From work for "vocation" to "flexible work"
As capitalism "flexible" has made possible the Marxist and socialist utopia of overcoming the social division of labor. But changing some signs and purpose
Antimo Negri
---------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------
Literature critical, particularly sociological and economic, on the world of production and work (organization of both) nell'epocale revolutionary shift from the labor-civilization, or the workplace rigidly fixed to the civilization of what they say today "flexible work" or precarious jobs and changing, it is now cut off from day to day, even in an excessive increase.
The passage in question can be characterized as the nation states to globalization, or, even, like the one from Old Economy to New Economy. But with greater inclination to question. Especially the history of the concept of work, more careful in using the category of time changed the theory and practice, can be considered as the transition, irreversible or reversible that is, the culture, mainly Christian, homo vocatus culture, which might be called post-Christian, homo flexibilis. At least if, in the sense where there vocatio Pauline and then in the Calvinist sense, or calling or Beruf (calling) profession in the Weberian sense, there can be, indeed, "flexibility" as diversion from a natural aptitude to exercise a profession or a professional activity which should obey, desiring to serve in an expression of Hegel, such a fate.
Christian culture of the vocative and, undoubtedly, the one COEST, historically, with a capitalist industrial civilization resort, need to meet the needs in the most rational production more efficient and competitive organization and more "scientific" labor (yes, you can think of Taylor and Ford), men staff, resigned as such, with a divided labor. The first chapters of Smithian Wealth of Nations (1776), in which describes the division of social labor as the cornerstone of manufacturing which will serve a man who fails to pay by job role that you assign very determined, even that of the specialist in manufacturing the eighteenth part of a needle, the preliminaries are doctrinal in Calvino religionis Institutio Christianae (1536), where, in the name of the vocative, it urges man not to indulge in a desultoria Levitas, ie a "light jumping" that do it playfully move from one activity to another.
It 's a fact, this, that deserves to be examined critically, in a time like ours, where, with the most advanced technologies, especially information technology, capitalism, emerged victorious from the conflict with communism that characterized some of our "short century", not longer needs vocatus homo or, more precisely, a man who wants to, even in the form of ideological residues that have their roots in classical antiquity (the "nature does not jump" is a motto that penalizes the old class division between masters and servants, also dear to Nietzsche), and indeed part of an parzialissima, out of which would seriously affect the fate of any enterprise. Yes, the era of Taylorism and Fordism, the last great appendix of culture of 'homo vocatus or worker divided, trapped in a stultifying and repetitive work role (Smith himself admit it, but did not want another Ford in the "assembly" is a significant metaphor), it's over. And the capitalist organization of production and work replaced, gradually more and more, the figure of the "flexible worker" to the figure of a worker named ".
remains, meanwhile, the question on the table, in 1952, placed the French sociologist G. Friedmann: OU is the travail humain? But this is a question to which, in early 2000, you can not give the same answer that, even with passion Humanities, gave Friedmann. The capitalist organization of production and work seems to have made possible a kind of historical irony, the realization of what, in the most extreme theories of socialism, seemed like an unattainable utopia: the end of the division of social work, its the culture of the vocative. Or, in a word, has made possible the realization of 'homo flexibilis, that is no longer relegated to a worker in a recurring role, but able to play a "poliattività " (the term is, significantly, Plato), to change several times trade or profession in life, to wait for many activities within a given day. And this was not the dream (even caressed by Marx is not without even more in the development of his scientific socialism, the utopian mood) of the utopian socialist Fourier? Not necessary, according to Calvin, surrender to desultoria levitas? But Fourier highlights, including the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, the passion papillonnante, the "passion sfarfallegiante" (Italo Calvino, and he presented the most characteristic features), which induces a switch from one job to another, from one profession to another. Capitalism has made it possible, what is historically called for socialism, the utopian and scientific socialism, even fed utopia.
The 'flexible man "is, in fact, a man named, in the organization production and employment, to abandon the idea of \u200b\u200b"job" to arrange the "flexibility" and "mobility". He said: "named". But here, the vocatio of Christian culture, civilization and modern industrial capitalism has nothing to do anymore. He is "called, yes, but a capitalist rather than" Modern Times "(Chaplin), but to" post-modern times "or, if you will," post-industrial ". Or, eventually, to the times you say, now, as we warned, globalization, new economy. Times that produced, first of all, if you want to listen to a prominent sociologist at the London School of Economecs, a flexible capitalism, which, however, of primitive capitalism, always provided that allow energy to change the skin, retains the stamp of "modernity", at least if by "modernity" can be construed as an attitude and incomparable to harness the man in the nets of the ratio, the calculation of 'intelligence instrument, the organ which is still the caput head (to capitalism).
