Marxian vs. bourgeios categories [was Marx on Smith]

[Rakesh Bhandari]

>JayHecht at aol.com wrote:
>
>>Well for one, the alledged "massive" productivity slowdown of 1973 is really
>>a load of bunk.  Yes, productivity slowed somewhat, but not because of worker
>>stupidity (or too many women, blacks, etc).
>
>Why not worker indiscipline? The "productivity slowdown" rhetoric,
>like the "inflation" rhetoric, accompanied a variety of social
>disturbances of the 1960s and early 1970s - urban riots in the US,
>near-revolution in France and Italy, rebellion among Third World
>commodity producers, etc. Of what use would a reworking of the
>economic stats that softened any impression of underlying trouble? To
>say that the working class has no power to fuck with capital?
>
>Doug

Doug,
Brenner's reply:

""The bottom line of my argument is not, therefore, that the exercise of
workers' power can never bring down profitability, but that workers'
pressure cannot sustain an EXTENDED period of profitability such as has
ensued since the later 1960s. The reason is that, where tight labor markets
cause declining profitability, firms will inevitably respond to their
reduced rates of return by cutting back investment, briding about a
reduciton in aggregate employment and thus of labor's leverage." p. 121 of
the latest issue of Challenge