Co-Revolutionary Theory
= concept by David Harvey
Description
Tero Toivanen:
"David Harvey's "co-revolutionary theory" distinguishes "seven moments" which could be usefull to analyse the emerging p2p-production and it's relation to contemporary capitalism. There is more about this in "The Enigma of Capital".
"They are derived from an understanding of Marx’s account of how capitalism arose out of feudalism. Social change arises through the dialectical unfolding of relations between seven moments within the body politic of capitalism viewed as an ensemble or assemblage of activities and practices:
a) technological and organizational forms of production, exchange and consumption
b) relations to nature
c) social relations between people
d) mental conceptions of the world, embracing knowledges and cultural understandings and beliefs
e) labor processes and production of specific goods, geographies, services or affects
f ) institutional, legal and governmental arrangements
g) the conduct of daily life that underpins social reproduction." (Facebook, October 2012)
Discussion
Tero Toivanen:
'Harvey argues that the transition from feudalism to capitalism entailed a change in all seven moments. It did not rise as a revolutionary change in one of these moments. Instead,
“It took a co-evolution and uneven development in the different spheres before capitalism found not only its own unique technological base but also its belief systems and mental conceptions, its unstable but clearly class-ridden configurations of social relations, its curious spatio-temporal rhythms and its equally special forms of daily life, to say nothing of its production processes and its institutional and administrative framework, before it was possible to say that this was truly capitalism.” (Harvey, Enigma, p. 135.)
Thus, the historical lesson is, that if we are about to vision an alternative society beyond capitalism, the change has to happen (at least) in all of these moments. Every moment is, of course, internally dynamic and full of tension, just think what kind of battles are happening between ideologies and beliefs or what changes are taking place in the sphere of production after the Fordist mode of production has been (at least partly) outdated. But the crucial aspect is that there is dialectical movement between the moments: each moment evolves in dynamic interaction with the others. For example, radical and new technological innovations does not come out without something happening on the sphere of mental conceptions, or political movement can affect deeply and rather fast to people’s understanding of institutions and the way that production forces are used. The explosion of lethal global virus is probably related to some errors on many spheres, but also affects radically to many of them. And so on.
Capitalism has lasted for few centuries precisely ‘by keeping the dialectical movement between the moments going and constructively embracing the inevitable tensions, including crises, that result.’ So the political movement that wants to vision and struggle for more sustainable and equal society has to keep moving from moment to another in ‘mutually reinforcing’ ways. This ‘mutual moving’ is actually what Harvey calls the movement (see Enigma, p. 138). I would, if you like, go even further to argue that this just could be ”the real movement which abolishes the present state of things” and which conditions ”result from the premises now in existence”.
You can perhaps think that it is possible to start the change from anywhere of these moments, but the point is not to stay where things start. In this sense, it is quite clear that Harvey set up his framework also to envision alliances between different social forces around the spheres.”