Production
Under the conditions of global capitalist competition, this is almost impossible. Because I passed by here in March: Every country has a strong incentive to deviate from the costly “zero epidemic” norm, so zero epidemic will not be the end point of global capitalism. And, as a corollary, zero covid is not a target for political leftists to argue.
Second, the secret to the long-term success of capitalism is no It is the accumulation of capital, but the command of labor.In the long run, capital can if only Growth is because it can mobilize the combination of labor and natural resources: capital will not accumulate just because of its existence; in the long run, wealth will not magically generate more wealth. Some production must be done.
Therefore, the interruption of capital’s command over labor therefore represents an obstacle to its long-term growth-and, most importantly, in terms of economics, covid-19 is an interruption of capital’s ability to command labor: Either it makes those jobs Of people become unable to work if they are sick, or they choose not to work, or they need to take public health measures on the way and conditions of work. In all cases, control is transferred from the capital of the organization as a competing company to other institutions.
I want to distinguish this point about labor control from the claim surrounding capitalism’s ability to cut costs to produce productivity gains that allow accumulation to occur-the kind of claim made by Jason Moore and Raj Patel The history of the world of seven cheap things.
I very much agree with this argument because it puts the long-term impact of capitalism on the environment at the center of its analysis. However, simplifying work to one of the seven “cheap things” that capitalism relies on loses the analysis of the true power relations that constitute capital.
Natural resources
This relationship—capital’s domination of labor—in turn opens up the prospect that capital can also develop cheap material resources.
There is a hierarchical system of its rule: first control the labor force, then use the control labor force, and use cheap raw materials-natural resources.And as Mikhail Kalecki argues keenly, As early as 1942, “commercial interests” would prefer Greater control over labor is transformed into less controlled situations, even if less controlled situations actually generate more profits.
As a result, business interests later lobbied vigorously against full employment, even if full employment conditions actually meant higher profits.
This insight-control is more important than cost savings or sheer profitability-also tells Andreas Malm Fossil capital, In describing the special choice when capitalists chose relatively more expensive steam power rather than relatively cheap hydropower in the early industrial revolution. Steam power allows them to control the labor process in a way that is beyond the control of unstable water power.
As we enter a world of epidemics, this indicates the dynamics that may emerge in the future: capital will sacrifice profitability to gain a higher degree of control; however, although some of the control costs will be borne by individual capital, the need to save costs will force It relies on the state, which is a lower-cost option for management supervision and control.
technology
Covid gave an extreme version of this dynamic because it directly affects the labor process, but it is certainly possible to imagine a future in which more general environmental shocks, such as extreme weather events or rising general production costs, are also possible. Will trigger a private withdrawal of capital to support the state.
By the way, this is not a very new argument for political economists: Rudolf Hilferding proposed this version of the integration of capital and state long ago. Similarly, the cost of this withdrawal process may be transferred from capital to labor as much as possible—whether in the form of generally rising prices or through increased tax burdens.
Of course, we can speculate on some future technologies that magically generate sufficient productivity growth—and thus increase profitability—to overcome the steady ordeal of rising costs and environmental instability.
For example, due to covid-19, huge investments in the pharmaceutical industry may help remove the productivity barriers that the industry has encountered in the past few years.
But to overcome Generally speaking Rising costs and instability, we need to find a way to Generally speaking Increase productivity-not just to increase productivity in a single production sector, but to increase productivity in the entire economy.
democracy
The closest thing to this legendary “common technology“Is still being calculated; however, thirty years after it was first discovered, Solow’s paradox still holds. Investment in computer technology will not produce a general increase in productivity.
Not only that: the existence of instability itself, coupled with the new crown virus as an amplifier, is encouraging investment in technology lines that do not greatly improve labor productivity. As the ability to regulate and control its use.
Where do we go from this? There are two political conclusions.
First, future politics will increasingly focus on the control and use of labor, which in practice means the ability of workers to try and set working conditions. There are good reasons to believe that COVID-19 might unnaturally help shift the balance of power to the workforceOf course, a series of strikes and resignations show that this has happened.
Support for union organization, strikes and industrial actions, and forms of workplace democracy—from joint decisions to worker ownership—are essential.
Monitor
Second, the left and the broader progressive forces must not passively accept the expansion of state power.
Given the growing role of the state in shaping and managing the economy, economic issues themselves are increasingly likely to be politicized. If the broad motivation is to bring capital and the state closer together to regulate and control labor and the natural environment, then this is increasingly likely to appear in a more authoritarian form.
Defending liberal and democratic norms should now be the core of the left and the environmental movement, not an afterthought. Then, it is important to support the decentralization of power to local and regional authorities, the strengthening of freedom of speech and protest, and the democratic reform of the country itself—in the UK, this means ending office and abolishing the House of Lords first.
However, it is also more difficult to oppose dubious surveillance technologies, which seem to be promoted with the best public health intent. Such as vaccine passport.
This author
Dr. James Meadway is an economist and a former adviser to the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer.Sign up for his Pandemic capitalism communication.
