• volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    For all of feudalism, serfs (majority of the population) worked the fields not for a wage on a free contract (i.e. commodity labor), but bounded legally to the land by the local aristocrat. That’s why it wasn’t capitalism.

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Hum… I’ve jumped over that part on your comment. And yeah, freedom for laborers was indeed a defining feature of capitalism. I’m not sure that puts the OP fighting against that system in a good light.

      Anyway, comoditized labor is nearly dead, and the 20th century created that entire labor market oligopsony thing. “You’ll never work on this city again!” was something so feared that it entered plenty of movies. Work today just does not work by the same rules as it did at the 19th century.

      • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        freedom for laborers was indeed a defining feature of capitalism. I’m not sure that puts the OP fighting against that system in a good light

        “Not sure fighting against feudalism and saying that in antiquity there was slavery instead puts the fight in a good light”

        Anyway, comoditized labor is nearly dead

        Do you know what you’re talking about? How is commodity-labor nearly dead? What percentage of people engage in free contracts in which they exchange their labor for a wage? I’d say the vast majority.

        the 20th century created that entire labor market oligopsony thing. “You’ll never work on this city again!” was something so feared that it entered plenty of movies.

        Ok? That’s not a defining feature of capitalism, ofc some things change but that’s not even reflected in any Marxist literature I’ve read. Why do you insist we’re in something fundamentally different? I feel like you haven’t read on the topic