>It's not, "capital" isn't, that simple.
>There are kinds of capital I now do command -- I take it with me, regardless of
>who employs me, or even if I was not empoyed -- they just aren't defined
>expressly by "profit".
I'm guessing (trust me to get into an argument about an area I know nothing about) that the "capital" you command is your CV? That is to say stuff published and reputation gained.
The thing about that sort of "capital" is that, without the real capital, it won't earn you a cent. You have to sell it in one manner or another to someone with the means to translate it into profit. You can't start your own university without a rather large amount of capital, you can't become an author without selling yourself to a publisher who owns the means to print and market your writings.
Your position is essentially that of a wage labourer, albeit one who can command a relatively comfortable price for your labour, because of the balance of supply and demand for your skills.
> > Are you saying that you
>> profit from capital in some sense, because your conditions of employment
>> afford you the privilege of some control over how you can best make money for
>> your employer?
>
>Yes, ok. It can partly be put that way. But there's also what adheres to me,
>now, rather than the position I hold.
"Adheres" to you, exactly. You can't sell this form of "capital". It only exists as long as you do and possibly not even that long. You can only sell yourself to sell it.
> > To me, that seems merely to be a necessary element of the job. Obviously if
>> you made sandwiches for a living, the same degree of flexibility would not be
>> necessary to maximise your efficiency. Presumably there is something about
>> your job that makes it useful to arrange it thus?
>
>Well I can't see how it works that way. Sure, the possibility of forms of
>cultural capital is one of the appeals of academic work. It's a way the job is
>sold and a way I can sell me for that job. But not only are those (despite the
>deceptive parallelism) not at all the same thing, I cannot see how that's
>actually very useful to my employer. All this is messy, I agree -- the
>university system needs to hype and enforce the freedom of some academic
>positions in order to make it an attractive thing to do,
Not just that, but the product the university sells would have little value in the market if it was created by mindless drones who were unable to exercise their intellectual creativity. This is what I meant by freedom being an unavoidable element of your job, I wasn't talking about mere spin.
> including the way more
>exploitative junior positions -- but it doesn't change the fact that right now,
>as is, I have not only some personal power over my work but everything I
>do 'for my employer' accumulates a kind of capital to me which does not belong
>to them and which I can move with me as I choose.
I used to work at an abattoir, long time ago. The position of Slaughterman enjoyed some of these advantages you mention. The speed at which the Slaughterman worked determined the speed at which the rest of the assembly line could speed along and therefor how hard everyone else worked. Of course the Slaughtermen were relatively high paid, they also had considerable influence on hiring and firing of lesser mortals. As you might imagine, a skilled and reliable Slaughterman commanded a fairly good wage and one with a good reputation could take his reputation with him. One who had a reputation for getting pissed and turning up late for work, costing the company thousands unproductive wages, would not be worth nearly so much.
As I say, it goes with the job.
>What? You're killing cats? OK, I know that's what you're saying, it wasn't
>really a question. This is: by what right?
That's how I feel about people who DON'T kill cats. I can defend my position if necessary, but it just seems so obvious, on environmental grounds alone. The murderous creatures have driven half of Australia's native wildlife to the brink of extinction.
> > Sounds like a riddle. Not very good at riddles. Air-conditioning in a new
>> fangled idea. It probably doesn't occur to your mother to install it.
>
>Ah, no. That's definitely not it. It's nothing so mysterious. She doesn't have
>A/C because she couldn't possibly afford it. I think I thought that was part of
>the point. Maybe chinotto is some kind of hallucinogen.
>
>>....
> Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think your work conditions would have to
>> be somewhat related to the necessities of the work. Maybe ordinary market
>> forces play some part too. You tell me.
>
>Market demand, sure. And everything that goes with that. My point is that I
>have a starkly different relation to the market now than I had years ago in
>*other kinds of class positions*.
Yes, but a changes relation to the market is not the same thing as a changed relationship to the means of production.
> > But as I see it, relationship to the
>> means of production might sound very complex, but is really simple. How many
>> different kinds of relationship can there be, in an objective sense? You
>> either own it or you don't. Can you think of any other possibilities?
>
>Oh come on. Shares make that crazy just even without trying to think of it.
I don't see how. Owning shares is precisely owning a part of the means of production. If you own the majority of voting shares in a corporation then your relationship to the means of production is that of owner. The only issue is that of where to draw the line in defining class.
>And
>I don't just mean the buying microsoft kind of shares either. Eery increase
>right now in the rep of USyd is an increase in my own, and the other way
>around -- and there are material senses in which those accretions belong to me
>not just to my employer.
In what sense? In the same sense that that what the university sells belongs to the student who graduates? That is to say, accreditation is non-transferrable, a graduate can't sell his certification to someone else, but can only sell his certified labour. Or do you mean it in some other way? Do you get a cut of the profits?
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas