WORKERS, GLOBALISATION AND INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY

WORKERS, GLOBALISATION AND INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY





BY



Ma’azu Mohammed Yusif
Department of Political Science,
Bayero University, Kano









For Discussion in a Forum of Civil Society Organisations in Kano, Organised by CITAD at Kano State Library, on
Tuesday 22nd May, 2007

Introduction
Fellow workers and representatives of Civil Society Organisations in Kano, participating in discussion forum on workers and ICTs. Specifically, the topic of this lecture is “Workers, Globalisation and ICTs”. I wish the organisers of this forum have framed the topic in a reverse form i.e. Globalisation, Workers and ICTs”, so that I can penetrate into the academic controversies about globalisation and workers and how the ‘new class’ of workers of the current era of globalisation could utilise the ICTs to carry out their struggles.

Nevertheless, I would still like to share with you some academic reflections about the topic given for discussion, so as to serve as a background for putting up our experience and thinking into discussion. Because for me when I meet and or interact with people from trade unions and other civil society organisations I open my mind and concentrate my attention to learn.

Following this direction I do not think it is possible to do justice to the discussion without first clarifying about the major concepts in the topic. Unless we make this clarification our discussion may be limited to old issues and ideas which have already given place to new structure of knowledge.

2. The Concepts
There are three concepts to be defined. There is however, a problem that concern definition. One is that a definition does not explain adequately what a subject is. Secondly, it does not give a critical conception of the phenomenon. But it explains it according to what usage the writer wants make about the term.
Globalisation
The discourse about the current globalisation is that the world has become a globalised planet, borderless with a World Economy in which national states have virtually disappeared and national sovereignty has lost its meaning.

That is the propaganda about the current globalisation. But this globalisation is not the first in the history of the development of human society. It is about expansion of capitalism and so there were many other globalisation before the current globalisation.

Therefore, the contemporary globalisation is just the latest phase of expansion of capitalism. The logic of changes in the expansion of capital pertains to what difficulties in process of accumulation it has gone through and what ways seem feasible to get out of the difficulties. Thus Eskor Toyo (2000: 16) noted that the current globalisation is “…strategically directed against the expansion and deepening of the victories of the labour movement in industrial capitalist countries and of the national liberation and socialist revolutions” in the world. As well as the progress in industrial development or revolution some countries in the Third World were making.

An important component in the growth and development of capital is the exploitation of labour, therefore, if we are searching for a precise definition of globalisation or the current globalisation, we may simply say is the expansion of production, exchange, etc. globally and the coordination and unification of these processes which in turn produces unified culture, politics, and ideology, for the benefits of the global transnational corporations.

In talking about the current globalisation, one must not forget to associate it with neo-liberalism. Because this is the strategy of the globalisation, such that it is called neo-liberal globalisation. By neo-liberalism, we are repeatedly told that it is the market that can do everything in the best way, not the state. Therefore, everything should be privatised, market should be allowed to determine wages, value of currency, in short everything including social services is for sale, if you want it buy it.
Workers
Human being exists to live. But nature cannot provide anything that man needs in a ready-made form. Much has to be produced by man himself. That means that man has to work. Through the process of work man transforms natural and other conditions to make him and the society to live. As Savchenko (1987) states ‘Labour is man’s purposeful activity through which he adopts natural objects and uses them to satisfy his needs”.

The work system evolved and changes with transformation of human society as determined by changes in the form of production. In the first stage, every human being is the owner of what he produced. Secondly, characteristic of a slave society, those who did the work and the means of doing the work are the properties of the lord. Therefore, the slaves are not independent workers. The third one, characteristic of a feudal society, is giving the means of production to the producer under an obligation to work on the kind of the landowner as well as his plot of land using the instruments of the landowner and in turn may receive some gift in cash or land. The fourth is a transformation of the third one into capitalist work system. In this case, there is no any bond or attachment between the worker and the owner of the means of production. The worker is independent and is in the market like every other commodity with his labour to sell.

Consequently, in a capitalist society a worker is one who has nothing but his labour as commodity to sell, receive wage and exclusively live on that.
Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
First, on information. It refers to facts and opinions provided and received during the course of daily relationship between people. Traditionally, there are so many sources of information: the mass media; library; electronic data banks such as Radio, Television, etc. Usage and control of information is very important in whatever one is doing. In reality, a person or an organisation or a system who masters use of information generates more information which are continuously communicated, and this gives one undue advantage of great influence in society.

While communication is the process of transmission of information usually via a common system of symbols e.g. Television, Radio, Computers, etc. Then communications technology is the electronic transfer of information from one location to another.

To be specific, information and communication technology (ICT) refers to the techniques for making and using electronic equipments such as computers and telecommunications which makes possible for acquiring, storing, processing, retrieving and distributing information and data including texts, and images to be transmitted anywhere in the world, provided the digital signals are found in that place.

Thus, the modern ICT is used for wide-range of activities such as in modern production/manufacturing system, in Government Administrative Services, businesses of all types, teaching and research, as well as in political struggles.

