McKenzie Wark on Mon, 3 Jun 2002 06:59:42 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> on material and 'immaterial' labour |
While i don't agree with everything Kermit writes in his post on Empire, i do agree that the concept of 'immaterial labour' is misconceived. *All* labour is simulataneously material and immaterial. All labour is about the transformation of both matter and information. Even within the terms of an analysis of immaterial labour, one has to ask, for whom does labour appear to become immaterial? Only for those of us in what Paul Gilroy so aptly called the 'overdeveloped' world. In a place like China, the 21st century is very much an *industrial* era. Take a look at Shenzen and you lose count of the smokestacks. There is a privileging of the experience of the overdeveloped world in H+N, and indeed in Negri. But it is no longer necessarily the case that what happens in the overdeveloped world has some determining role for the rest of us. But one thing that does seem to me to be worth pointing out is that IP becomes a new source of power for a new class, what i call the vectoralist class. A class whose power is based on the control of copyrights and patents, not on the control of the productive assets of agriculture or manufacturing. There has been a hollowing out of the corporations of the overdeveloped world. They have passed from a capitalist to a vectoralist formation. They control the means of designing and branding things, but subcontract manufacturing out elsewhere. An example might be the American corporation ADM, which was once about the production of agriculture, then about the secondary processing of food products, but is now about patenting plant varieties and branding foodstuffs. Its history spans the history of commodification through land, capital, information. But there is nothing 'immaterial' about this. Its a misunderstanding of materiality to think that information belongs to the real of the ideal. Its a weirdly imperial move, reserving the immaterial (aka the ideal) for the overdeveloped world. If what happens in the overdeveloped world still matters, it is that a new mode of commodified life has been born there. The monopolisation of information affects the life chances of everyone everywhere. The emerging regime of global IP is heavily biased towards the needs of the overdeveloped world. One forgets that when the US was a 'developing' country, it freely stole patents and copyrights from Europe. The immaterial comes to exist precisely *because* it becomes a form of property. This crucial insight is to my reading missing from H+N. By treating it as an ontological category, H+N dehistoricise the relations of power by which the 'immaterial' comes into being. Which is why i prefer this other way of conceptualising it, which puts IP as a class instrument at the centre of the analysis. Many thanks ot Kermit for inciting me to think this through further, k _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]