The subtitle of Richard Sennett called into question is the following: The Personal Consequences of Work in the capitalism. And, certainly the "new capitalism" - or "flexible capitalism" - has a powerful influence, in which no one can escape, the "personal lives" of men, it also silences the ideological complaints about the "end of work "(Rifkin) or on the 'economic horror" of civilizations that is called post-Christian civilization that no longer vocatio (Viviane Forrester). And that the "new capitalism has this influence is shown by the very fact that it has produced and produces "flexible" workers. " O, too, has crossed the barrier and leads to a civilization no longer work, but work (Accornero). Which, of course, can also result in a culture of "creative" or the 'pancreatic leisure "(De Masi). But it remains that it is also a civilization in which most worries the problem of unemployment is to await the resolution of which the most varied and most conflict employment policies. One thing is certain, in the meantime: it opens the space for a real work of futurology. And on this same futurology, with his lyrics have been written or that you still have to write, we must make a special speech on the more scientific and less ideologicopossibile possible.
Nor can it be, this speech, conducted without an interdisciplinary approach. The work, in fact, long ago, is now, itself, a divided object of study. And for that reason, we need to study it, perhaps without the worry of "applications" policy shift and not the lies of multiple perspectives union of intellectual workers divided: the sociology of work the psychologist's work, labor economist at the labor lawyer. Juxtaposing not, of course, contributions to the study of these knowledge workers. The object of study is unique. Woe to divide without reassembling it in drive. Especially with a precise objective: to critically commisurare two cultures and two civilizations: the decline of the vocative and the now booming flexibility. The futurist work can not also be a historical work.
E 'which can not be properly assessed at the same time when you are already playing, the res gerendae the world of work without knowing the res gestae. What in the world this has happened, is happening and will happen concerns a human being, and has as its protagonist a man whose past and whose future are intertwined in a present where the reasons for the respect of his "vocation" and the need of its "flexibility." Observed that, at least here, just as the reverse of the "vocation". But it must be said that just seen, against a "calling" that "naturalizes" every trade and every profession of man, thereby linking him to a fate impassable, "flexibility" may also take on its face "humanist", if implies the idea of \u200b\u200bactivity varied, diverse, multilateral, under which a person can be realized in all its fullness and not be humiliated in a part and in only a part of himself. it raised the possibility of a result of "flexible working" in a "creative" in a speech in flexibilis homo homo ludens. And it is a possibility which seems an instance of alleged non-negligible: the one that emerges from some German neo-humanism between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Hoelderlin, Schiller), no stranger to the conscience of Marx, an instance that, compared to the end , takes off his appearance at work "slave" and shakes of freedom.
ideology - since this is all about - the "flexible work" is no place for this instance. But we must now warn that crumbles as soon as it turns out that "flexibility" is the necessary historical product of a "flexible" to powers exercised by the fact that apply now, in the organization of production and labor, that "flex", a man bend to their will, even if not live by only working (Totaro), works for a living. And what they say is essential that these powers, a man who wants to, yet often can not work for a living? Neither more nor less than this, you will work when we want and to the extent that we agree (the logic of the efficiency, productivity, competitiveness), and if you work in, resigned to not do what you can and should do by obeying a "vocation", but also that the absence a "vocation" does not allow you to do with gratification that blooms only when I work and "vocation" match.
From this point of view, can arise even nostalgia for the culture of the vocative, to the civilization of the job split. At least if the concept of "Flexibilization" is not logically be used if not as long as you are referring, specifically, to a person who "bends" and a person (even an object) that is "flex". The person who "bends", now, has been identified: the "flexible capitalism." It does not take much to identify the subject (and indeed the object) "flex" you can see in every mother's son, to be "worthy of his food" (San Paul), the curve back under a burden (the work that has ponos, fatigue, pain, weight), for "calling" can not and must not lead. And then read in Laborem Exercens of Pope John Paul II: First of all the work is "for man and not man for the job" (I, 6)!
Copyright © 2010 - all rights reserved. All rights reserved
