Tr : n v r t n Tr n l t n

de Bary, Brett

P bl h d b H n n n v r t Pr , H

d B r , Br tt . Tr : n v r t n Tr n l t n: Th nt l L b r f l b l z t n.

H n n : H n n n v r t Pr , H , 20 0. Pr j t . b. 2 p.

20 4. http: .jh . d .

For additional information about this book

Access provided by McGill University Libraries (3 Jan 2015 18:40 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/books/9789882205611

Cogn i t ive Cap i ta l i sm and Educa t ion

T R A C E S : 5 317

Cognitive Capitalism and eduCation:new Frontiers

Yann moulier Boutang —TranslatedfromFrenchbyPhilippeBonin

Beyond the Thesis of the Commodification of Education

Whatever the termbeing used— “cognitive capitalism,” “knowledge-basedeconomy,” or “intellectual capital”— andwhether or not one agrees thatknowledgeisatthecoreofanewsystemofaccumulationthatisincreasinglypredominant,ithasbecomeclearatthepresenttimeitistheactivityofproducingknowledge and intellectual human resources that ismore central than theendproductofthatactivity,thatistosay,knowledgecodifiedinsoftwareanddatabases.1Whatwecall“humancapital,”orintellectualcapital,conditionsthecapacitytoinnovate.Inandofitself,suchacapacitytoinnovatewouldfavorresistanceagainstincreasedandgeneralizedcompetitionbetweeneconomiesatagloballevel.Inthissense,itisundeniablethateducationandtheentirelearningapparatushavetakenongreatstrategicimportance. However,infollowingsuchalineofthinking,onequicklyfacesaparadox.InEurope,forexample,neo-liberalismseemstobeaforcethatisattackingthestate’scommitmenttoeducationasabranchofpublicservice.Byimposingnewregulations (a formofgovernance)oneducation,neo-liberalismhascertainlycontributedtotheprivatizationofpartsofthelearningprocess.Atthesametime,thedecliningrateofeconomicgrowthintheEuropeanUnionaftertheApril2000summitinLisbonledmemberstatestoreaffirm,atleastintheirdeclarations,the

Yann Moul ie r Boutang

318 T R A C E S : 5

needforadecisiverecoveryoftheEuropeanzoneby2010,onewhichwouldmakeit“oneofthemostproductiveeconomiesintheworld.”Thesameleadershaveemphasizedambitiouseducationalgoals:guaranteededucationforeveryone,accesstocontinuingeducationatanyage,andreductionofthetechnologicalgapwiththeUnitedStates.Arewedealingherewithanofficialpolicy,producedjustforeffect,thatconcealsthedarkerrealityofaMalthusiancommodificationofeducationandlearning,whichwouldsubjectthemtothepressureofimmediatereturnoninvestments? If one adopts such an optic, one cannot fail to be impressed by theoverwhelminginfiltrationoftheeducationalprocessbyeconomicsanditslogic,allovertheworld.Itappearsthateducationalinstitutionshavebecomeincreasinglydominatedbynotionslikeyieldoninvestment,cost/benefitanalysis,andefficacyin the spatial distribution of new investments. Productivity of teachers andotherpersonnelarenowmeasuredthroughavarietyofquantitativeindicators,ranging from students’ performance on examinations, their success rates insuch examinations, numbers of theses defended, and calculations of budgetexpendituresperstudent.Whenweaddtothis theemergenceofmanyotherphenomena,suchasanewemphasisontheneedforeducationalinstitutionstoattracttheirownfunding(partlythroughdevelopmentofnewhybrid,public/privateidentities),thenotionofcustomizingeducationalservicesforindividualstudents,andabroadershiftfromalogicofpublicservicetooneofsatisfyingtheenduser—eventhecustomer—ineducation,onemightindeedwonderifalltheseelementsincombinationdonotclinchthecaseofthosewhovigorouslydenouncethecommodificationofeducation. Ofcourse,itisalwaystemptingtoselectivelyretaintheideasofeconomists.FromGaryBecker of theUniversity ofChicago, onemight adopt thenotionof “human capital” (developed in 1962).Or, onemight invoke the idea of“endogenousgrowth,”morerecentlydevelopedbyRobertLucas,ofthesameinstitution.Thesetheorieshewcloselytotheneo-classicalmatrix;theyweremajorinspirationforwhathavebeencalledtheThatcherandReagancounter-revolutions.Certainlysuchexplanatoryconceptsgohandinhandwithneo-liberalviewsandpolicies.Theyassert,forexample,thateducationwillbenefitfromareductionoftheroleoftheState,andtheyplacetheburdenofeducationsquarelyontheshouldersoftheindividual,whothusbecomestheentrepreneurofhis/herownbildung.ItiseventemptingtocombinesuchneoclassicalargumentswithMarxist,

