I am working on a paper on class, and thinking about, among other
things, Marx's concept of double freedom of labour under capitalism
--- the idea that workers under capitalism are free from the
ownership of means of production and are free to choose their
employers. The issue of double freedom of labour has implications for
(uneven) economic development and the nature of the state (esp
whether or not it has a bourgeois-democratic form) in the periphery.
I would like to think that the extent to which workers are free in
each of the senses depends, in part, on class struggle (e.g. they
have fought for their freedom to choose employers). I will
elaborate my argument later if necessary, but at the moment I would
like to know what people think. In particular, why do workers have
double freedom, if/when/where they have it? Is it because the double
freedom is functional to capitalism or because of class struggle, or
perhaps both?
I am trying to develop an argument that would not be functionalist,
competitionist and politicist. Your thoughts on this crucial
concept would be highly appreciated.
Raju
Raju J Das
Department of Geography
University of Dundee
Dundee DD1 4HN
United Kingdom
Phone 01382 348073 work
01382 737097 home
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|