[illegible] in Action: A Sociolo[gy] [illegible] Industrial Relations [illegible] Banks (Faber and Faber)
Anat[omy] of a [illegible] — A Hist[ory] of G.E.C., [illegible] and English Electric. [illegible] and Marriot (Johnathon Cape 75s)
Both these books in effect [illegible] features of capitalism. It [illegible] comment on the state of bourgeois research that Jones and Marriot give a far better account of contemporary capitalism than does Banks.
Banks's book is in fact in many ways a most curious effort. Firstly the book is not at all about what its title says it is. The section on industrial relations is in fact only an incidental part of the book, most of which is devoted to a general discussion of everything from the problems of motive forces of the Chinese revolution (p.139-158) and Lenin's theory of the Labour aristocracy (p. 218). It is [illegible] as a book on industrial relat[ions] [illegible].
Unlike most non-Marxists who write on Marx, the author actually does appear to have read something other than Karl Popper's The Open Society and its Enemies. He thus avoids falling into any of the usual "Marx was relevant to the appalling conditions of the 19th century but not today" type of argument. He thus for example gives a reasonably good definition of Marx's definitions of social formations when he says that "... what on the Marxist analysis distinguishes slavery, feudalism and capitalism from one another is not the fact that the ruling class uses the system to its own advantage, but the different ways in which it is done. If there has been a managerial revolution in some Marxist sense of the term, it must be because the managers have introduced [illegible] new way of extorting surplus value from the workers." Unfortunately, having said this he then plunges into a garbled version of Burnham's The Managerial Revolution (which as the erudite know is itself only a garbled version of Bruno Rizzi's La Bureaucratisation du Monde. From this point on the discussion becomes singularly uninteresting.
The problem is that Banks, like Burnham but unfortunately for him unlike Marx, believes that Marxism can be broken down into a set of separate postulates. Thus for example he states a possible theory of the Russian Revolution in terms of two separate premises. This means that [illegible] connection between economics, politics, sociology, philosophy, etc. in Marxism and cannot therefore give an account of any [illegible] that Marxists use. This renders the book virtually worthless apart from a few pieces of empirical information scattered around its pages.
The Oliver and Marriot book is a very different kettle of fish altogether. Perhaps the most startling thing in it is the way in which [illegible] deals with the existence of cartels and mono[poly] [illegible] what a load of rubbish the "conventional wisdom" of capitalism is. The first chapter reveals clearly the origins of the Electrical Industry—it is simply entitled "The Lamp King".
The working of cartels and modern capitalism [illegible] "[illegible] Cowdray's Whitehall Securities ... Lord Poole, English Electric's financial adviser, is also a director of Whitehall Securities [illegible] One such firm was Kleinwort Benson, and there was a Kleinwort partner, Reginald Maudling the former Conservative Chancellor of the [illegible] director, Alexander Hood, was a director of [illegible] Sir Archibald Forbes, chairman [illegible] Bank, and Lord McFadzean, chairman of British Insulated Callendar's Cables ... brushed shoulders with Lord Caldecote, chairman of British Aircraft Corporation".
Again we have a very clear understanding of the role of profit in a capitalist economy. This is beautifully summed up in the penultimate paragraph: "Thus the shareholders of English Electric, which with sales of £411 million in 1967 had been much bigger than either AEI (£260 million) or GEC (£180 million), ended up with, at the very best, one-third of the equity of the combined three companies. That is the measure of the premium for better GEC profitability and for the Weinstock touch." (The Weinstock touch of course consisting of the ability to make these bigger profits.)
We also have marvellous examples of bourgeois ideology at work. Consider for example the title of Chapter 8: "AEI: The Years of Prosperity (1930-53)". What other system than the capitalist could consider the years of the slump, of the war, and of post-war reconstruction, years of prosperity! Here we have a perfect example of how the making of profit is totally unconnected to the needs of society.
Remarkable too are the examples of sheer lying and hypocrisy by the capitalist class. My [illegible] unions kicking up a fuss about the merger. [illegible] on Barbara Castle, who as Secretary of the Department of Employment and Productivity would have a crucial say in the Government decision. Sir Jack ... went bearing a letter signed by Lord Nelson and Lord Aldington promising full consultations with the unions concerning any possible [illegible] that might arise from the merger. They promised to initiate 'immediate discussions between Sir Jack Scamp and national Trade Union leaders concerning arrangements for consultations on matters arising from the merger with a view to maintaining and [illegible] communications between [illegible] and management'."
I trust that the 12,000 workers sacked from GEC were grateful for the immense amount of trouble that went into ensuring that they lost their jobs in a suitable way and not through any rash actions.
All in all, this book is just about the best description of the capitalist system that we are ever going to get from a "reputable" source. As for the problem of the price, well, I suggest that you put in a request to your public library before the Tories make the charge for borrowing books from there almost as much as the cost of the book itself.
Alan Jones