If so, we are now well placed to understand Fordism: how soon we will know about post-Fordism remains to be seen. ![]() The owl of Minerva, Hegel once noted, takes flight at dusk. I also argue that there is a fundamental asymmetry between Fordism and post-Fordism as analytical tools and call for more cautious and critical use of terms such as post-Fordism. I distinguish four different levels on which Fordism and post-Fordism have been analyzed and also contrast their structural and strategic moments. In doing so I make the best case I can for both sets of concepts before proceeding to criticize them. ![]() In this chapter I criticize and reformulate the conventional terminology of Fordism and post-Fordism in order to enhance its usefulness in the critique of political economy. This reduces its utility for theoretical understanding and empirical analysis and generates many confusions and controversies. As it has become more widespread, however, this language has also been vulgarized. The language of Fordism and post-Fordism has entered lay discussion about the social and economic changes occurring in advanced capitalist societies. Storper, eds, Pathways to Regionalism and Industrial Development, London: Routledge, 43-65, 1992. ![]() ‘Fordism and post-Fordism: a critical reformulation’, in A.J. This on-line version is the pre-copyedited, preprint version.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |