Show Summary Details
Restricted access

Immaterial and industrial labor: On false binaries in Hardt and Negri's trilogy

Sylvia Yanagisako

Keywords: AFFECTIVE LABOR; EMPIRE; INDUSTRIAL LABOR; IMMATERIAL LABOR; ITALIAN CAPITALISM; MULTITUDE

Abstract

At the core of Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri's thesis that a new global form of sovereignty has replaced a previous imperialist geography is their claim that the capitalist mode of production has undergone a shift from a modern era in which “industrial labor“ was hegemonic to a postmodern era in which “immaterial labor“ has become hegemonic. In this article, I argue that capitalism in Europe (let alone other areas of the world) does not conform to this model. I draw on the history of Italian manufacturing and on my ethnographic research on the silk industry of northern Italy to question the analytic usefulness of their distinction between “industrial“ and “immaterial“ labor and to show that the latter has always been crucial to industrial production. I conclude that Hardt and Negri's attempt to expand the definition of productive labor to include the “multitude“ unwittingly parallels an emerging discourse that serves to legitimate transnational hierarchies of labor.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or log in to access all content.