class concept from its rightful place at >the center of inquiry and analysis. 1) The idea that the "great fortunes" >that have arisen in the course of capitalist development have been *raw >material* fortunes (e.g., the oil billionaires), or based on the >peculiarities of finance (J.P. Morgan). (Bill Gates stands as a major >counterexample.) 2) The notion that government contracts have been the >source of private wealth, either in military or civilian forms (prototype >here is Ross Perot). The claim is that without raw material monopolies and >without government, the "free market" would have distributed wealth far more >evenly that it has in fact. This is clearly something that ought to be >addressed in the Capitalist Ruling Class issue of S&S. > Any thoughts? > > david > > David Laibman > Editor, Science & Society >========================================================================= > SPECIAL ISSUE: THE CAPITALIST RULING CLASS > CALL FOR PAPERS > > Both left and mainstream scholarship have become adept in >their analysis of the subordinate sectors of present-day capital- >ist society. Ordinary people go under the microscope: studies of >various strata of the working class and labor movements abound, >including regional variations and historical evolution; there is >an ample literature on the poor (including from a culture-of-pov- >erty perspective); ethnic and racial minorities have been examined >in depth, as have immigrant communities, rural communities, urban >sub-cultures, and so forth. Our recent symposium on the problem >of synthesis in labor studies (S&S, Winter 1996-97) is a state-of- >the-art exploration of the multi-disciplinary effort to give these >varied efforts a unifying and cross-fertilizing focus, without >doing violence to the inherent diversity of the subject matter. >In effect, critical scholarship, including the Marxist component, >has turned its magnifying lenses "downward," into the vast majori- >ty of the working population and its cultures and institutions. > By contrast, the concept and reality of the capitalist ruling >class have been left relatively unexamined (with a few notable >exceptions). This may reflect a somewhat reified conception of >"capitalism" as the unanalyzed, disembodied evil of present-day >society. It is as if we think we do not need to know very much >about capitalism and capital in detail; we seek the sources of >agency to oppose capitalism as though that agency is independent >of what capitalist power is, and how it evolves. This reification >of capital may stem in part from a tendency in some circles to see >"capital" anywhere where there are political forces one wishes to >oppose; it then becomes an ethereal entity that can inhabit any >type of property structure, any system of power and authority, at >will. (The link between this attitude and the failure to study >the Soviet-era societies concretely, referred to above, will be >clear.) > In earlier, more confident times Marxists devoted a great >deal of energy to the study of capital as such, and as embodied in >the capitalist class. This was tied in with theories of periodi- >zation in capitalist accumulation, especially the emergence of >financial and monopoly power. There were analyses (however incon- >clusive) of interest groups, control by banking and financial in- >stitutions, regional divisions and conflicts within the ruling >class, and the perennial question of the relation between owner- >ship and control of corporations. (I will not attempt to produce >a bibliography here, as I don't want to offend potential partici- >pants in the special issue by leaving anyone out!) > It could be argued that many of the questions that have di- >vided the left in recent times turn more on implicit differences >in the participants' understandings of capital and the nature of >the capitalist class than on the factual material under debate. >To take the Soviet example one more time: there is more agreement >among Marxists concerning the actual historical record -- industri- >alization, urbanization, growth, relative economic equality and >stability, *and* bureaucratism, privilege, political and cultural >repressiveness and the Gulag -- than on the use of terms like "so- >cialism" and "state capitalism." Much depends on the meaning of >terms like "capital," "class," and "capitalist class." Again, as >Marx and Engels noted 150 years ago in the Communist Manifesto, >defenders of capitalism rarely define the object of their defense >honestly; instead, they hide behind concepts like "private proper- >ty" and "free enterprise." The *capitalist class* disappears from >view. > It is high time to turn the spotlight upward once again! > We invite proposals in two main areas. First, what is the >state of the theory of, in increasing order of specificity: class; >the ruling class; the capitalist ruling class? The literature on >levels of abstraction should be addressed here; for a fine start- >ing point, we recommend a classic article by Theotonio dos Santos, >"The Concept of Social Classes" (S&S, Summer 1970). There is also >the matter of the tension between adjective and noun in the term >"ruling class," with the former being essentially a matter of gov- >ernance or agency, and the latter one of structure. (Is this con- >tradiction logical or dialectical?) > Second, what is the reality of capitalist ruling class power >in capitalist countries today? What institutions hold power? How >is it exercised? What is the relation between institutional and >individual power, and wealth? What changes have taken place? > There are three delicate issues here. First, while the pri- >vate power of the capitalist ruling class cannot be separated from >its political or "public" manifestations, or from the political >process generally, we would like to start from the (possibly con- >troversial) Marxist premise that ruling class power precedes, in >the hierarchy of determination, its embodiment in and interaction >with state power. We ask that potential contributors to the issue >focus on capital, as a preliminary to the capital-state relation, >rather than making the latter the center of attention. Second, we >propose a premise: the nature of the ruling class in present-day >capitalist societies is likely to be revealed most clearly in >countries where capitalist development has most fully emerged from >entanglement with precapitalist forms and institutions, i.e., in >industrially developed countries rather than developing countries >where capitalist class structures are newly evolving. Thus, with >due allowance for complexity, we point out that studies of the >capitalist ruling class face a temptation to dissolve into discus- >sions of the political process, or of development. Finally, these >temptations are especially dangerous where it is postulated (an- >other point for controversy!) that capitalism is increasingly in- >ternational, and that the capitalist ruling class is therefore >also international in nature. Granted that capital is revealed in >both developed and underdeveloped forms, and that it is insepara- >bly political and international, we hope to inspire, and publish, >studies that do not lose their focus on the structures and power >of capitalist classes as such in the glare of politics, develop- >ment and international relations. > Projected publication date: Spring 2000 (Vol. 64, No. 1). >Manuscript deadline: March 1999. Please contact the editor with >proposals and suggestions as soon as possible: Science & Society / >John Jay College, Rm. 4331 / 445 West 59th Street / New York NY >10019. 212-246-4932 (voice/fax). > Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://clawww.lmu.edu/Departments/ECON/jdevine.html
