Fictitious Capital and the Re-emergence of Personal Forms of Domination
Through analysing the link between fictitious capital and social reproduction, this article shows how the increased circulation of fictitious capital leads to the re-emergence of personal forms of domination. This re-emergence of personal forms of domination takes place in the context of the impersonal domination that structures capitalist social relations. However, since fictitious capital is not a product of production, it therefore has not gone through the valorisation process necessary for the realisation of capital. Thus, fictitious capital represents unrealised value. In order to account for this inconsistency, fictitious capital is premised on a contract (debtor-creditor) that makes a claim on future labour, and therefore the valorisation of fictitious capital is suspended and accounted for by the dependence on the valorisation process to occur in the future, with its premise in future labour rather than past as in the case of realised capital. This temporal discordance results in placing increased pressure on social reproduction, a function that insures the reproduction of labour power, a variable at the heart of the justification of the circulation of fictitious capital. Significantly, this re-emergence of personal forms of domination is not solely based on the relation of the debt contract, as the debtor might not be a worker or even an individual but a bank or a hedge fund, but also the personal relations that uphold the ability for society to as a whole to reproduce the labour power that will in the future account for the repayment of the debt. Therefore, personal forms of domination implicated in social reproduction of labour power re-emerge as a site with increased pressure as a result of an increased circulation of fictitious capital.
- Journal Articles