Abstract
Within Marxist theory, approaches have recently emerged which draw on Rosa Luxemburg’s theory of an ongoing primitive accumulation to develop an analysis of post-Fordist accumulation regimes. Soiland demonstrates that such a reference to Luxemburg had occurred within the feminist reception of Luxemburg’s work as early as the late 1970s. The so-called ‘Bielefeld sociologists’, most prominently Veronika Bernholdt-Thomsen, viewed household production and the reproductive labour performed mostly by women within it as being subsumed under the capitalist mode of production and thus subjected to a form of primitive accumulation. This chapter adapts this still current analysis to post-Fordist conditions, characterised by the fact that a portion of once-unpaid female labour has been converted into wage labour. Soiland argues that the world today and the combination of paid and unpaid reproductive labour we find in it represents a new form of subsumption of subsistence production, which does not disappear with the advance of capitalism, but rather expands.
The original version of this chapter was revised.An erratum to this chapter can be found at DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-60108-7_12
An erratum to this chapter can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-60108-7_12
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For the English-speaking world, see Perlmann (2000), Harvey (2003), De Angelis (2007), Federici (2010), Ezquerra (2014) and the discussion about the Commons (see, for example, The Commoner http://www.commoner.org.uk/); for the German-speaking world, see Zeller (2004), who speaks of an economy of dispossession, Dörre (2009, 2012), who speaks of a ‘new Landnahme’, as well as Backhouse et al. (2013).
- 2.
‘Expanded reproduction’ denotes the generation and subsequent re-investment of surplus value, that is, the contractually legitimised form of accumulation, cf. Marx (1978, pp. 418–599). Marx’s concept of reproduction must be distinguished from that which was so essential for developing feminist theory. When Marx uses the term, he is thinking of the reproduction of the totality of capitalist relations, of which the reproduction of the labour force is only one partial aspect.
- 3.
Various terms are common. In the English-speaking world, Perlmann (2000) speaks of a history of primitive accumulation, Harvey (2003) of an ‘accumulation by dispossession’ and De Angelis (2007, p. 135) of ‘enclosures’as ‘continuous characteristic of “capital logic”’. The term “new Landnahme” coined by Klaus Dörre cannot be accurately translated into English because of the implied metaphorical connotation (2012, p. 664).
- 4.
It should be added that Mandel (1972, p. 43) and the developmental sociology that drew on his ideas always assumed the ongoing existence of primitive accumulation in its theory of geographically unequal development (dependency theory).
- 5.
The Commoner (15) special issue on ‘Care Work and the Commons’ returns to this older debate. The issue also features some important texts from that time.
- 6.
At this point, I cannot definitely say whether this is also an anticipation of Harvey’s reflections. Comprehensive clarification would be required to determine how exactly Harvey’s concept of ‘spatio-temporal fix’, developed since the 1970s, is linked to his ‘accumulation by dispossession’, introduced in 2003 to explain the endurance of forms of primitive accumulation in our times. It seems to me, however, that the early concept of spatio-temporal fix (see Harvey 2001, 1982) is closer to Marx’s model of ‘expanded reproduction’ than to what lies at the heart of the discussion (to which Harvey has contributed greatly since the early 2000s) about contemporary forms of dispossession: the basic assumption that forms of dispossession must be understood as distinct forms of accumulation not arising from wage labour, forms that are absolutely vital for capital accumulation today (Harvey, 2003, p. 137). At least in Space of Capital, in which his older texts from the 1970s are collected, Harvey speaks of expropriation only in relation to primitive accumulation.
- 7.
Mies (2007, p. 268) notes that the expression ‘Bielefeld approach’ is misleading because the advocates of this approach could not find employment in Bielefeld, on account of, among other things, these basic assumptions they proceeded from. I nevertheless use this term because it has come to be accepted and used internationally.
- 8.
- 9.
‘Here, on the level of form, it is peace, property, and equality that prevail, and it required the acute dialectic of a scientific analysis to expose the way in which, during the process of accumulation, the right of property turns into the appropriation of alien property, commodity exchange turns into exploitation, and equality turns into class domination’ (Luxemburg, 1913, p. 329).
- 10.
