In this article, I argue albeit briefly for the necessary overthrow of capitalist property relations and their replacement with non-exploitative forms of social organisation. In an attempt to advance a more persuasive argument, I compare the particular social progress and maturing of capitalism with that of human pregnancy, or rather the process thereof.
All things being equal, typical prenatal development will conform to definite quantitative and qualitative stages over a nine month period. For example, and compared to the first few weeks of pregnancy, towards the close of the first trimester foetal development has ushered in a qualitatively new phase in which the head, brain, hands and feet are all now present. Such quantitative and qualitative changes, in turn, become physiologically visible for the first time as the mother’s stomach begins to grow, albeit modestly. Then, around the close of the second trimester, a foetus differs both quantitatively and also qualitatively from one of twelve weeks. For instance, synaptic connections are now clearly present in the brain and reproductive organs are sufficiently developed to the extent that gender becomes discernible via ultrasound scanning. ‘Quickening’ is another characteristic which is typically evident at this stage. Finally, during the third and final trimester, foetal growth is much more rapid and movement is greatly pronounced. Thus, at around thirty-six weeks of prenatal development, the foetus is fully developed and as such, is both quantitatively and qualitatively distinct in many ways from a foetus of six months. Birth now becomes imminent.
The reason for labouring this point about foetal development is that it provides a useful metaphorical framework for critically understanding the social development of capitalism, along with the need for supplanting it. Capitalism initially asserted its historical presence in the form of primitive accumulation more than three centuries ago. Among other things, this involved the amassing of capital (often from colonial plunder) along with the process of land enclosures through Acts of Parliament. This distinct quantitative and qualitative phase of ‘capitalism in its infancy’ is analogous I would suggest, to the first trimester of foetal development. Above all, any ‘capitalistic bump’ in the social belly at this time was negligible.
However, when enough capital had been accumulated, and when enough peasants had been ‘legally’ robbed of their respective plots of land, capitalism began to further develop and expand, thus qualitatively transforming itself from that of primitive accumulation into its industrial phase. This is most evident in the 19th century when exponential growth assumed the form of hitherto unheard-of industrial output, along with the undertaking of huge railway projects, numerous leaps in the growth of technological and scientific knowledge and so on. Again, this is comparable to the second, qualitatively distinct trimester of foetal development. At this stage, capitalism has visibly grown and asserted its presence as a dominant, socio-economic phenomenon.
Finally, in the late 19th and early 20th century, following the on-going concentration and centralisation of capital, and in the wake of endless takeovers and mergers in which a few financial and industrial giants begin to assert their collective global dominance, capitalism may be regarded as having qualitatively transformed itself once again, this time into its most advanced form, namely that of imperialism. This is metaphorically equivalent I would argue, to the third and final trimester of foetal development. At this qualitatively distinct stage of capitalistic development, both production and the provision of services are utterly social in character.
However, our metaphorical comparison does not end here. For just as evolving feudal relations in the middle-ages necessarily became pregnant with, and eventually gave birth to more advanced, capitalistic forms of social relations, so too in the historical development of capitalism, this now globally dominant form of socio-economic organisation has similarly become heavily pregnant with a socialist model of production. Such transitions occur because the development in people’s productive techniques, skills and forms of work tend to eventually outgrow the established socio-economic pattern of organisation within which they have hitherto developed. Thus, there comes a time when the thwarted interests of those associated with the more advanced, yet constrained techniques, clash with the interests of those who wish to retain the present order of things.
As far as capitalist development itself is concerned, the specific self-movement associated with this social form involves the relentless pursuit by capitalists, of ever greater amounts of surplus value through the exploitation of paid labour. This is the essential cause which drives the development of capitalism’s productive forces. Consequently, while the appropriation of that which is produced remains the property of a minority (the capitalists), the productive forces themselves (including the skills and work practices of millions and millions of human beings) have gradually evolved as mentioned earlier, to assume an utterly social character. This suggested social character is presently expressed in the form of monopolistic relations. Capitalism as a competitive system has therefore progressively transformed itself into its opposite! The established order is thus pregnant with a new form of socio-economic organisation which is latent in the dominant pattern. The social character of capitalism’s productive techniques now demands the social appropriation, rather than the private appropriation of that which is produced.
Now it is worth reminding ourselves that just as we would not expect a nurse or doctor under normal circumstances to induce labour at say, three or four months into any pregnancy, so too when a woman is in the final stages of her third trimester, we would not expect any nurse or doctor of sound mind to try and nullify or else unnecessarily delay such a process. On the contrary, we would expect such professionals to do all in their power to ensure that birth is achieved swiftly, and with the minimum of distress for all concerned. That way, human life is endlessly perpetuated. Unfortunately, social development is not so easily achieved on account of antagonistic economic interests. In this sense, the bloody revolutionary activities of Cromwell’s Parliamentarians in 17th century England may be regarded as the actions of political midwives as they challenged feudalism and ultimately triumphed in facilitating the birth of capitalism. Similarly, it is arguably now the turn of the historically fallen (exploited) majority of the advanced capitalist system itself, to do precisely the same. If human history is to be qualitatively reborn and progressively advanced once more, all exploited people must do everything they can to facilitate the birth of socialism from the constrictive womb of global capital. For in so doing, they collectively stand to regain control over their socio-economic activities as well as to play their historic part in the necessary advancement of human society to yet another higher stage.
Submit Your Review for Pregnancy And Politics
Required fields are marked with (*). Your e-mail address will not be displayed.