Hypothesis of Cognitive Capitalism

* Article: The hypothesis of cognitive capitalism. By Carlo Vercellone. EconPapers. 2005

URL = https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/halcesptp/halshs-00273641.htm

Abstract

"The aim of this presentation is to introduce some aspects of the research programme on Cognitive Capitalism. The main point that characterises this research program resides in the fact that it assume as its main pillar the social crisis of Fordism. Such a crisis manifests itself as a break with respect to the polarising tendency of the forms of knowledge informing Industrial Capitalism, thereby, realising some aspects of Marx's hypotheses concerning the notion of General Intellect. Accordingly, we shall articulate the reasoning as follow. Firstly, we shall explain the main features of the research agenda. In particular, we shall address the application of Marxist methodology and the extent to which its interpretation differs from other approaches to contemporary capitalism. Secondly will shall deal with the historical transformations of the capital/labour relation that has led to the crisis of Industrial Capitalism and, consequently, to the transition towards Cognitive Capitalism. Finally, we shall focus on the analysis of the new nature of antagonism and contradictions (subjective and objective) inherent to Cognitive Capitalism."

Summary

Reading notes by Michel Bauwens, 2006

Carlo Vercellone and his team

   - reject technological determinism
   - do not restrict the knowledge economy to the direct production of knowledge
   - do not abstract it from social relations
   - and do not consider it a independent 'third' production factor

Cognitive capitalism research historizes the economy, takes into account conflicts. It stresses the primary importance of living labour over dead labour. It centrally focuses on the changes in the division of labour. It does not oppose but complement some weaknesses of the financial capitalism hypothesis (part one), differs from the 'new economy' approaches (part two), and proposes a alternative hypothesis of a 'third regime of accumulation (part three).

1. The origin of the research program

Historians have noted a cycle of crisis - innovation-consolidation - but since about 30 years, the crisis seems permanent A standard explanation is the change from managerial to financial capitalism, and the demands and control of the latter. For CC-adherents, it is the structural crisis of Fordism, and the crisis in the extraction of surplus value caused by the dominance of knowledge work, which has contributed to financialization. CC examines the interplay of these 3 factors (i.e. the new division of labour, the growing importance of immaterial assets, and financialization), while still focusing on the core capital vs labour dichotomy. Financialization, i.e. the preference for liquid rather than fixed capital assets, can be seen as an attempt to break the dependence on concrete labour relations. It was also seen as the only way to extract immaterial value.

2. Transition Crisis to a New Capitalism ?

So, instead of crises within the cycle of cognitive capitalism, we have a crisis of the very model itself, which yearns for change, but cannot complete itself.

What are the differences between cognitive capitalism and the information economy ?

- 1) CC distinguishes information and knowledge, the latter being dependent on interpretative capabilities

- 2) the spread of a 'diffuse intellectuality' is the precondition for the development of IT infrastructures, if it is not to be a exogenous import

- 3) its role is ambivalent:

- it reinforces non-market and horizontal forms of cooperation, which put the IP system in difficulty
- but it can also serve as the baisis of a new Tayorism.