Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/87147
Authors: 
Fumagalli, Andrea
Negri, Antonio
Year of Publication: 
2008
Series/Report no.: 
Quaderni di Dipartimento, EPMQ, Università degli Studi di Pavia 205
Abstract (Translated): 
The paper argues why in the nowadays context of accumulation, named Cognitive Capitalism (CC), from an economic point of view, it is not possible a political compromise (nee deal) as it was in the fordist era. Starting from ch. 24 of Keynes' General Theory, we discuss how the keynesian conditions for a the development of a social pact between workers and entrepreneurs, with the intermediation by the State, are overcome by the structural change of the accumulation and valorisation process. Fordist new deal was based on three main variables: i) the existence of a State-nation able to implement nationalwide and autonomous political economies; ii) the possibility to measure productivity gains in material terms, and, iii) the existence of stable industrial relations, with high degree of representation of national differing social interests. In CC, globalization and finanziarisation strongly reduce the role played by States, the shifting towards immaterial production, based on knowledge and cognitive labour, leads to the impossibility provide an effective measure of productivity, whose dynamics is more and more depending on social factors. Further, the prevailing individual bargain on collective bargain negatively affects the relevance of industrial elations and especially the capacity of tradeunionism. The structural instability of CC could be minimize, first, by the introduction of a limit to intellectual property rights, able to socialize knowledge ad better exploit learning and network economics at the basis of accumulation process. Secondly, by the introduction of a basic income, able to compensate the unfair income distribution due to the capital gains allocation. Nevertheless, both of these measures, cannot be constituent of a new social pact, since they are incompatible with private property statements and with the discipline of work as condition for its exploitation. Therefore, as usual, only social crisis and conflict can provide a solution.
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
139.54 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.