Blair: 1) what is the "modernist" or "modernish" theory that you are criticizing (below) as inadequate to explain these events? who wrote this theory? I think that most Marxists are aware of the fact that capitalism is changing in the general direction which you describe. (a non-Marxist on this but very worthwhile book is Bennett Harrison's LEAN AND MEAN.) 2) David Harvey's book on postmodernism argues (to summarize in more than desperate brevity) that the rise of postmodern theory is a reflection of the rise of postmodern capitalism, i.e., increased flexibility, decentralization, etc., etc. He's no postmodernist, BTW. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A. Blair writes:>>Philip Kraft discusses the new VW plant in Resende, Brazil. The special section on technology in the Nov. 18 WSJ includes an article on Colgate which suggests the the new intranet software connecting not only all Colgate plants and employees around the world but also suppliers, retailers, etc., challenges the notion of the enterprise and raises the question what is inside and what is outside the firm. >>Also: different but related: re: the struggle between Norfolk Southern and CSX to buy Conrail. Pennsylvania state law affirms that enterprises need not sell to the highest bidder but can also consider the needs of state residents, customers and suppliers (read workers) in such matters. This too strikes a blow at the notion that the firm is well-bounded and its interests well-defined as "profit-maximization." >>Also: the Texaco settlement with its African American employees includes the formation of a committee which comprises membership chosen half by the enterprise and half by the plaintiffs (and one person chosen by both) and is to have "unprecedented" power over personnel relations and policy, etc. A modernist notion of a firm is going to have more difficulty, I believe, integrating these kinds of developments than pomoish theories will. >>P.S. Nike is another company with a particularly complex and bizaare structure from the point of view of modernish Marxism that can be theorized in interesting and useful ways from an overdeterminist Marxian class perspective (someone at UMass is studying Nike and I heard a talk they gave, but can offer no further details). <<