Because of the varied uses of modern ICT, Ernest J. Wilson (1998) distinguished the system into three different aspects, according to the use it can be put for. These are:


1. ICT as media
2. ICT as embedded-factor of production
3. ICT as driver of organisational change

A most significant component of the modern ICT is the internet system. The internet with all its components and various uses (The World Wide Web; Electronic Mail; File Transfer Protocol; Internet Relay Chart; Usenet) is a powerful network which ensure access to information, but which on the other hand asserted control of information by those who guides the information system.

Even in the Third World countries public access to the internet has become more widely available since the mid – 1990s. Especially in Latin America propelled by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and grassroots civil organisations. These organisations use this worldwide network for mobilisation of people for varied things including anti-imperialism and “National Liberation” from neo-liberalism. Also for increased and faster liberalisation of the polity and democratisation of the society. True, in all the cases it is the most effective instrument of mass communication which could reach the recipients without audience. Hence it is a great instrument against the state and by its power of communication it becomes uncontrollable even by those who invented it. Therefore, it could also work against globalisation interests.

3. Workers in the Current Globalisation
Here it may look as if the emphasis is on class politics and analysis of globalisation which will focus on capitalist class division between the Bourgeoisie and the working-class. However, a critical observation and getting into the literature would certainly call for reflection. One reason is that “globalisation has changed everything” including the structure and processes of production which also affect the primacy of social relations of production and the constitution of the antagonistic classes in particular.

The debate on this matter cannot even be classified. Nevertheless, there is one direction showing that production and processes of class formation is globalised. Accordingly, there is global ruling-class and transnational state. In this set of the argument only the capitalist class is acknowledged and the other classes ignored as if they do not exist.

As for labour it is said that there is ongoing recomposition of it in a condition of almost globally universal relation of capital. Those who go to the extreme think that workers are displaced by information to the extent that the working-class does no longer exist.

On the contrary, it is said that indeed there is a reformulation of international division of labour thesis in the context of globalisation, but “capital is still dependent on exploiting workers for profit, and that the exploitation has shifted to the underdeveloped countries of the Third World. (Harrod; 1987).

Although it can be recognised that both capital and labour are fragmented beyond the recognition of any Marxist theory. As under condition of fragmented production, capital splits into thousands of production capacity covering the distinction between ownership of working capital and labour, and the output of labour is paid under casualisation or part-time employment, or as contracts or through self-employment or piecemeal work (Ibid 181).

Therefore, the classes too become fragmented and divided into (i) Those who control big corporations operating on a world scale (2) those who control big nation-based enterprises and industrial groups (3) locally-based petty capitalists. Then the exploited classes are further divided into (1) a middle stratum of scientific, technical and supervisory personnel (2) established workers (3) non-established workers (4) new industrial labour forces in the industrialising Third World countries and (5) peasants and marginal (Ibid. 181).

It is nothing but pro-globalist desperation for continues exploitation of Third World workers that they are writing all rubbish about death of workers. Of course, according to their view on globalisation, the world is something different from capitalism and it is in which social classes, imperialism and ideologies came to an end. Furthermore, for them, since the traditional workers have disappeared and following the logic of neo-liberalism, trade unions too must go, and disappear.

4. Workers and ICTs in the Era of Globalisation
The relationship between globalisation and ICT is obvious. While globalisation is a network of processes which connected the globe, the modern ICT is also a network of devices for generation of information across the globe.

Both bring about revolution in the world because they have dissolved the old system and makes new out of it. In short, they have changed everything. Each one of them needs the other, although because of centrality of globalisation, the ICTs is said to be a greater force, moving the globalised world.

For die hard proglobalists some of the revolutionary changes these bring is that the workers and or the working-class have disappeared. The political implication of this is that the workers are no longer constituted or reconstituted as a social force for social transformation. The logic for this reasoning is that as a result of globalisation there are diverse groups marginalised and that the “third wave of democratisation and the growth of civil society raised serious challenges to class politics. Furthermore, it is said that the complexity of the problems are such that cannot be addressed by class politics.

These not withstanding, the question remains that, under these conditions what strategies can be used to liberate societies battered by neo-liberalism. Theoretically, the question of “Another world is possible” is worth exploring. One direction is to re-create a radical nationalist project which would oppose neo-liberal globalisation in favour of nation-centred policies. To carryout this a new political force must come out and find new roots in the working-class, in alliance with semi-proletariat across the rural-urban divide and which must not rely on contemporary neo-liberal political parties, the state and external interference. Of course, with ideological clarify to build a mass movement in opposition to neo-liberalism.

The second direction is to globalise resistance against neo-liberal globalisation. This is a higher level, beyond national. It is about transnationalisation of opposition. This requires a high level of coordination, both nationally and internationally around a minimum program of action against neo-liberal globalisation. This implies that the “National Liberation” against neo-liberal globalisation can better be executed at global level. In this strategy the workers/working-class, (because of extroverted pattern of accumulation, marginalisation of workers by neo-liberalism, and by global restriction of movement still imposed on labour) lack the capacity for independent political action globally.

