Galeano writes that the real profits from coffee went to the bourgeoise and workers in North Americans who distributed and marketed it in the core countries.
I'm struck by how much this continues to resonate today. It reminds me of the Apple Ipad, where something like $300 dollars of profit from each unit sold goes to Apple and other US corporations (that develop, distribute and market the product) while only $10 goes to the Chinese manufacturer Qualcomm (and even less to its workers who have to work in modern-day Orwellian-Dickensian conditions).
Even in an era of transnational production (and the rise of some formerly peripheral countries), core-periphery dynamics continue to define productive relations. The toilsome, low profit and value-added productive activities (which now includes manufacturing) have been relegated to the periphery while the core retains the cush high profit and high value-added activities (R&D, marketing, branding).
China has made some great strides but breaking out will still be a tough and arduous process. Fortunately, it does seem like the Chinese state knows this and that it has a plan (Made in China 2025) to move the activities of its companies and workers into a better position in these global production chains by developing its own brands (Huawei) and leadership in new technologies (5G, AI). However, US elites and capital have gotten wind of this and now are fiercely resisting China's rise (which was perfectly fine with them as long as it was based on low wage manufacturing (which they profit from - see the Apple example) and did not threaten their privileged positions in global value/production chains.
BTW: I am enjoying a cup of coffee as I write this, but doing so guild free as it is Cuban coffee!
Great stuff Charles!
Galeano writes that the real profits from coffee went to the bourgeoise and workers in North Americans who distributed and marketed it in the core countries.
I'm struck by how much this continues to resonate today. It reminds me of the Apple Ipad, where something like $300 dollars of profit from each unit sold goes to Apple and other US corporations (that develop, distribute and market the product) while only $10 goes to the Chinese manufacturer Qualcomm (and even less to its workers who have to work in modern-day Orwellian-Dickensian conditions).
Even in an era of transnational production (and the rise of some formerly peripheral countries), core-periphery dynamics continue to define productive relations. The toilsome, low profit and value-added productive activities (which now includes manufacturing) have been relegated to the periphery while the core retains the cush high profit and high value-added activities (R&D, marketing, branding).
China has made some great strides but breaking out will still be a tough and arduous process. Fortunately, it does seem like the Chinese state knows this and that it has a plan (Made in China 2025) to move the activities of its companies and workers into a better position in these global production chains by developing its own brands (Huawei) and leadership in new technologies (5G, AI). However, US elites and capital have gotten wind of this and now are fiercely resisting China's rise (which was perfectly fine with them as long as it was based on low wage manufacturing (which they profit from - see the Apple example) and did not threaten their privileged positions in global value/production chains.
BTW: I am enjoying a cup of coffee as I write this, but doing so guild free as it is Cuban coffee!