Capitalism Is Capitalism, Not Technofeudalism

1990

This book began with the translation, by Marcia Van Dyke, of my book A Sociedade Estatal ea Tecnoburocracia (São Paulo, Editora Brasiliense, 1981). A first version of it was submitted in 1983 to Cambridge University Press. After several months, the editor showed interest in the publication of the book, provided that I introduced major changes. Yet, in the meantime, I was called to political life, and was unable to make the required changes.

First and foremost, this article builds off the book *Techno-Capitalist-Feudalism*, which was published in 2020. So if the reader wishes to explore in greater depth and detail the concepts and framework of Techno-Capitalist-Feudalism, the book is a great place to start. Secondly, this article is an emblem of punk economics. Like a short and direct punk song, played with intensity and verve, this article is as well stylistically written with intensity and verve, short and direct, like punk music, like the sex pistols, the ramones etc. Through an entertaining punk stylistic format, the article is meant to disturb, enthrall, and create discomfort in the reader through its extremely direct and to the point arguments and crisp sentences. Short Abstract: One of the greatest tricks capitalism ever played on the global intelligentsia was convincing some of them that it no longer exists, that it is dead and gone, having vanished in plain sight from the face of the earth. And in the last few years, a branch of political economy has risen arguing exactly this, whereby capitalism has unraveled and devolved into techno-feudalism. That is, that capitalism has exited the stage of world history, or has started to do so, only to be replaced by techno-feudalism, i.e., a socio-economic-formation, where markets have been usurped and/or abolished in favor of highly-organized and highly-controlled internet platforms, who are owned and operated by one-person, or a select few, that control every aspect of their digital fiefdoms. Techno-feudalism is the idea that capitalism has receded, along with profits and the profit-imperative, in favor of central-bank money, i.e., fiat money, now taking the place of all profit-making. For these theoreticians of techno-feudalism, capitalism is dead. And like an old battle weary baby boomer, gently easing him or herself into a warm tub, filled with Epsom salt, capitalism as well, has gently eased itself into the hot tub of techno-feudalism and dissolved itself into a new post-capitalist socio-economic regime, without kicking a fuss. Ultimately, this is false. And this short critique explains why this is so, through an entertaining punk stylistic format. Whi

European Journal of Social Theory, 2010

At the center of contemporary discourse on technology -or the digital discourse -is the assertion that network technology ushers in a new phase of capitalism which is more democratic, participatory, and de-alienating for individuals. Rather than viewing this discourse as a transparent description of the new realities of techno-capitalism and judging its claims as true (as the hegemonic view sees it) or false (a view expressed by few critical voices), this paper offers a new framework which sees the digital discourse as signaling a historical shift in the technological legitimation of capitalism, concurrent with the emergence of the post-Fordist phase of capitalism. Technology discourse legitimated the Fordist phase of capitalism by stressing the capacity of technology and technique to mitigate exploitation. It hence legitimated the interventionist welfare state, the central planning in businesses and the economy, the hierarchized corporation, and the tenured worker. In contrast, contemporary technology discourse legitimates the post-Fordist phase of capitalism by stressing the capacity of technology to mitigate alienation. It hence legitimates the withdrawal of the state from markets, the dehierarchization and decentralization of businesses, and the flexibilization of production and the labor process.

This work charts the speculative relationship between technology and anarchy. What follows is not a proposal for some ‘coherent’ political system. Rather, it is a sketch of some vital ideas on epistemology, technology, and politics that speak to processes of experimenting with the digital mediums of a rapidly accelerating Internet age. This techno-genetic turn towards the rhizomatic underpinnings of technology is about venturing out into the world of objects, material processes, vibrant matters, technological and cosmological time. What this work attempts to put forward is a means to make sense of the multiple crises that we find ourselves faced with; to think through the materialities of power in order to better understand the subjugating processes of capitalism. As a result, it puts forward a meso-politics of contingency, a set of technoanarchistic pragmatics that include but are not limited to: decentralisation, open source, anonymity, contingency, and absurdism. Running through the work are discussions of epistemology, subjectivity, integration, techno-genesis, nonconsciousness, and anarchistic forms of resistance. For technoanarchism, this resistance comes through new cartographies of speculation—a reductio ad absurdum, a meso politics of immanence that problematises not only social laws, which we see as corrupt, stifling, and transient, but moral, physical, and perceptual laws as well, all in order to envisage a post-representational political moment no longer tied to stimulated desires in a control society.