Cogn i t ive Cap i ta l i sm and Educa t ion

T R A C E S : 5 319

regulation-prone,critical (or“radical,”as theyarecalledontheothersideoftheAtlantic)theorieswhichhavedescribedneo-liberalismasamonetarizationof the economy. Such viewshavebeen advancedby French economists likeFrédéric Lordon, FrançoisChesnais,AndréOrléan, andMichelAglietta andAntoineRébérioux,contributingtoaverypessimisticgeneralvision,inwhichthe commodification and theprivatizationof educationwill prove tobeourinescapablefuture.2

On the contrary, Iwill try to showhere, bypresenting thehypothesis of“cognitivecapitalism,”thatsuchanalysesareinsufficient.3Thepresentsituationis,fortunately,muchmoreopen-ended. FirstletmeassertthatIdonotdoubtthatschools,universities,andinstitutesofcontinuingeducation—allofwhichIconsidertobethemaintoolsofsomethingwemight call the “apparatus of capture” (of human subjects) for cognitivecapitalism—arenowintheforefrontofcapitalistaccumulation.The“managerial”pressurenowbeingexertedontheeducationalprocesscanbeexplainedbytheneednowfacedbydevelopedsocietiestoinvestmoreandmoreoftheirfundsinimmaterialresources,witheducationtheircostliestbudgetitem.(Asapointofhistoricalreference,wemaynotethatthecombinedinvestmentineducationonthepartofstateandlocalbodiesinJacobinFranceconstitutedonefifthoftheentirebudget,andthatthefigurewassimilarforotherfederalistcountriesatthetime.) Butthereareotherfactorswhichexplainequallywelltheemergencewithineducationofavocabularytaintedwitheconomics.Foronething,wemightnotethatthecurrenttendencytolinkprocessesofevaluationtothelogicofaccountingwastheproductofamuchearlierintroduction,inthe1970s,oftechniquesforrationalizing budget practices.Yet the appearanceof this type ofmanageriallogicinthe1970smustitselfbecontextualized.ForitsemergencecorrespondedwithanincreaseinthepercentageofGDP(grossdomesticproduct)constitutedbycompulsorytaxesraisedbythestate.Infact,thisamountincreasedinbothabsolutetermsandasapercentage.Today,thepercentageofGDPraisedthroughtaxeshoversatalittleover50percentinScandinaviancountries,isabout45percentinFrance,andhasincreasedevenincountrieswhereithastraditionallybeenmuchlower,asintheUnitedKingdomandtheUnitedStates. Bycontrasttothedevelopmentsofthe1970s,todayweareseeingasanewcomponentthefreshintensificationofmanagerialpressureoneducation.YetI

Yann Moul ie r Boutang

320 T R A C E S : 5

wanttoproposethatthisintensificationisinseparablefromthreedeepinternalcontradictionsincognitivecapitalismthatactuallypreventsitfromtakingholdofknowledgeprocessesthroughapureandsimpleprocessofcommodification. The first contradiction derives from the peculiar economic nature ofinformation goods (which Iwill describe later).The secondderives from thequasi-publicnatureofknowledgegoodsandoftheirconditionsofproduction.ThethirdcontradictionofwhatIamcallingcognitivecapitalismhastodowiththeextensionofprivatepropertyrightstointellectualproducts,basedontheongoingcirculationofknowledgeproductsthroughnewinformationandcommunicationtechnologies(whichIcallNICTs).Ofcourse,theexistenceofNICTsimpliesaconsiderablepotentialforrepressivecentralization,aswellasforthecodificationofknowledge,accordingtowhichinformationismerelyconsideredacommodity.Butweshouldalsobearinmindthatsuchprocessesofgeneralizingknowledgeanditsapplicationsconstituteawayofextracting thevalueofworkas living work.Today’sdemandforanewkindofwork forcebasedonautonomyandflexibilityisdifferentfromthedemandforworkerstodoseveraldifferenttypesofwork(asspecializedworkerswereexpectedtobeabletodointhe1970s).Thisisbecausethedemandmadeontoday’sworkforcedrawsonitscapacitytoinventnewtasks,tomobilizeimplicitknowledge,andtooffernewanswerstoquestionswhosesolutionshavesofarnotbeenprogrammedproperly. ThecontradictionsIhavenotedaboveare,Ibelieve,difficultiesintrinsictothecommodificationofknowledgeitself.Moreover,Iwouldsuggestthattheirconvergence is leading to a crisis in private property relations that, in turn,is establishing the contours of a newpublic space.This space is completelycompatiblewith thegoalsofemancipationanderadicationof inequality thathavetraditionallybeenassignedtopubliceducation.Toclarifythisthesis,letusexaminesometraitsofwhatIhavereferredtoascognitivecapitalism.

