Search

The paper investigates one of the possible models of the modern state, namely: the Schumpeterian Workfare State, on the basis of the analysis of scientific literature. The author gives an assessment of the phenomena that determined the transition to a new production and technical paradigm of Post-Fordism. The paper elucidates the preconditions of formation of the idea of the Schumpeterian Workfare State and its essential characteristics. In particular, it is noted that the model of the Schumpeterian Workfare State is applicable to any capitalist states at the present stage regardless of whether they have passed the stage of Fordism. The author proposes his own definition of the category of the Schumpeterian Workfare State that was missing in the modern domestic theory of the state. The author poses a number of problems that we must resolve for theoretical understanding and practical application of the model of the Schumpeterian Workfare State. To this end, the author believes that it is necessary to update the doctrine about the state in the national science to create solid theoretical foundations for the development and functioning of the Russian Federation at the modern stage.

Sermaye birikim sürecinde ‘kent’, hem üretim ilişkilerinin içinde gerçekleştiği yer olma özelliğine sahip olması bakımından hem de zamanla sermaye tarafından metalaştırılarak kullanılan bir birikim kaynağına dönüşmesi nedeniyle oldukça önemli bir işleve sahiptir. Kapitalizmin her safhasında gerek fiziki gerek sosyo-ekonomik koşullarıyla önemli ölçüde farklılaşan ‘kent’, her yeni dönemde işlevsel ve yapısal olarak farklı form ve rollerle karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Bu makalenin başlıca amacı öncelikle kapitalizm ve mekan ilişkisini sorgulamak ve sonra kapitalizmin farklı dönemlerinde kentte gerçekleşen değişim ve dönüşüm süreçleri ile kapitalist üretim ilişkilerinin bağlantısını kurmaktır. Bunu da özellikle iki farklı kapitalist dönemi baz alarak, Fordist ve Post Fordist safhada, bir dönemden diğer döneme geçişte değişen dinamikler üzerinden gerçekleştirmektir., In the capital accumulation process, the 'city' has a rather important function both from the perspective that it is the place where production relations take place and as it has, in time, been transformed into a tool of accumulation, commodified and used by capital. The “City”, which has changed significantly with both its physical and socio-economic conditions at every stage of capitalism, presents itself with different functional and structural forms and roles in every new phase. The main purpose of this article is to connect the processes of change and transformation that have taken place in the city in different periods of capitalism with the relations of capitalist production. It does this by focusing particularly on two different capitalist periods, the Fordist and Post-Fordist stages, and examining, in this context, the dynamics that emerged during the transition from one period to the next.

В статье исследуется феномен позднего капитализма. Поздний капитализм рассматривается как форма капиталистического производства, которая пришла на смену развитым формам капитализма 1950-х — 1960-х гг. Иначе данный переход именуется переходом от фордизма к постфордизму.Фордизм определяется как социально-экономическая система, возникшая в послевоенный период на Западе (США и Западная Европа) и типичными особенностями которой были массовое производство в рамках крупной вертикально интегрированной корпорации, а также создание соответствующих стабильных массовых рынков. В противоположность фордизму постфордизм представляет собой систему, которая сформировалась в условиях начавшейся глобализации и отражала в значительной мере как изменения на глобальных рынках, так и собственные внутренние противоречия фордизма.Последовательно рассматривается сначала становление фордистской системы (производственный и социальный проект Форда и послевоенный «фордистский компромисс»), а затем становление постфордистской системы. Особенности последней раскрываются на примере известной концепции американских авторов М. Пиоре и Ч. Сабеля. Также на материале концепции французских исследователей Л. Болтански и Э. Кьяпелло рассматривается идеология современного (позднего) капитализма. Для того чтобы показать многообразие форм (в том числе региональных) позднего капитализма, автор обращается к концепции известного американского социолога М. Кастельса.На примере фордизма и постфордизма можно убедиться в том, что капитализм — весьма гибкая и адаптивная система, однако постфордизм представляет собой как бы радикализацию «гибкости» и инновационности, изначально присущей капиталистической системе.

Free software development and the technological practices of hackers have been broadly recognised as fundamental for the formation of political cultures that foster democracy in the digital mediascape. This article explores the role of free software in the practices of digital artists, animators and technicians who work in various roles for the contemporary digital visual media industries. Rather than discussing it as a model of organising work, the study conceives free software as a production tool and shows how it becomes a locus of politics about finding material security in flexible capitalism. This politics is ultimately contradictory in that it extends creative and craft autonomy of digital artists but does not mobilise a critical project. Instead, it nurtures further precarious labour. Empirically, the article draws on ethnographically collected material from the media practices of digital artists and programmers who engage with two popular free software production tools, Blender and Synfig.

Book Review for Bojana Kunst's most recent publication 'Artist at Work. Proximity of Art and Capitalism'.

