The Political Situation (3/14)
The real forces aimed at the workers were the big capitalists, who by the 1920's were already the big money-lending capitalists, the shareholders in the large companies, the bond holders, as well as the representatives of those interests within the state. These money-lending capitalists looked to the revenues they could obtain from their shares and bonds (fictitious capital). The crises of overproduction of the 1920's, had put those revenues at risk, along with their fictitious-capital itself, as well as the socialised, industrial capital, which was the source of the profits out of which their revenues were paid. They had a direct interest in a restructuring of capital, and of the economy, to overcome the crises of overproduction, and raise the rate of profit. But, these big money lending capitalists formed a small proportion of society. They form an even smaller proportion today. In the 19th century, as Engels describes, the big industrialists, precisely for this reason, had to ally with the industrial proletariat to obtain their political supremacy over the old financial oligarchy, the merchant capitalists, and the landed aristocracy. But, with the development of socialised capital, the place of the big industrial capitalists is taken by the professional managers, who are themselves increasingly drawn from the ranks of the working-class.
One of the effects of this can be seen from the experience of Taylorism in the US. The Taylorists sought to introduce scientific management into industry, so as to increase efficiency and thereby profitability. Its one reason that Lenin, Trotsky and Gramsci also sought to introduce Taylorist methods. In the US, the workers, via the unions, increasingly identified with the Taylorists, because they were able to point to the problems of industry arising from bad, amateurish management inherited from the old private capitalist businesses.
“Taylor believed that his systematic approach to the problems of management provided a means by which productivity, wages and profits could be boosted radically. The scale of these improvements, he believed, would be so large that all major sources of friction between employer and worker could be overcome... (p 57)
The benefits that systematic management of the production process could bring to the worker in the form of higher wages and improved working conditions appeared very tempting to many unionists. What the unions wanted in return for their co-operation in introducing the new techniques, however, was a say as to how and where they were to be utilised and how the benefits were to be distributed (McKelvey – AFL Attitudes Toward Production 1900-1932)... (p 64)
The war compelled the leaders of these two groups to work together and the success of this experience convinced many of the leading Taylorists that an essential condition for the successful introduction of scientific management into the workplace was the co-operation of the trade unions. It also made the unions aware of the tactical advantages greater scientific knowledge could provide them... (p 65)
The Taylorists' conclusions that poor management was the major cause of industrial inefficiency was publicised widely by the unions and used by them as a weapon to counter arguments that employers could not afford to pay higher wages or grant reduced working times. Utilising this study, union leaders also attacked employers for their 'rule of thumb' methods. To an increasing extent they exhorted capitalists '… to analyse production costs, to practice managerial economy' and make 'intelligent efforts to eliminate waste and to establish more efficient methods' (Nadworthy, Scientific Management and the Unions 1900-1932: A Historical Analysis) Rubbing salt into the employers' wounds, they also declared they were eager to co-operate with management to remove the waste the latter's incompetence had caused. (p 70)”
(Chris Nyland – Scientific Management and Planning, in Capital and Class 33, Winter 1987)
It manifests itself in demands from the workers to share in the benefits of such improvements in efficiency, but also to demands to be a part of the process of decision making, so as to increase that efficiency. The big money-lending capitalists have two responses to this. Firstly, to pull the teeth of such demands for workers control, by turning it into corporatism, the establishment of company unionism, Mondism and so on, as Trotsky describes (See: Workers' Control of Production). Secondly, where the workers seek to go beyond such sham workers control, as they did in Italy, by an outright attack on the workers organisations themselves, as was done by Mussolini.
No comments:
Post a Comment