I would love to read that post. I don’t think people are claiming feudalism has the same material base… I could be wrong… but my understanding is that neufeudalism is an expression of a highly financialized economy during reproletarianization. I think the point is just that what is developing during that process isn’t completely different in terms of changes in social economic relations, than like what it was like, say, when the commons was enclosed.
Like, the tendency of the rate of profit to fal, and the decreasing exploitability of the global majority, has pushed many of the imperial core’s precariat into new categories of jobs where their own belongings (like cars, homes, and phones… often acquired with debt) are essentially used as the overhead for “tech companies” that are actually rube-goldberg-like financial instrument that extracts value out of the belongings of working class people while forcing them to “rent” it: subscription services, planned obsolescence, debt service, or publicly financed asset-inflation (ex: quantitative easing). Does that seem like a change in the basis of relations? Maybe?
I would love to read that post. I don’t think people are claiming feudalism has the same material base… I could be wrong… but my understanding is that neufeudalism is an expression of a highly financialized economy during reproletarianization. I think the point is just that what is developing during that process isn’t completely different in terms of changes in social economic relations, than like what it was like, say, when the commons was enclosed.
Like, the tendency of the rate of profit to fal, and the decreasing exploitability of the global majority, has pushed many of the imperial core’s precariat into new categories of jobs where their own belongings (like cars, homes, and phones… often acquired with debt) are essentially used as the overhead for “tech companies” that are actually rube-goldberg-like financial instrument that extracts value out of the belongings of working class people while forcing them to “rent” it: subscription services, planned obsolescence, debt service, or publicly financed asset-inflation (ex: quantitative easing). Does that seem like a change in the basis of relations? Maybe?