Der Beitrag greift den Diskurs um die Formen 'primitiver Akkumulation' auf, um in Anschluss an David Harvey das 'Theorem fortdauernder Landnahmen' im Feld sozialer Reproduktion zu diskutieren. Erklärter Anspruch des Beitrags ist es, zum einen eine 'Erweiterung der marxistischen Akkumulationstheorie' vorzulegen, zum anderen die von Rosa Luxemburg angestoßene Debatte zur erweiterten Akkumulation im neuen Kontext zu theoretisieren sowie für die Externalisierung der Kosten gesellschaftlicher Reproduktion zu sensibilisieren. Zu diesem Zweck wird die jüngere Luxemburg-Rezeption vorgestellt, namentlich die Lesart der Bielefelder Soziologinnen, die Ausdehnung des Reproduktionssektors im Rahmen des Postfordismus dargelegt sowie die 'neue Landnahme' am Beispiel von Care-Arbeit und Care-Ökonomie (allg. personenbezogene Dienstleistungen) problematisiert und schließlich viertens ein Fazit gezogen, das Luxemburgs Imperialismustheorie mit der 'Artikulation unterschiedlicher Produktionsweisen' im Zentrum als theoretisch zentral erachtet und zur Basis eines feministischen Ansatzes sozialer Reproduktion erklärt.

Historisch-materialistische Kritik gängiger Erklärungen des gesellschaftlichen Naturverhältnisses im Kapitalismus fördert idealistische, kulturalistische und politizistische Verkürzungen zu Tage. Eine kritische Theorie des gesellschaftlichen Naturverhältnisses auf Basis des Marx‘schen Hauptwerks Das Kapital zeigt, dass die Gesetzmäßigkeiten der kapitalistischen Gesellschaft notwendig zu systematischer Naturzerstörung führen. Die kapitalistische Produktionsweise ist mit nachhaltiger Entwicklung unvereinbar.

This thesis examines the way that subversivity is produced in relation to the name of the author, as understood by Foucault, and what potential for ressistance that can be glimpsed there. This from the reading of three text that in different ways relate to that theme. Firstly, throught the reading of "Isis mamma är genusvetare, skribent och konstnär, min mamma är f.d. städerska, kokerska och dagisfröken, numera förtidspensionär med diagnosen fibromyalgi" by Lidija Praizović, a text that actively work with the internal production of different exteriorities. The text uses these exteriorities, both to commit the violation needed in order to establish it's perspective toward a capitalist publicity, and to anticipate the response and argument towards the text in the same publicity. The becoming of the proletarian class awereness is in the text partly formed in terms of origin and political ressentiment. But when used in litterature the analysis show that they produce subversive collective assemblies and question the border of political discourse. The way we become subjects in submission in terms of being bodies, irrational, specific in relation to a liberal sphere that produces the superior as invisible and bodyless, can establish it's pespective as human and universal when turned into literature. Throughout this processes the proletarian position is produced as an instance of power both internal to the text and pointing outwards, from the text. The analysis futher shows how conventions that regulate the spreading of discourse through the name of the author in capitalism, can be used to circulate experiences of submission that has the formation of collective assemblies as their potential. A process that is directly related to the post-­‐fordist capitalisms needs for new forms of life in order to reproduce. The two other texts, "Nej, man har inte rätt att skriva vad man vill" by Lyra Ekström Lindbäck, and "I huvudet på Lidija Praizović" by Tove Folkesson, was produceed as a reaction to the first texts apperance in the public sphere. The first one is critical to the text and the name, but is still making claims on a subversive position. The reading of it shows that the making of that claim, in relation to the need to produce ones own name as an author name in community with the liberal public sphere, results in a blocking of the subversive potential and a reduction of the subversive to only a marker on the name. A reaction that is in turn foreseen by the first text in it's working with the anticipation of readers responce. The reading of the second text shows how, throught the production of a complete affinity with the exteriority that is the athor name of Lidija Praizović, the potentially dangerous class position is reduced and disarmed. That occurs partly throught a reduction of the class position to aspects that only allows political ressentiment and loneliness. This turns the subversivity and the violation associated with the name of Lidija Praizović to functions for the name of Tove Folkesson. Something that in turn shows not only the potential of using these aspects of political becomings as grounds for building something that goes beyond them, but also the dangers of it. Both texts can therefore be seen as two different attempts to block the spreading of the subversive by using it solely to produce the name of the author.

This article is about the key problem of the conflict between «living» labour and capital which is connected with the reflection of relevant tendency of capitalism development. In contrast to Marx’s thesis on expansion of «living» labour by capital, Post-operaists postulate the autonomy of affective labor from capital that allows to present the concept of «multitude» as critical in relation to the contemporary forms of capitalism development. The purpose of this article is to show the conflict character of both of these approaches and emphasize heuristic potential of this antagonism for the analysis of relevant forms of capitalism development.