Cognitive Capitalism: What It Is Not

Researchershaveofferednumerouslabelstobetterdescribethetransformationcapitalismispresentlyundergoing,a transformationofwhichglobalization isthesymptom.Theterm“cognitivecapitalism”recommendsitselfbecauseitissoeasytodiscoverproblemswiththeselabels.Cognitivecapitalism,forexample,by

Cogn i t ive Cap i ta l i sm and Educa t ion

T R A C E S : 5 321

nomeanssignifiesa“neweconomy.”Nordoesitrefertoahighlyfinancializedeconomywhichmightbefreefromthevicissitudesofeconomiccycles,liketheonetheUnitedStatesappearedtopresenttotheworldbefore2001,whentheDot-combubbleburst. Cognitivecapitalismdoesnotrefertoan“informationsociety”either.ForIwouldinsistthatsocialexchangecanneverbereducedtoanexchangeofneutralinformation.Norisitappropriatetousethereductivetermcognitiveeconomy,forwecannotcharacterizetheentireeconomyintermsofthesectorthatproducesknowledgeorintellectualgoods.Finally,Itakeissuewiththeterm“knowledge-basedeconomy.”Theideaofa“knowledge-basedeconomy”assumesthatsocialinteractionhasessentiallybeendissolvedinaneutralconvergenceof“governmentfromandbyscience.”Bycontrast,theterm“cognitivecapitalism”assertsthatweareindeed,stillinaneraofcapitalism.Weareinaneraofcapitalismmuchmorethanweareinaneraofthemarket.Thefinancialworldexiststoharnessvalue,notvice-versa.Marketsare,infact,secondarytotheharnessingofvalue. Letusaskagain,then,ifitispossibletodescribetheongoingtransformationsby resorting to expressions like “information society,” or “knowledge-basedsociety,” asUNESCO reports on education tend to do. Iwould view theseexpressions as highly ambiguous. Like the republican ideologyof yesteryear,conceptslike“informationsociety”positthatahypothetical,orrealizable,equalitycanbeattainedthroughtraditionaleducation,whiledenyingthe increasinglystrategicvalueofknowledge-sharingandthedistributionofknowledgegoodsinthecurrenttransformation. Itshouldbeobviousthatequalityinaknowledgeorinformation-basedsocietydoes not dependpurely on sharing of information and codified knowledge.Thesecriteriahavebecomeintertwinedwithcriteriaofstratificationbasedonsocialclass,withoutevercompletelyreplacingthem.Wemustthuspointtoasecond limitationof thenotionof a knowledge-based society.This limitationarises because the notion of such a society blurs the distinction between asocietyinwhich“information”andalreadycodifiedknowledgeareofparamountimportance, and societies inwhich the development of knowledge, and theharnessingofthatdevelopmentarethedrivingforcesforaccumulation.Weneedtoconsiderhow terms suchas “contextualizedknowledge,”developedbyE.Rullani,orDonnaHaraway’s“situatedknowledge,”correspondtowhatAndréGorz simplycalls “knowledge.”4According toGorz’definition, “knowledge”