It is important to note that Luxemburg’s criticism of Marx concerned an economic problem, as she challenged his basic assumption of the ‘absolute dominance of the capitalist mode of production’: ‘On closer inspection, the schema of expanded reproduction itself points beyond itself to relations lying beyond capitalist production and accumulation’ (Luxemburg 1913, pp. 252–3).
- 11.
Compare, for example, Luxemburg (1913, p. 262): ‘This relation of dependence is not exhausted by the bare question of the market for the “excess product,” as the problem was posed by Sismondi and the later critics and skeptics of capitalist accumulation.’ Or: ‘[T]he realization of surplus value […] is a priori bound up with noncapitalist producers and consumers’ (Luxemburg, 1913, p. 263).
- 12.
Cf. Feministische Autorinnengruppe (2013).
- 13.
This is a central point, as the Bielefeld sociologists are often equated with the ‘subsistence perspective’ which some of its proponents adopted at a later point and in which subsistence was conceived of as a strategy for overcoming the capitalist mode of production. In their earlier writings, however, the term ‘subsistence production’ is clearly used exclusively to denote an economy of survival (and its associated overexploitation) generated by capitalism itself. In this regard, the concept is indeed applicable to contemporary forms of precarised lifeforms in the metropolises of capitalism. For examples of a current application of the Bielefeld approach see, for example, Hürtgen (2015, pp. 59–62).
- 14.
Marx assumed that the wage would have to encompass all the goods needed to reproduce workers and their families. This is how he determines the value of the labour commodity. Marx thus left untheorised the fact that many workers do not engage in waged activities without interruption but nevertheless reproduce themselves during these in between periods. What is central to reproduction understood in this way is the labour performed by family networks.
- 15.
In the form of the publication Feminist Economics, founded in 1996. On the partial continuity between the older housework debate and feminist economics of the late 1980s cf. Cağlar (2009, pp. 230–35). It is important to note, however, that feminist economics possesses a distinct theoretical background, as it evolved out of a dispute with neoclassical economics and partly follows the institutional approach. On this, cf. Heck (2010, pp. 45–63).
- 16.
On this point cf. S. Donath’s expression ‘the other economy’, which concerns ‘the direct production and maintenance of human beings’ (2001, p. 115). On this, compare the appraisal by Madörin (2014, p. 179f). In reference to Madörin, the care economy encompasses the daily provisions humans require, which means, among other things, that production and ‘consumption’ cannot be separated (2007, p. 142f, 2006, pp. 277–86). The paid care work sector includes education, health, social services.
- 17.
- 18.
- 19.
Wherever profits are nevertheless extracted from person-oriented services, such as in privatised nursing services or hospitals, this is only possible by way of the exertion of massive downward pressure on wages, often leading to wages so low they are below the level necessary for care workers’ own reproduction. Cf., for example, Chorus (2013, pp. 199–235).
- 20.
In economics, low value-added denotes any work that cannot be produced faster through productivity increases. Almost all person-oriented services are thus low value-added.
- 21.
This development can be observed both in the rather conservative care regime in Switzerland (Madörin 2010, p. 100f, 2007, p. 159) and in the largely neoliberalised care regime in the UK (McDowell, 2009, pp. 36–8). Unfortunately, I have no prepared figures available for other countries; impressive figures on the relation of employment in the care sector to the rest of the economy for the New York metropolitan area are also available in Chorus (2013, pp. 199–211).
- 22.
- 23.
It should be emphasised that this means a relative cost increase for these services in relation to the goods from commodity production as a result of technical innovation. Cf. on this Madörin (2007, p. 150f).
- 24.
This raises the question as to whether the crisis of over-accumulation Harvey addresses (2003, p. 110f) is perhaps rooted in this problem of diverging productivity, insofar as the problem identified by Baumol is an expression of the fact that an ever increasing share of GDP is low value-added and thus hardly conducive to private profit interests and investment opportunities: what is referred to as ‘expanded reproduction’ in Marxism cannot or can hardly expand into profitable investment opportunities, due to its expansion in advanced western capitalist societies occurring primarily in the person-oriented service sector.
- 25.
- 26.