Socio-economic Review, 2016

This discussion forum is based on the roundtable discussion at the 27th Annual Conference of the Society for Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE) hosted at the London School of Economics. The discussion presents recent work on capitalism as an evolving historical formation by Wolfgang Streeck and Craig Calhoun, together with contributions by British journalist Polly Toynbee and SASE founder Amitai Etzioni. Streeck opens with a reflection on major trends of capitalism that now pose ungovernable contradictions and thus point to an end of capitalism as a viable historical formation. Despite these contradictions, Calhoun sees capitalism as unlikely to undergo a rapid breakdown, but likely to generat continued challenges related to financial risks, limited international cooperation, negative externalities and growth of illicit forms of capitalism. Toynbee focuses on how these themes relate to the contemporary situation in the UK, outlining the growth in social inequalities and the weakness of social solidarity needed to generate political constraints on these trends. Finally, Etzioni reflects on the prospects for a postcapitalism, where work and consumption are no longer the central social identity around which social institutions are constructed. Together, the panelists present a bleak picture of the future for capitalism, which is likely to be a period of lasting disorder, where new moral foundations of a post-capitalism remain as elusive as they are necessary.

Handbook social inequality, Springer, 2023

This chapter aims to provide a sociological review of the main interpretations of capitalism from the early days of sociology to the present day. To this end, it is divided into four parts. The first reconstructs the theme in the works of the main classics of the discipline, with the advent of industrial society. The second reviews the debate that advanced in the first half of the twentieth century, starting with ideas such as late capitalism and advanced industrial society, until the mid-1970s. The third recovers the theme of capitalism from the structural transformations in the 1970s, with the emergence of neoliberalism and the questioning of the centrality of the analytical categories of labour and class. The final part presents some of the main contemporary discussions on capitalism, especially since the 2008 crisis, such as the emergence of digital and platform capitalism, the phenomenon of "uberization", the emergence of new forms of authoritarianism, and the new proposals of utopian socialism today.

2008

"Capitalism and freedom" is not only the title of a 1962 book by Milton Friedman playing a pivotal role in asserting worldwide the neoliberal paradigm, but also a slogan that leading statesmen, politicians and opinion-makers have been heralding in recent years in order to justify, amongst other things, the slashing of welfare states and the invasion of foreign countries. In particular, "capitalism" has been coupled regularly with "democracy", the latter being seen as the political system that better entrenches and promotes "freedom" or "autonomy". Thus, "capitalism" and "democracy" have been described as the two sides of one and the same project for human emancipation, which is said to characterise modernity. However, Castoriadis reminds us of their different historical origin and of their different nature, which is highlighted in further depth by John McMurtry’s attempt to overcome the categories of standard economic rationality. Hence, in this paper, Castoriadis’ hermeneutic of modernity is integrated with the insights provided by McMurtry, whose notions of "civil commons", "life-needs" and "life-value economy" explain how an emancipatory modernity may be still possible

Capitalism on Edge (Columbia University Press), 2020

• This Chapter of Capitalism on Edge develops the first comprehensive methodology for critical social theory; • it articulates a three-dimensional model of domination and attendant notions of emancipatory practice and radical politics; • offers a theory of the internal transformation of capitalism, later applied in an account of the historical forms of capitalism from the 19th-century liberal form to our contemporary post-neoliberal, 'precarity capitalism'.

Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 2010

T his book adopts a critical perspective to help us understand where we are and why we have become what we are. It is not apologetic of our current condition or the powers that dominate us. It is intended to be emancipative in word and spirit. In so doing, it attempts to break free from the overwhelming reductionism that characterizes most intellectual endeavors today. Emancipation is the fundamental objective of a just society. Human emancipation involves not only freedom from oppressive and exploitive conditions but also participation in the governance of society and its creative activities at all levels. More than at any previous time, emancipative participation involves decisions that defi ne the human condition and what it means to be human through the exercise of creativity in technology. Today, these decisions are overwhelmingly determined by corporatism and its authoritarian power over technology. Corporatism is defi ned in this book as the power of business corporations over society. Such power now tends toward hegemony, but as we see later, it is not incontestable. This defi nition of corporatism varies from the traditional one that signifi es collusion between corporate and government interests. Obviously, the traditional defi nition can be subsumed in the one used here, but the scope of the term is much broader. The term corporatism is therefore used to refer to the