Yann Moul ie r Boutang

322 T R A C E S : 5

alreadyimpliesthattherehasbeenaninspectionandtheharnessingofknowledgebycapitalism.Ofcourse,theaccesstoinformationandtoknowledgecaneasilybesubjectedtoatoll.ThustosimplyreduceaknowledgesocietytoasumofinformationactuallyacceleratesMalthusiancommodification.Anexampleofthiskindofcommodificationisthepatentingofsoftwaredealingwithtechnicalprocesses,aprocessoftendescribedasthe“claiming”(revendication)ofapatentandits“range.”Suchprocessestendtoappropriatetotheprivatesphereobjectslikethetherapeuticmethodsofmedicine.Butinthelongrunsuchpracticeswillleadtoadeclineininnovationandevendeteriorationofconditionsnecessaryforknowledgeproduction. It isalso important toemphasize that incognitivecapitalismthevalueofknowledgedependsonanabilitytoselectivelyuseinformation.Butitshouldbeemphasizedthatselectionofinformation,aswellasthecriticalprocessofselectingthe tools for selection, cannot in andof itself be considered an informationgood.Knowinghowtousetoolsincludesgeneraltraitsthatarenotcodifiable.Thisisbecauseitisonlytheintelligentapplicationoftoolstoacontextthatisconducivetoinnovation.Thevalueofknowledgegoods,therefore,presupposestheexistenceofaneducatedcollectivitythatisabletomakeintelligentuseofthem,i.e.,answeringnewquestionswithyetunheard-ofsolutions. Since the appearance ofworks byBourdieu, Baudelot, and Establet, the“republican”ideologythatmadeeducationthevectorofupwardsocialmobilityhasbeenundersevereattack.Schoolscanbethelocusofnewformsofsubjection,thesecriticshavenoted,andschoolingcanreproduceinequalitybystandinginthesteadofotherdisplacedprocessesofselection.Forthesescholars,theconceptofanalmostpatrimonialpossessionof“social”or“human”“capital”hashelpedjustifyaccentuateddosesofinequalitysincetheendoftheTrenteGlorieuses.Conceptsofindividualizationineducation,theysay,havetheeffectofmakingtheindividualshoulder“responsibility”forhisorherlearning,aswellasforhisorher“employability”(inGaryBecker’sterms). However, such analyses do not help us to understand the componentsof knowledge production.This analysiswill be essential to redefining theemancipatoryprojectthateducationshouldbe.Suchaprojectwillbemuchmoreeffectiveifitisaddressedtotheintrinsiccontradictionsofcognitivecapitalism,ortonewcontradictions,ratherthantothea-historicalrepresentationofknowledgeas“power”stillfoundinthetheoriesofknowledge“elites”supportedbytheright,

Cogn i t ive Cap i ta l i sm and Educa t ion

T R A C E S : 5 323

orleftcritiquesofmodernitybasedonthenotionoftheadventofthe“individual,”whoisthenreproachedforthedestructionofthe“collective.”Infact,thestrategicimportanceofknowledge(andnotonlyofinformation,ordigitalizedandcodifiedknowledge)bringstotheforeanewcommonorcollectivespace.It isinthisspacethatprocessesof“individuation,”asSimondondescribesthem(ratherthanprocessesofindividualization)canemerge.Individualizationhasbeentakentobethatwhichoperatesinoppositiontothecollective,whereas“individuation”canonlytakeplaceinstrictsymbiosiswiththecollective(asinthecaseofhumansubjectsamongstthemselves,orhumansubjectswiththeirtoolsandtechnicalobjects).Productionincognitivecapitalismbreaksdownthedistinctionbetweenproductionandconsumptionasseparatespheres.Withcognitivecapitalismweseetheemergenceofmoreandmoredevicesforreinjectinginformationgivenbytheconsumerintorealtimeproduction,and“justintime”(aswehaveseenwiththedevelopmentofthenotionofthe“prosumer,”acompoundmergingtheroleoftheconsumerwiththatofproducer.)Theroleplayedbythemarkethasthusbecomeinseparablefromtheprocessofharnessingpublicopinionandpublicattention,asGabrielTardeobserved.5Toproducenolongermeanstoproduceadistinctmerchandiseorcommoditybuttoproduceaworldandanexperienceoftheworldthatleadstomaterialconsumption.6

The New Nervous Centers of Capitalism

Themutationunderwaysince1975heraldsthebirthofanewcodeofregulationofcapitalism(thethirdmodeinhistoryaftermercantilismandindustrialcapitalism).Thisisthelatestmodeofcapitalismthatwetermcognitivecapitalism.7Itscenterisassociatedwiththeappropriationofknowledgeandthecontinuousproductionof innovations.All sectors of social life that participate in the production ofknowledgeas either ameansof knowingor ameansof livinghavebecomethenewnervouscentersofaccumulation.Theorientationandtheprinciplesofthisaccumulationarethedefiningfeaturesofcognitivecapitalism.Whatistheprinciplethatunderliesthistransitiontoacognitivecapitalism?Asocietymaybecharacterizedbyaprincipleoranorientationof itsaccumulation.Here, Iuseaccumulation to refer to theentiretyof the investmentsmadebyagivensociety;weneednotrestrictittotheeconomists’definitionofGrossFixedCapital