The same applies to the possibility of relocating ‘production’: while this is unproblematic for industrially produced goods, allowing the West to benefit enormously from the dramatic differences in wages worldwide, most person-oriented services cannot be moved to a low-wage country. There is, however, the phenomenon of care migration, both westwards and vice versa, meaning that people in need of care are moved to nursing homes in a low-wage country specifically established for this purpose.
- 27.
- 28.
Ezquerra shows this very clearly in the case of Spain, speaking of the ‘New Enclosure of the Reproductive Commons’ (2014, p. 1).
- 29.
Ezquerra (2014, p. 7) also emphasises this point in the case of Spain.
- 30.
Federici (2010) correctly emphasises that Marx’s productivist bias led him to overlook the fact that growth in productivity is always accompanied by an increase in poverty of a certain part of the population.
- 31.
Hürtgen (2015, pp. 59ff) also analyses this for western post-Fordist societies, likewise with reference to the Bielefeld sociologists.
- 32.
This was by no means undisputed, however; cf. Frauen in der Offensive (‘Women on the Offensive’) (1974) which called this strategy into question with the slogan ‘Wage Labour Won’t Set You Free’ (Lohnarbeit macht nicht frei).
- 33.
Cf. on this also Ezquerra (2014, p. 7) who argues that the question of Landnahme in the area of reproduction cannot be reduced to the commodification of care work, as the unpaid care sector remains central as a possible site of hidden cost absorption.
- 34.
For Switzerland, expanded GDP has been determined by the Federal Statistical Office through time budget surveys of private households since the year 2000. These figures exist for most EU countries; for Germany cf. Schaffer and Stahmer (2006).
- 35.
Correspondingly, Bennholdt-Thomsen criticises the Marxist disregard of this mode of production and the failure to recognise its significance for capital accumulation (1981, p. 38):‘Even though it appears to be dealing with it, the actual analysis of subsistence production is evaded by banning its relations of production from the capitalist mode of production by definition, depicting them as pre-capitalist or non-capitalist.’
Bibliography
Backhouse, M., Gerlach, O., Kalmring, S., & Nowak, A. (Eds.) (2013). Die globale Einhegung – Krise ursprünglicher Akkumulation und Landnahmen im Kapitalismus. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.
Baumol, W. J. (2012). The cost disease. Why computers get cheaper and health care doesn’t. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Bennholdt-Thomsen, V. (1981). Subsistenzproduktion und erweiterte Reproduktion. Ein Beitrag zur Produktionsweisendiskussion. In H. G. Backhaus et al. (Eds.), Gesellschaft: Beiträge zur Marxschen Theorie 14 (pp. 30–51). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrlamp.
Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2007). The new spirit of capitalism. London and New York: Verso.
Brodie, J. (1994). Shifting the boundaries: Gender and the politics of restructuring. In I. Bakker (Ed.), The strategic silence. Gender and economic policy (pp. 46–60). London: Zed Books.
Brodie, J. (1997). Meso-discourses, state forms and the gendering of liberal-democratic citizenship. Citizenship Studies, 1(2), 223–242.
Brodie, J. (2004). Die Re-Formierung des Geschlechterverhältnisses. Neoliberalismus und die Regulierung des Sozialen. Widerspruch, 46(24), 1, 19–32.
Cağlar, G. (2009). Transnationale Wissensnetzwerke und Geschlechterpolitik im Feld der internationalen Wirtschafts- und Handelspolitik. In G. Cağlar (Ed.), Gender and economics. Feministische Kritik der politischen Ökonomie (pp. 278–303.). Wiesbaden: VS.
Chorus, S. (2007a). Ökonomie und Geschlecht? Regulationstheorie und Geschlechterverhältnisse im Fordimus und Postfordismus. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag.
Chorus, S. (2007b). Who cares? Kapitalismus, Geschlechterverhältnisse und Frauenarbeit. Regulationstheoretische Sehkorrekturen. Feministische Studien. Zeitschrift für interdisziplinäre Frauen- und Geschlechterforschung, 25(2), 202–216.
Chorus, S. (2011). Care-Seiten in der politischen Ökonomie’. In Das Argument (Care – eine feministische Kritik der politischen Ökonomie), 53(3), 392–401.
