Thanks, Scott. I was unaware of this episode, though the logic it expresses is limpid.
One interesting angle to explore is the far-reaching social and ideological consequences of the court's decision. The stock market's principle of anonymous ownership pushes what Marx called alienation to another level. If I understqnd correctly, Dodge v Ford removed the owner of the physical capital (the factory and its assets) from the equation. The owner ceases to be the human being who created it and gave it is definition. Instead, it's a pure abstracton known as "maximum profit."
There is a kind of natural human tension between say the owner of a mill in the 19th century and the workers. Although the workers are to some extent anonymous because they are replaceable, the actual human beings can observe one another and interact. Management takes place over channels of communication. It may resemble autocratic monologue more than dialogue, but it does admit the possibility of dialogue.
In contrast, the stock market model makes the ownership/worker relationship totally anonymous, defined by maximum interest rather than, say, maximum efficiency or productivity, which implies optimizing both the technical and human means of production.
Dodge v. Ford thus redefined the default understandng of ownership to eliminate the last trace of a human element and establish anonymous ownership as the norm for capitalism. It utterly replaced and even invalidated the human relationship. Henry Ford attempted to define a relationship, a line of communication with his workers. It was of course wildly asymmetrical, with all the power on one side. But it contained a small measure of accountability. Dodge v Ford eliminated the last trace of a notion of accountability and apparently sealed it as a fundamental principle of modern capitalist ideology, which of course was subsequently formalized by Hayek and Friedman.
This is a great lesson in the evolving history of capitalist ideology.
Peter, thank you so much for the thoughtful comment. Thanks also for zeroing right in on why this case continues to be important today. You are so right. It astonishes me how hard capital works to erase humanity from the equation.
I have been thinking about this capital/labor relationship a lot as I watch season 2 of Severance. In some ways that show is like a fever dream of an even more unequal dynamic between capital and labor... of what might be accomplished if workers' humanity and reasoning powers could be removed surgically. It is a fantasy of complete labor disempowerment on one hand, but also a reminder of the power that labor has. If you haven't seen it I would highly recommend.
Thanks, Scott. I was unaware of this episode, though the logic it expresses is limpid.
One interesting angle to explore is the far-reaching social and ideological consequences of the court's decision. The stock market's principle of anonymous ownership pushes what Marx called alienation to another level. If I understqnd correctly, Dodge v Ford removed the owner of the physical capital (the factory and its assets) from the equation. The owner ceases to be the human being who created it and gave it is definition. Instead, it's a pure abstracton known as "maximum profit."
There is a kind of natural human tension between say the owner of a mill in the 19th century and the workers. Although the workers are to some extent anonymous because they are replaceable, the actual human beings can observe one another and interact. Management takes place over channels of communication. It may resemble autocratic monologue more than dialogue, but it does admit the possibility of dialogue.
In contrast, the stock market model makes the ownership/worker relationship totally anonymous, defined by maximum interest rather than, say, maximum efficiency or productivity, which implies optimizing both the technical and human means of production.
Dodge v. Ford thus redefined the default understandng of ownership to eliminate the last trace of a human element and establish anonymous ownership as the norm for capitalism. It utterly replaced and even invalidated the human relationship. Henry Ford attempted to define a relationship, a line of communication with his workers. It was of course wildly asymmetrical, with all the power on one side. But it contained a small measure of accountability. Dodge v Ford eliminated the last trace of a notion of accountability and apparently sealed it as a fundamental principle of modern capitalist ideology, which of course was subsequently formalized by Hayek and Friedman.
This is a great lesson in the evolving history of capitalist ideology.
Peter, thank you so much for the thoughtful comment. Thanks also for zeroing right in on why this case continues to be important today. You are so right. It astonishes me how hard capital works to erase humanity from the equation.
I have been thinking about this capital/labor relationship a lot as I watch season 2 of Severance. In some ways that show is like a fever dream of an even more unequal dynamic between capital and labor... of what might be accomplished if workers' humanity and reasoning powers could be removed surgically. It is a fantasy of complete labor disempowerment on one hand, but also a reminder of the power that labor has. If you haven't seen it I would highly recommend.