Yann Moul ie r Boutang

324 T R A C E S : 5

Formation.AsBernardPaulréstates,accumulationisnotapurelyquantitativeoperation.Oneshouldalsomeasureitsintentionanditsdirection.Ifindustrialcapitalism can be characterized by the fact that accumulation is orientedprimarilytomachinesandtheorganizationofwork,cognitivecapitalismwouldthenappeartobeadifferentsystemofaccumulationfromtheoneatworkinindustrialcapitalism.Accumulationtodayfocusesmainly(eveninahegemonicmanner) on knowledge and creativity, that is to say, on immaterial forms ofinvestment.Extremefinancializationoftheeconomyundeniablyexists,butthisrepresentsanattempttomastertheinstabilityofcognitivecapitalismratherthanthereverse.Incognitivecapitalism,thecaptureofrevenuestobegainedfromknowledgeandinnovationrepresentsthemainaimofaccumulationandplaysacrucialroleincapitalformation.Themattersofpropertyrights,oflocationinnetworks,ofalliances,andofprojectmanagementareallmajorinstitutionalandorganizationalfactors.Theirroleisparamount.Firmsformulatetheirstrategiesbyfirstdoingresearchtodeterminewhatspatial,institutional,andorganizationalpositioningwillmaximize the firm’s capacity to participate in, and reap thebenefitsof,creativeprocesses.

Tensions That Have Become Internal and Direct

Thecharacteristicsabovehaveledtothecreationofasystemwithanumberofother traits thathavebeendiscussedelsewhere.8The relationshipbetweenschools,universities,researchinstitutions(bothprivateandpublic,itshouldbehighlyemphasized),andcontinuingeducationapparatusesthusbecomesdirectandinternalincognitivecapitalism.Inthegloriousdaysofindustrialcapitalism,theapparatusesofeducationandlearningwereseenascompletelyexternaltothesphereofenterpriseandthemarketplace;thereoriginatedthevaluesoftherepublic,ofthenation,orthevaluesofthedominantclass.Suchavision,affirmedinstillinfluentialworkbyJ.A.Schumpeter,considersinventiontobeadistinctmoment in innovation,one situatedoutsideof the sphereofmarket increasein value.The industrial innovation of the Schumpeterian entrepreneur arisesonlyfromsuchexternalinnovation.Butthisisnolongerthecaseincognitivecapitalism. Education and subject formation are now the essential bases forincubationofforcesforinnovationinwork,andofinventivenessitself.Invention,

Cogn i t ive Cap i ta l i sm and Educa t ion

T R A C E S : 5 325

togetherwithattention,organization,andtime(inparticular,timeforlearning),istheimmaterialassetparexcellenceforextractingeconomicvalueincognitivecapital. Education and science have thus become directly productive.Thetraditionaldistinctionbetween“pureresearch”anditstechnological“application”hasthuslostitspertinence(eventhoughdemandsforshort-termprofitabilitythatrelyon thisobsoletedistinction still threaten fundamental research). In truth,whatwecall“fundamentalresearch”hasbecomemorevitalthaneverbeforeto innovation.Butat the levelof research,wefindourselves returningagaintothegeneralcontradictionwithwhichwestarted.Sincetheveryessenceofbasic research is theproductionof knowledge throughknowledge, cognitivecapitalismmustunavoidablyintegrateintoitselftheprocessesofeducationandsubjectformation,makingthemintohighlydesirablegroundsforprivate(andpublic)investment.

Some Provisional Conclusions

Cognitivecapitalismseekscontinuallytocapturethecollectivepowerofinventionthatmanifestsitselfinsocialcooperation.9 Thepower of invention represents anuntappedpotential for innovationsandforaformofpermanentemploymentthatisdifficulttorelocate,or,attheveryleast,isfarfrombeingbasedonapurelyrepetitiveformoflabor.Itistruethatnewinformationandcommunicationtechnologies(NICTs)allowforlarge-scaleautomationofrepetitivementaltasks,justasmachinesonceachievedinthecaseofmusculartasks.However,onecannnotjumptotheconclusionthatrepetitivementaltaskswillautomaticallydisappear.Taylorstillwillenjoyafewbeautifuldays,thankstotheserializationandroutinizationofcertaintypesoftasksmadepossiblebythedigitizationofdata.Butcognitiveworkalsopresentsneo-liberalismwiththeincredibleadvantageofbeingabletoincorporatelargenumbersofpositiveexternalities,theproductionofwhichhasuntilnowbeenlefttothepowerofthestateortotraditional(andevenmodern)communities.10Intheframeworkofprivatecapitalism,cognitiveworkkeepsexternalizingcosts,whichareinfactpaidbysociety,beitthegovernmentorhouseholds.Toharnessthevalueofcognitiveworkcarriedoutoverthewholeoftheproductiveprocess,however,cognitivecapitalismmustincessantlystrivetocodify,standardize,digitize,and