Chorus, S. (2013). Care-Ökonomie im Postfordismus. Perspektiven einer integralen Ökonomietheorie. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.
De Angelis, M. (2007). The beginning of history. Value strugles and global capital. London: Pluto Press.
Donath, S. (2001). The other economy. A suggestion for a distinctively feminist economics. Feminist Economics, 6(1), 115–123.
Dörre, K. (2009). Die neue Landnahme. Dynamiken und Grenzen des Finanzmarktkapitalismus. In K.Dörre, St. Lessenich, H. Rosa: Soziologie, Kapitalismus, Kritik (pp21–86). Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.
Dörre, K. (2012). ‘Landnahme’. Historisch-kritisches Wörterbuch des Marxismus, 8(1), 644–688.
Dörre, K. (2013). Landnahme und die Grenzen sozialer Reproduktion. Zur gesellschaftstheoretischen Bedeutung Rosa Luxemburgs. In I. Schmidt (Ed.), Rosa Luxemburgs ‚Akkumulation des Kapitals’. Die Aktualität von ökonomischer Theorie, Imperialismuserklärung und Klassenanalyse (pp. 82–116.). Hamburg: VSA.
Dörre, K. (2015). The new Landnahme: Dynamics and limits of financial market capitalism. In K. Dörre, S. Lessenich, & H. Rosa (Eds.), Sociology, capitalism critique (pp. 11–66). London and New York: Verso.
Dörre, K., & Haubner, T. (2012). Landnahme Durch Bewährungsproben – Ein Konzept für die Arbeitssoziologie. In K. Dörre, D. Sauer, & V. Wittke (Eds.), Kapitalismustheorie und Arbeit. Neue Ansätze soziologischer Kritik. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag, pp. 63–108.
Ezquerra, S. (2014). Spain, economic crisis, and the new enclosure of the reproductive commons. Montly Review, 65(11).
Federici, S. (2010). The reproduction of labour-power in the global economy, Marxist theory and the unfinished feminist revolution, Reading for Jan. 27, 2009, UC Santa Cruz seminar. The crisis of social reproduction and feminist struggle. https://caringlabor.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/silvia-federici-the-reproduction-of-labour-power-in-the-global-economy-marxist-theory-and-the-unfinished-feminist-revolution/. Last accessed 4 Feb 2015.
Federici, S. (2012). Der Feminismus und die Politik der Commons. In S. Federici (Ed.), Der Aufstand aus der Küche. Reproduktionsarbeit im globalen Kapitalismus und die unvollendete feministische Revolution (pp. 87–105). Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.
Feministische Autorinnengruppe (2013). Das Theorem der neuen Landnahme: eine feministische Rückeroberung. In H. Baumann, I. Bischel, et al. (Eds.), Care statt Crash. Sorgeökonomie und die Überwindung des Kapitalismus. Denknetz Jahrbuch 2013 (pp. 99–118). Zürich: Denknetz.
Fraisse, G. (2009). Service ou servitude. Essay sur les femmes toutes maines. Paris: Editions Le Bord de l’eau.
Frauen in der Offensive (1974). Lohn für Hausarbeit oder: Auch Berufstätigkeit macht nicht frei. München: Trikont Verlag.
Hürtgen, S. (2015). Das Konzept der strukturellen Heterogenität und die Analyse fragmentierter Wachstumsgesellschaften in Europa. University of Jena, unpublished manuscript.
Harvey, D. [1982] (1999) The limits to capital. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Harvey, D. (2001). Spaces of capital: Towards a critical geography. New York: Routledge.
Harvey, D. (2003). The new imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heck, S. (2010). Von ‚Reproduktion‘zu ‚Care‘. Analysen feministischer Ökonomie, 1960s to 1990s. University of Hannover, unpublished Master’s thesis.
Hirsch, J. (1995). Der nationale Wettbewerbsstaat. Staat, Demokratie und Politik im globalen Kapitalismus. Berlin and Amsterdam: ID Verlag.
Hirsch, J., & Roth, R. (1986). Das neue Gesicht des Kapitalismus. Vom Fordismus zum Postfordismus. Hamburg: VSA.
