[KB] Burke & the Division of Labor
dtietge at monmouth.edu
Mon Sep 12 21:00:44 EDT 2016
An interesting discussion considering North Korea's latest attempt at "atomic ownership," especially since they now have to plead to the international community for flood relief after their latest nuclear weapons "trespass". Burke's Marxist/capitalist dichotomy seems all the more relevant.
David J. Tietge, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of English
Director of First-Year Composition
From: KB <kb-bounces at kbjournal.org> on behalf of Jim Moore <jimmijcat at hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 8:44 PM
To: kb at kbjournal.org
Subject: Re: [KB] Burke & the Division of Labor
I'm not an expert, but I was taught that Burke rejected
"scientific" socialism, especially in the context of the presence of
atomic weapons in the two-superpowers era. The _Rhetoric of
Motives_ has a relevant section called "Dual Possibilities of Science"
(32-35), which examines the slipperiness of the concept of "ownership"
with regard to research into atomic energy post-1945: "Thus the
_socialist_ delegate [Gromyko] was arguing for the _restriction_ of ownership
to national boundaries, while the world's greatest _capitalist_
country argued for ownership by a _universal_ body. _On its face_,
the capitalist proposal seems much nearer to the ideal socialist
solution than the position of the Soviet Union is.'
"However, the history of corporate management in the United States,
and of political parties everywhere, gives ample evidence of all
the devices whereby _actual control_ of a property differs from
_nominal ownership_ of it." (page 33 in RM--all emphases belong to Burke).
From: KB <kb-bounces at kbjournal.org> on behalf of Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
Sent: September 10, 2016 5:33:02 PM
To: kb at kbjournal.org
Subject: [KB] Burke & the Division of Labor
It's been over 50 years since I did most of my intensive study of Burke,
though I continued frequently to browse in the Grammar & the ...Literary
Form until my eyes failed me nearly 10 years ago. I also read carefully his
exchange in CI with Jameson at the time of its publication.
If I remember correctly, the core of Burke's rejection of Marx was his
(Burke's) belief of the inevitability of the division of labor. If that is
so, his objection to Marx was grounded in his premise that "Marxism" was
essentially a recipe for a future society rather than a critique of
contemporary society. Again, if I remember correctly, Burke in the Grammar
did speculate on making a worker the _owner_ of his job. That had to be
premised on the permanence of capitalist social relations, combined with at
least a speculative belief that either (a) wage workers could achieve the
political and social power to seize possession of their jobs (permanent
tenure for all employees, public & private) _or_ (b) that capitalists could
be persuaded (through a correct rhetoric) to grant wage workers such tenure
voluntarily. His use of the trope "the human barnyard" might point to the
KB mailing list
KB at kbjournal.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the KB