Yann Moul ie r Boutang

326 T R A C E S : 5

treatknowledge—includingeventraditionalknowledges,asdemonstratedinthecaseofbio-piracyanalyzedbytheIndianeconomistVandanaShiva.11

But harnessing the economic value of knowledge and of innovation ishardworkthatfacesmajorcontradictions.Assoonasitistransformedintoaninformationgood,anitemofknowledgethatisexpensivetoproduce(beitatthesociallevel,orattheprivatelevelofresearchanddevelopment)losesmuchofitscommercialvalue,sinceitcanbereproducedforalmostnothing.Informationorknowledgethatiscodifiedviacomputertechnologybecomesafilethatcanbe copied infinitelywithout any risk of degradationof its content. It canbetransmittedcheaplyviatheInternetwithasimpleclickofthemouse.Asaresultitsmarginalcost(thecostincurredinproducingonemoreunit)isalmostnull.Thischaracteristicconstitutesafirstmajorobstacletoitscommodification:Whatisthepricetagofdigitizedknowledge? Bycontrast,immaterialassets,likeliving work competences(workthatremainsaliveratherthanbeingreducedtoastockofdeadknowledge,orinformation),exhibitallthecharacteristicsofpublicgoods.Livingworkcompetencescannotbedivided,spatiallyortemporally.ToparodythelexicologyofHumanResources,ahumanbeingcannotbehalf“competent,”one-tenth“inventive,”orthree-fourths“creative.”Thepersonasawholeiseithercompetent,inventive,oravailable.It isaperson’s inventive timewhich isof interest for thecapitalist.12But thistemporalityisdiscontinuousandhardlyassignabletoaspecifictimeslot—itisnotbecausearesearcherissittingatadeskinfrontofapieceofpaperduringofficehoursthatinventiontakesplace. Humanactivityandnetworkedcollectiveintelligenceare,inthissense,notopposedtoeachother.Informationorknowledgethatisgiventoseveralpersonsatthesametimeisnot“takenaway”fromtheoriginatingparty,anymorethanusemadeofitbyoneoftheaddresseesdeprivesothersofthesame.Anyprocessofknowledgeproductionnecessarilyinvolvesmultipleinteractions.Therelationshipbetween teacher and student can no longer be described as “decanting” ofcontent(“teachinganythingmeanslearningittwice,”saidSébastien-RochNicolasChamfort[1741–1794]asearlyasthe18thcentury).Thetechnicalapparatusofthedigitalage,which,forexample,canuse“cookies”to“remember”accesshistories(pagesvisited,productsbought,preferencesofpreviousconsumers),nowallowsforretroactionsinrealtimethatwereunthinkablefiftyyearsago.Throughsuchmanifestationsoftheirtastes,andbyextensionthetasteofthe“public,”consumers

Cogn i t ive Cap i ta l i sm and Educa t ion

T R A C E S : 5 327

nowfacilitatereal-timeproduction,famouslyknownas“flexibleproduction,”inwaysthatdoawaywiththeneedforstockingrealgoods,sinceitemscanbeproduced“ondemand”(thatis,canbeproducedonlyifitisknowninadvancethattheywillbepurchased). To be sure, knowledge goods existed, although in smaller quantities, inthe age of industrial capitalism.To facilitate the transformation ofwhat hadbeen considered public goods into commercial ones, laws had to establishprogressivelythreenewmodalitiesfortheattributionoftransferablepropertyrights(alsocalledabusus):patents,copyrights,andbrands.Inalltheseinstances,theinventororauthorwasgrantedanartificialmonopolylimitedintime(inFrance,thiswas20yearsforpatents,70yearsforcopyrights,and25forbrands,whichwereindefinitelyrenewableontheconditionthattheycouldbeexploitedforcommercialsales).Whentheperiodofmonopolyexpired,theholderofsuchanexclusivepropertytitlecouldtransferit toanindustrialist(inthecaseofapatent),or fromauthor toeditor,firm to franchisemanager.Oneof themoststrikingparadoxesintheemergenceofcognitivecapitalism,however,isthatifindustrialpropertyisdeemedthesinequanonforthecommercialvalorizationof immaterial assets, it is alsoexperiencinganunprecedentedcrisis inbeingenforced.13ThemassiveapparitionofNICTs,necessarytoharnesstheeconomicvalueofcognitivework,simultaneouslymakesolderpropertyrightsin-executable.Itde-legitimizesthem,resultinginrequestsfornewfreeandaccessiblespaces;itpushesawayanytechnicalobstacletomass-reproductionandmass-publicityontheworldstage. Intelligenceandthecapacityforinnovation,oncetheyhavebeenensnaredin the nets of the digitalworld andmade infinitely reproducible,make thecreationandsubsequentsurvivalofanymonopoly,howevershort-liveditmaybe,moreandmoredifficult.Itshouldbenotedthatmonopolieshavebeentheessentialenginesbehindthecreationofintellectualpropertyrights.Theprotestagainstpatentsonmedicationsandthemanufactureof“generic”medicinebySoutherncountries(Thailand,India,Brazil,SouthAfrica),aswellthecontroversyoverpropertyrightstriggeredbythedownloadingbymillionsofusersofmusicandimagesonpeer-to-peernetworks(Napster,Gnutella,Kazaa),allshowtheimperviousnatureoftheseconfrontations.Afterthe1995Marrakechagreements,theOMCopenednewroundsofnegotiationsinDoha,thecapitalofQatar,inanattempt tocoordinate legislationon intellectualproperty rights.TheDoha