Luxemburg, R. [1913] (2015). The accumulation of capital: A contribution to the economic theory of imperialism. In The complete works of Rosa Luxemburg, volume II, economic writings 2. pp. 7–344. London: Verso.
Madörin, M. (2006). Plädoyer für eine eigenständige Theorie der Care-Ökonomie. In T. Niechoj & M. Tullney (Eds.), Geschlechterverhältnisse in der Ökonomie (pp. 277–297). Marburg: Metropolis.
Madörin, M. (2007). Neoliberalismus und die Reorganisation der Care-Ökonomie. Eine Forschungsskizze. In Denknetz (Ed.), Zur politischen Ökonomie der Schweiz. Eine Annäherung. Jahrbuch 2007 (pp. 141–162). Zürich: Denknetz.
Madörin, M. (2010). Care-Ökonomie – eine Herausforderung für die Wirtschaftswissenschaften. In C. Bauhardt & G. Cağlar (Eds.), Gender and Economics. Feministische Kritik der politischen Ökonomie (pp. 81–103). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Madörin, M. (2011). Das Auseinanderdriften der Arbeitsproduktivitäten: Eine feministische Sicht. In Denknetz (Ed.), Gesellschaftliche Produktivität jenseits der Warenform. Jahrbuch 2011 (pp. 56–70). Zürich: Denkwerk.
Madörin, M. (2014). Kommentar zu Donaths Artikel aus der Sicht einer feministischen Politökonomin. In I. Bischel, U. Knobloch, et al. (Eds.), Kritik des kritischen Denkens. Denknetz Jahrbuch 2014 (pp. 178–187). Zürich: Denknetz.
Madörin, M., & Soiland, T. interview(2013). Care Ökonomie? Offene Fragen und politische Implikationen. In H. Baumann, I. Bischel, et al. (Eds.), Care statt Crash. Sorgeökonomie und die Überwindung des Kapitalismus. Denknetz Jahrbuch 2013 (pp. 84–98). Zürich: Denknetz.
Mandel, E. (1972). Late capitalism. London: Humanities Press.
Marx, K. (1867). Capital. A critique of political economy, volume I. London: Penguin.
Marx, K. (1885). Capital. A critique of political economy, volume II. London: Penguin.
McDowell, L. (2009). The rise of the service economy. In Working bodies. Interactive service employment and workplace identities (pp. 25–48). Malden and Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mies, M. (1983). Subsistenzproduktion, Hausfrauisierung, Kolonisierung. Beiträge zur feministischen Theorie und Praxis, 9–10(6), 115–124.
Mies, M. (1986). Patriarchy and accumulation on a world scale. Women in the international division of labour. London: Zed Books.
Mies, M. (2007). Patriarchy and accumulation on a world scale – revisited. Journal of Green Economics, 1(3–4), 268–275.
Mies, M. (2014). Housewifisation – Globalisation – Subsistence-perspective. In M. Linden and K.H. Roth, Beyond Marx. pp. 209–239. Leiden: Brill.
Perlmann, M. (2000). The invention of capitalism: Classical political economy and the secret history of primitive accumulation. Durham: Duke University Press.
Schaffer, A., & Stahmer, C. (2006). Erweitertes Gender-BIP – Eine geschlechts-spezifische Analyse des traditionellen Bruttoinlandproduktes und die Haushaltsproduktion in Deutschland. Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 226(3), 308–328.
The Commoner. (2012). “Care Work” and the Commons, 15. http://www.commoner.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/commoner_issue-15.pdf.
Von Werlhof, C. (1988). The proletarian is dead: Long live the housewife!. In von Werlhof, C. von and M. Mies, V. Bennholdt-Thomsen (eds), Women. The last colony. pp. 168–181 London: Zed Books.
Zeller, C. (Ed.) (2004). Die globale Enteignungsökonomie. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Soiland, T. (2016). A Feminist Approach to Primitive Accumulation. In: Dellheim, J., Wolf, F. (eds) Rosa Luxemburg: A Permanent Challenge for Political Economy. Luxemburg International Studies in Political Economy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-60108-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-60108-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-60107-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-60108-7
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)