Jumping the Industrial Revolution. Going directly to
post-industrial society?
Behind the important similarities already
commented, there are significant differences between the 21st century Brazil
and the 19th century England. In the classic English case -e.g. Manchester –, a
very conflictive situation forced the population to make a very painful and
distressing jump -simplifying- from rural and agricultural communities to urban
and industrial societies. Now, the challenge that often has to face the
population of emerging countries -like Brazil- is one even bigger, almost comparable
with the "Neolithic revolution" (according to a famous expression
used by Gordon Childe). In some cases the population is forced to jump from
degraded situations almost close to the hunter-gatherers communities, to the current
post-Fordist and knowledge society.
In those cases, it implies to arrive to the "Post-industrial revolution" coming from
the "Neolithic revolution", without stopping at the classical “Industrial
revolution”. Despite what it may seem, this is not an advantage of any kind, but
a much larger and more difficult challenge in all aspects of life. We need to
analyze it in detail, in order to understand it and not to minimize the
difficulties that face millions of people nowadays. We must not forget this
situation acts in favor of a growing wealth disparity, adds barriers in the
frontiers of exclusion and continues to impoverish people, systematically and
permanently.
In the following pages, we will highlight some of the
most important difficulties that prevents a leveling reaction in the medium
term and stronger actions for the empowerment of popular classes.
Virtues and skills demands in the traditional
industrialization
Nowadays trained attitudes
that society demands for manpower success, are no longer the typical of the
Fordism and Taylorism era. Briefly, the following skills are not asked anymore:
- Self-control,
- Discipline,
- Manual work,
- Passive obedience (better
than not active),
- Gregariousness,
- Submission to the foreman
and sense of hierarchy;
- Patience and social
resignation;
- Capacity of suffering in the
assembly line (which entails a complex balance between competition and
mechanical solidarity with the rest of workers);
- Basic literacy and purely
passive (not active literacy which was, as it is known, even persecuted and
repressed);
- Physical strength and physical
presence in the workplace.
Just listing these
"virtues" from the Taylorist-Fordist industrialization era, it is
clear that the desired model was defined or imposed on workers from the
outside. It was assumed (rightly!) that work was basically an imposition, and
therefore the worker was valued above all for his self-control, efficiency, obedience
and discipline. As we shall see, this is changing rapidly and not always implies
beneficial effects.
Before analyzing the virtues
and skills more demanded in the current knowledge society, it must be said that
not all occupations of the Fordist industrialization era were equal, just like today
all works not always demands the same “new” virtues we will define. But yes –and
we insist- those were the production features mainly expected from workers. Together
they form the kind of behavior that gave access to better paid occupations,
which allowed to break the dire dialectics of exclusion and poverty, and used
to be the only possibility of access one could have into the privileged social
groups or maintain a place in the management elite.
Precisely for this reason, this was the social
model massively divulged and formed the universal idea of the good men. Through
such idea, this model caused an undoubted influence over the entire population,
becoming a basic element for empowerment and a decisive tool to learn in the fight against poverty and
exclusion. On the other hand -let us not deceive ourselves-, probably, it was also
a key model to direct the drain of social resources in the "right
direction".
Virtues and skills
demands in post-Fordism and the knowledge society
Although it can surprise us,
the mentioned self-control and other
"virtues" that presided the
Fordist industrialization have changed profoundly in the post-industrial
knowledge society. Therefore, they radically transform the current industrial worker
which, as we have pointed out - was intended as an amorphous proletarian very
similar to the "man without attributes" or "without
qualities" (Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften) of the Austrian novelist Robert
Musil (1880-1942). They also change profoundly the ideal and the daily reality
of the traditional industrial "manpower", who came to be an amorphous
and easily replaceable part in the Fordist assembly line.
On the other hand, nowadays it
is demanded to the worker much more than proper obedience and self-control to
be able to "embody" the "improvements" in his work
"performance" that commands him his Taylor foreman. In Fordism, the
worker obediently occupied the place and function on the assembly line that was
granted for him and assumed the orders and modifications that once in a while
where given to him when it was "discovered" how could he be more
rentable if he did this instead of that. It was of course expected that the
worker did exactly what was asked for without flinching, since otherwise he
would be fired. We should note that in the industrial society, the model type
of the worker and of correct work was imposed and defined from the outside.
Charles Chaplin visualized brilliantly in his film Modern Times the usual relationship between the taylorist leader, the foremen and the workers in a Fordist factory: the taylorist leader calculated the best production parameters and communicated them to the foremen whom –at the assembly line - communicated them to the workers and watched that they execute them accurately and obediently. Karl Marx analyzed perfectly the kind of alienation and fetishism that this fragmented, repetitive and not at all creative activity caused on workers.
Charles Chaplin visualized brilliantly in his film Modern Times the usual relationship between the taylorist leader, the foremen and the workers in a Fordist factory: the taylorist leader calculated the best production parameters and communicated them to the foremen whom –at the assembly line - communicated them to the workers and watched that they execute them accurately and obediently. Karl Marx analyzed perfectly the kind of alienation and fetishism that this fragmented, repetitive and not at all creative activity caused on workers.
Although not always for the best,
this has deeply changed in the post-industrial knowledge and information society.
This is a society always in permanent and turboglobalized competition among all
companies, banks, productive sectors... and also (which still surprises us!)
among all workers and professionals of the entire earth. Since today the homeostatic
equilibrium of success and failure, wealth and poverty, effective inclusion and
exclusion, etc., is played around the world and at a tremendous speed.
Therefore, and differently
from the traditional assembly chain, the current post-Fordist knowledge society
requires very different training and attitudes from those we have commented.
Today it requires above all:
-Proactivity;
-Innovation capacity;
-High training and effective
literacy, including new technologies;
-Intellectual work even on
minor tasks;
-Desire to stand out and
differentiate oneself from the rest of workers;
-Autonomy and capacity for
self-management of one´s own schedule, effort and tasks;
-Constant competition with
each other and with oneself!;
-Ability to foresee and
anticipate the relevant tasks without waiting for the order;
-Eagerness and social
ambition;
-Appropriate character to conciliate
our own and other´s initiative in group work;
-Ability to manage in the long
term objectives, training and personal development...
(Trad. Yanko Moyano) Comes from the post VULNERABILITY & SOCIAL CHANGE and continue in the post INFINITY SOCIETY TRAINING?
(Trad. Yanko Moyano) Comes from the post VULNERABILITY & SOCIAL CHANGE and continue in the post INFINITY SOCIETY TRAINING?
No comments:
Post a Comment