Brief Prate on “Industrial Revolution and the Crisis of Control”

This response is again based on my notes for the first several pages of the text – before I would begin to digress.


The imperative of the alteration of the current system along with economical shifts is a prime premise of Marxist theory. Here, the second premise of control being the crux of such evolution is an arbitrary delimitation of superstructure* within its pro-capitalist from that hence coerces intransigence into the basestructure**. If Marxist theory is to be challenged, a consummate induction upon the applications of control (well depicted further within the piece) to suppress economical shifts would be apt -rather than romantically proclaiming the current system to retain absolute immutability hence self-defined victory.


Further into the piece, in “Control Crisis in Transportation”, the term crisis is contorted into a dual meaning – crisis in conversion of commodity*** into profit and crisis in application of means of production in their nascent state. As the dual meaning can lead into false analogies, it would have been applicable if this segregation was elucidated (or aim, viably subconscious, could have been to establish romantic, false analogies).


On Application of Control, “Control Crisis in Transportation”

What captured my attention was the control application that mitigated the effect of economical alteration to purvey an extent of stasis to the current potentates of the system and, in corollary, formed the denoted segregation of work area that utilized “objective capacity of their [workers’] brains to store and process information”. My conception of this application of control within transportation:

  • There is an overflow of production; hence outright distribution of goods would be detrimental for the current potentates.
  • Thus, the distribution is suppressed to found a quasi-stasis, the preservation of which would bleed the stock funds of the potentates in a much slower rate than the bleed of unsuppressed distribution. Therein, a tolerance span is attained.
  • In this tolerance span, the appropriation of nascent production means would be facilitated. The improvement of means without a tantamount aggrandizement of the market would expedite the bleeding of potentates if such improvements are micro-simulacra of the grand-scale improvements.
  • Thus, private improvements are deliberately deviated from the objective progression that the means would naturally purvey. To explicate, the transition into nascent means is not done blandly; they are severely overseen by the potentates to prevent perforation of system shift in their private zones. As a corollary, re-induction of such micro-scale alterations of adopted improvements into the collective scale would supplant the natural progression (dialectical materialism, as in Marxist theory) of the improvement with the progression that is derived to sustain the superstructure.
  • As the crucial point, the oversight of potentates is consolidated first through objective implementation of the nascent means.
  • For this cause, as the means’ implementation is achieved, the stringent oversight -now consolidated- is converted into oversight for appropriating individuals into the maintenance of the means (as both the generic and the insinuated, new worker class). Therein, collectively, these individuals become bound to the market (later on via alienation****, etc.) thus create means to relegate quasi-stasis into antecedent system.

Through this way of appropriation of new means of production, oversight -application of control- is utilized expediently to preserve the current positions of power. Above, the term “consolidation” is vague. The term is utilized as probably insinuated in my previous responses -existential self-actualization through action within defined medium.

* Superstructure, in Marxist theory, is the aggregate set of social establishments (daily interrelations, cultures, politics, arts…) that stem from the basestructure.
** Basestructure, in Marxist theory, is the set of economical foundations from which the superstructure stems.
*** Commodity is utilized as defined within Marxist theory.
**** Alienation, in Marxist theory, is conversion of the immersion of worker’s private life into work time hence conclusive conversion of self into commodity, an alienated version of self.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>