Читать книгу The Handbook of Peer Production - Группа авторов - Страница 75

The crisis of the 1970s placed significant pressure on the profits of US capital. In response, policymakers and shareholders sought measures of restoring profitable capital accumulation. These measures essentially unfolded along two axes. First, policymakers began to cut away at policies designed to protect worker rights. These efforts began in the late 1970s, but really ramped up after leaders like Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and Deng Xiaoping took office. These leaders ushered in an era of deregulation and the privatization of national industries, which also cut away at protections for labor (see Harvey, 2005). The upshot of these regulatory changes was a reduction in wages and the outsourcing of jobs, thereby reducing the fixed costs of firms. Second, shareholders and business owners also sought ways of reducing the fixed costs associated with their business operations. This was made possible by new developments in information and communication technologies, most notably software, which allowed owners to track their production processes in a more sophisticated way. The result was a further disciplining of labor and the maximization of efficiency throughout commodity supply chains. Furthermore, commodity supply chains could now be networked across geographic boundaries to take advantage of cost savings wherever they existed. This allowed for what Harvey (1989) refers to as flexible accumulation, which is “characterized by the emergence of entirely new sectors of production, new ways of providing financial services, new markets, and, above all, greatly intensified rates of commercial, technological, and organizational innovation” (p. 147). In effect, this new model of production no longer relied on mass production, which was the hallmark of Fordism. Rather, it made possible on‐demand production, which reduced stockpiles of mass‐produced inventory while simultaneously allowing firms to adapt to ever‐changing demands from consumers.

One of the critical elements enabling this type of business model was the development of networked communication technologies, which could be put into the service of capital. It was during this time that information and communication technologies became viewed as a new vehicle for reinvigorating capital accumulation, and the sector saw massive capital investment, especially in the 1990s, while US manufacturing remained stagnant. Indeed, the massive surge in venture capital investment into the so‐called “dot‐com” companies during the 1990s fueled the financial bubble that eventually burst in the early 2000s (Cassidy, 2002). The investment in digital technologies continues today, as similar investments can be seen in a number of digital services that promise to reinvigorate capital accumulation, whether they are digital platforms like Uber, Lyft, Spotify, or cryptocurrency technologies like Blockchain.

Accompanying these economic changes was also an ideological shift, particularly in the ways in which participation in capitalism was justified. Boltanski and Chiapello (2005) refer to the “spirit of capitalism” as the “ideology that justifies engagement in capitalism” (p. 8). They argue that the spirit of capitalism shifted from the 1970s onwards. During this time, business culture – in the form of management texts – began to abandon the rigidities of hierarchical Fordist production in favor of flexible and network‐based forms of organization. In doing so, capitalism effectively assimilated the artistic critique of capitalism of the 1960s and 1970s by touting individual autonomy and emphasizing employee initiative as a path to self‐fulfillment, whilst marginalizing its social critique, embodied in trade unions and more concerned with wage inequality. In short, employment was not simply something necessary for earning a living, but it was also a way to achieve creative freedom through self‐expression. The espousal of these new forms of freedom and autonomy for workers proved to be an effective way of reducing the fixed costs of corporations. As more workers embraced flexible work routines, they carried the burden of funding their own benefits like insurance, retirement plans, etc. Indeed, this trend can also be viewed today in a number of industries where freelance work has become prevalent, but the trend is particularly pronounced in the media and journalism industries as well as so‐called “creative” industries that employ artists, fashion designers, and stylists (see Deuze, 2007; McRobbie, 2016; Cohen, 2016).