Yann Moul ie r Boutang

328 T R A C E S : 5

discussions,however,weremarredbyopposition fromdevelopingcountries,whorefusedtopayfeesdeemedusuriousforpatentsandpropertyrights.Indeed,suchfeeswouldhaveeatenawaywhateverprofitsthattheymightmakefromtheopeningofmarketsinNortherncountriestofreetradeincompetitivelypricedagricultural and industrial goods.This struggle then expanded to include thequestionofpatentsonsoftware,withgroupslikeLinuxofferingfreesoftwaretocontestMicrosoft’smonopolies.Microsoft’scounter-offensivesagainstLinuxandOpenspilledoverintotherealmofeducation,intheguiseofMicrosoft’sofferstoschoolsoffreecomputerswithpre-equippedsoftware.Cognitiveworkhasinthiscasebeenheldhostage,condemnedtoa“Microsoft”norm. Theseexamplessuggestthatincognitivecapitalism,forwhichthecomputeranddigital technology are every bit as emblematic as the steamengine andrailwaywere for industrial capitalism, the educational process need not bedominatedbyan ineluctableand irresistibleprocessofcommodification.Onthecontrary,educationprovestobeasiteatwhichallthestructuraldifficultiesofcommodificationareexposed. It is for this reasonthatwehavewitnessed,aroundthequestionofintellectualpropertyrights,theemergenceofanewanduncertainstruggleover“thenewenclosures.”RecentcontroversiesoverDigitalRightsManagement(systemslimitingaccesstodigitalmaterialstoprotecttherightsofcopyrightholders)arebutthelatestinstallmentofthisdrama. At this historical conjuncture, access to new technologies, themass-democratizationofNICTsinandthroughtheeducationalprocess,andpressureforcontinuingeducationthatwouldguarantee,throughoutlife,entrytosharedspacesof knowledgeproduction, are all-important levers for activatingade-commodificationofknowledgegoods.InsistingonopenaccesstonewdigitaltechnologiesandageneraldemocratizationofNICTsineducationwill implyafarlesstimidapproachthanwehaveseentodateoftheircapacitytoengagestudents,andonefarlessprotectiveoftheformsofintelligenceupheldbytheoldJesuitandrepublicansystems.These“levers”shouldbeafocusofpressurefrompoliticalpartiesaswellasunionsstrivingforrecognitionoftherighttocontinuingeducation throughout life (rather than foreducationasasimplevalidationofwhatonealreadyknows).Thesemultiplefactorscanensuretherewillbebothcreationandpreservationofnewcommonspacesallowingfortheproductionofknowledge.