Meanwhile, the civil society is already fixed against authoritarianism and democratisation of society. The expression “civil society” is very complex. In the last 20 years people have abandoned the academic and political history that had defined the concept centuries ago. One perspective of the civil society in the past is in the Gramscian theory which sees the civil society as a class phenomenon with a bourgeoisie civil society which comprised a series of political parties and formally private organisations and associations through which influence is exercised over the masses (Lars Rudebeck and Olle Tornquist; 1995: 22). This recognise also an alternative civil society of the masses to check the powers of capital and bourgeois state.

However, there seems to be a contradiction between modern civil society and class organisations and actions. This is not just a cynical reflection, but because while the modern civil society has great capacity of mobilising against neo-liberal globalisation, and while they are able to hold greatest and largest global demonstrations, yet they lack theoretical focus on anti-globalisation and lack ideological clarify and alternative programme against neo-liberal globalisation.

Any formulation of strategy and tactics against neo-liberalism is to balance the two directions highlighted so that the modern civil society could combine general mobilisation of all groups, social movements and class organisations for a mass support and campaign as well as opposition against neo-liberalism.

This type of coalition is capable of bringing together wider range of issues and methods to withstand the assault of neo-liberation. In any way the mobilisation and the opposition can move from the streets and other scenes to the use of ICT (internet) and therefore national struggle also becomes global.

The widespread computer networks made it possible for literally millions of people living in different countries to form a populous cyber village or even family through sharing of information. The rapidly of this network is facilitated and accelerated by local and transnational NGOs who built a common bond of provision of common services globally. Secondly, the commonality of activities, of sharing common resources, of information, etc. created a bond of solidarity, resulting in a global organisation.

To understand this development in proper perspective, it is in order, to imagine that a kind of social network is fast emerging in African countries. Promoted by neo-liberalism this involved the economy, the polity and all other things about them.

Given access to electronic networks, activities located physically in different countries can link up more easily than ever before. The Net provides new spaces for new political discussions about democracy, revolution and self-determination, though it does not provide solutions to the differences that exist; it is merely a means to accelerate the search for such solutions (Harry Cleaver, 1998).

The Zapatista Movement in Mexico, Latin America is a perfect example of a group which has successfully made use of the Net to mobilise against the Government of Mexico. I think we need not get into the debate about the politics, ideology and class support of Zapatista. It may simply be characterised as an independent civil society organisation which evolved out of the movement three layers: the indigenous peasants of Chiapas; educated middle class; and myriad of local and international NGOs; which gives the movement its Netwar relevance (David Ronfeldt and John Arquilla (1998).

The most important from revolutionary stand point about Zapatista is that, as the whole world has gone neo-liberal it is the first movement which through insurgency opposes neo-liberalism. That is why it is called many names such as “New-World warrior”; internet guerrillas; post-modern liberation movement; etc.

The Zapatistas did not have enormous resources to get their own internet connections, fax machines, and cellular phones. Yet they used these facilities to great effect for conveying Zapatistas views, and for communicating and coordinating with each other, and for creating extra-ordinary mobilisation of support which by passed whatever the government of Mexico was able to do. The movement has already made unreversable impact on the net as there are hundreds websites and thousands of web pages about the Zapatistas such that Ronfeldt and Anquilla (1998) observed that even Google cannot stop when you click Zapatista.

5. Conclusion
The problem with civil society polities in Nigeria and most African countries is accommodation with neo-liberalism. If the sources of radicalisation and opposition is to be search, it will require a political force which can combine class action, nationalist politics and globalism.

This must be a new political force which in Nigeria can be an independent civil society organisation which could master the resources and courage to bring various groups with different attachment to neo-liberalism to define a new programme of opposition which must include mass base education about neo-liberalism in order to build support against the system. For example, here in Nigeria we can organise community discussions on neglecting social welfare issues, lagging of democratisation; wages and salaries; etc.

Work Cited
1. Ali Mazrui (2000). “Nigeria between Lord Lugard and the Digital Divide; Political Culture and the Skill Revolution”, Website

2. Cleaver Harry (1998). “The Zapatistas effect: The internet and the rise of an Alternative Political Fabric”. Journal of International Affair Vol. 51 No.2

3. Curl LaBond (2000). “Is Internet Access helping or hindering Civil Society Organisation”. Website

4. David Ronfeldt and John Arquilla (1998). “Emergence and Influence of the Zapatista Social Netwar”. In John Holloway and Eloine Palaez (eds.) Zapatista reinvending revolution in Mexico Pluto Press, London

5. Ernest J. Wilson (1998). Globalisation, Information Technology and Conflict in the Second and third Worlds. Website

6. Esko Toyo (2000). “Background to Globalisation”. ASUU Educational Publication Series(2)

7. Harrol J. (1987). Power, production and unprotected worker New York. Colombia University Press.

8. Petter Gibbon (1996). “Theoretical Reflections on Development, Democratisation, and Civil Society”. In Lars Rudeback and Olle Tornquist (eds.). Democratisation in the Third World. Concrete cases in comparative and theoretical perspectives. Uppsala University, Sweden

9. Savchenco P. (1987). What is Labour. Progress Publishers, Moscow

10. Yusif M.M. (2004). “How to use Internet to source reading materials”. A paper to guide students on how to use Internet facilities for reading and research.