Cogn i t ive Cap i ta l i sm and Educa t ion

T R A C E S : 5 329

Suchadecommodification(wemaycall itaprocessofdisclosure) isfirstandforemostamatteroffairness.Itwillestablishconditionsforarealequalityratherthanthe“equalityofopportunity”whichismoreoftenthannotapiouswish.Economic“indicatorsofhumandevelopment”(IHD),whichincreasinglycarrymoreweightthanthephysicalcalculusofGDP,revealthattheadvantageconferredbypost-secondaryeducationhasonlygrownmoredecisiveinvariousagebrackets.Forthisreasonalone,theprocessofdisclosureshouldbedefended.Moreover,thisisfarfrombeingapurelyutopiangoal.DecommodificationofknowledgeproductionwillbeessentialtotheconsolidationofcognitivecapitalismasithasemergedinEuropesincethe2002LisbonSummit,asaforceagainstamilitarypetro-industrialcomplexwhichkeepsconcocting reactionary recipesinspiredbyindustrialcapitalism. Thepathtowardatrulypublicpolicyforeducationandsubjectformationmustpassthroughthestruggleagainstnewenclosuresofintellectualproperty,andforthisreasonmustbenothingotherthantheorganizationofasocietyofknowledge.

notes

1 The concept of knowledge-based economy is developed in D. Foray and B.-A.Lundvall,EmploymentandGrowth inaKnowledge-BasedEconomy (Paris:OCDE,1996). Analysis of “intellectual capital” is developed in Baruch Lev, Intangibles,Management, Measurement and Reporting (Washington, D.C.: The BrookingsInstitutionPress,2001).

2 See F. Lordon, Fonds de pension (Paris: Raison d’agir, 2001); F. Chesnais, Lamondialisationducapital (Paris:Syros,1997);A.Orléan,Lepouvoirde lafinance(Paris:OdileJacob,1999);M.AgliettaandA.Rébérioux,Lesdérivesducapitalismefinancier(Paris:AlbinMichel,2000).

3 Theprojecton“cognitivecapitalism”waslaunchedbytheIsys(Innovation,Systems,Strategy)team,housedbytheMatisseUMR85–95fromtheCNRS-ParisI.Theteamincludes:B.Paulré,A.Corsani,M.Lazzarato,PatrickDieuaide,P.Jollivet,J.Taddei,C.Vercellone,andJ.-M.Monnier.

4 See Enzo Rullani, “Production de conaissance et valeur dans le post-fordisme,”Multitudes2(2000):97–112.Availableathttp://Multitudes.samizdat.net.IalsoreferheretoA.Gorz,L’immatériel,connaiassance,valeuretcapital(Paris:Galilée,2002).

5 MaurizioLazzarato,Puissancedel’invention:LapsychologieéconomiquedeGabrielTarde(Paris:LesEmpêcheursdepenserenrond,LeSeuil,2002).

6 JeremyRifkin,Ladémocratiedel’accès(Paris:LaDécouverte,2000).

Yann Moul ie r Boutang

330 T R A C E S : 5

7 Y.MoulierBoutang,encollaborationavecA.Corsani,P.Dieuaide,M.Lazzarato,J.-M.Monnier,B.Paulré,C.Vercellone(Paris11octobre2001),‘’Lecapitalismecognitifcommesortiede lacriseducapitalisme industriel,Unprogrammede recherche,’’CommunicationauForumdelaRégulation,Paris,Ronéotypé,Isys-Matisse,URM85-95CNRS-UniversitédeParis1,unpublished.

8 YannMoulierBoutang,“Nouvellesfrontièresdel’économiepolitiqueducapitalismecognitif,’’CommunicationauColloqueTextualitésetNouvellesTechnologies,23–25octobre,Revueéc/artS,No.3(Montreal:Muséed’ArtContemporaindeMontréal,2003),pp.121–35.

9 As stated above, these views are elaborated in Maurizio Lazzarato’s “Puissancede l’invention: La psychologie économique deGabrielTarde” and inRévolutionsCapitalistes(Paris:LesEmpêcheursdepenserenrond,LeSeuil,2004).

10 Onereferstoexternalityorexternaleffectwhenatransactionbetweentwoagentsproducesariseinthestandardofwell-beingforoneormoreagentsthatdidnothavetopayforsuchapositiveeffect,orhadtoreceivecompensationforanegativeeffect.Onexternalities, seeY.MoulierBoutang,«La revanchedesexternalités,mobilité,transformationdel’économieetdel’interventionpublique»inFuturAntérieur39–40(1997):http://multitudes.samizdat.net/article.php3?id_article=427.

11 V.Shiva,StolenHarvest:TheHijackingoftheGlobalFoodSupply(Cambridge,MA:SouthEndPress,2000).

12 SeeLazzarato,RévolutionsCapitalistes,op.cit.13 YannMoulierBoutang,‘’Lesnouvellesclôtures:lesNTICoularévolutionrampante

desdroitsdepropriété,’’inCahiersMarxistes230(2005):21–50(Brussels:UniversitéLibredeBruxelles,http://www.ulb.ac.be/socio/cmarx/).