I challenge the definition of a developed nation

                          (picture courtesy of new.geekradio.com)

The definition of a developed nation is flawed particularly as it states that post industrialism is a pertinent feature. What does it mean to be post industrial in today’s world? Can a nation truly be post industrial?  According to the definition a post industrial society relies more on delivering services as opposed to relying exclusively on its manufacturing base to acquire wealth having passed through the stage of industrialization. The definition implies that overtime the service sector becomes the dominant accumulator within the economy.  If that is the case then we have to look at how value is created through services and manufacturing. Manufacturing depends on producing commodities for sale in the market . Once the goods are sold the profits will return to the owner with a portion redistributed throughout the company in the form of new investments so as to continue production and another portion for his own personal revenue to do with it as he or she so pleases. The elements that constitute manufacturing costs are the constant and variable elements. The constant element includes raw materials, semi finished products and machinery/technology. The variable element includes wages paid to the workers who are thoroughly exploited by the owner. The worker represents variable capital because it is his labour that generates surplus value for the capitalist. The portion that represents the wages is considered that which is necessary for the worker to survive whereas the surplus for the working day represents the unpaid labour time which the capitalist appropriates. This is all dependent on the working day which can range from 8-14 hours a day. The more wages paid indicates that the worker is appropriating more of the value he generates to produce the commodity with the rest being surplus value. The wages begin to decrease as a result of increased productivity where it requires less work to produce a particular product. ( I am not going to refer to external elements such as the trade unions etc in determining the amount of wages paid)  This is determined by the social standard of labour which agrees on the amount of time it takes to produce a particular commodity. The less necessary labour it takes to produce a particular commodity the more surplus value for the capitalist.  The profit is calculated on the basis of the surplus value generated as separate from the capital invested in the constant feature of the industrial process. Surplus value and by extension surplus profit thereby have a distinct measure in such a case with regards to the production of the commodity. The profit generated throughout the manufacturing or industrial factory process spreads throughout various sectors of the economy such as the banks, the stock exchange which helps to feed other companies' increased investment, government bonds and government taxes,   luxury products and services. I highlight services to show that it merely appropriates revenue. Revenue is generated through productive labour  which is normally shared amongst the great classes of a modern economy: wage earners under capital, the profits of the capitalist and the rents of the landlords and interest for  the money lender who makes loans to either of these classes that have some stake with the surplus product.  Surplus value represents the ground for all these classes for if the workers claimed the entire product of a days labour then there would be no capitalist to collect profits or landlord to demand rent or any interest to pay out to the money lender.

                Services appropriate revenue and within the context of the global economy a  particular nation can appropriate the surplus product of the workers of other countries. If America was truly post industrial then it would not need its productive sectors and could rely solely on research and development through the various educational institutions or by providing financial, health, maintenance and the like. They would not need their factories according to this definition. The provision of services in a post industrial society implies some high level of expertise (not referring to domestic services which are the lowest kind of service. I am referring to generating significant growth in the economy). This high level of expertise will attract money into the country and so the economy will grow and the funds earned would either be repatriated to the secondary countries that are engaged primarily in manufacturing or be retained to fuel more services with the hope that the truly productive countries will continue to feed it with the surplus profits generated by industry. The dilemma between the US and China for instance seems to suggest that the US will employ a qualitative approach to development i.e. its think tanks will develop the latest commodity with a necessary use value for exchange on the market. This commodity will represent a high level of scientific research however for it to be truly commercialized it has to go to China for production. If this is what is meant by post industrial then it is accurate. If, as a post industrial society, the US requires only highly skilled labour and does not need industry to produce within its boundaries then its economy will contract and it will stagnate. The wealth of a nation is the amount of commodities produced within its borders.

Attracting money into a country means nothing unless it is invested in productive industry in order to produce commodities for the market; unless money in this context is a commodity i.e. capital for investment. If this money cannot be translated into the money capital for investment then interest rates are meaningless within the context of the national economy. The only way for capital to valorize (increase value) itself is to produce commodities not merely to collect money for services rendered. The only way this would be acceptable is if the developed nation has a developed post industrial mechanism designed primarily to render services. The impression that the definition of post industrial gives is that a developed nation no longer engages in industry. This would imply that the economy will not grow significantly from this point onwards. The concept of a developed nation suggests that the nation itself cannot valorize capital significantly within its national borders. It is within the productive sector where surplus value is generated. The inability to valorize capital significantly beyond the extent which the country became developed is a sign that the nation will endure a relative decline i.e. the absolute wealth of the nation will be magnificent for the moment but that is about it. The nation that constantly valorizes capital and grows phenomenally (China) will soon represent the new standard of wealth because of the amount of industrial production within its borders. London was once the great market for capital on the basis of its industrial sector that conquered the world in the 19^th century. Britain became caught up in the value of its currency, sterling, but its value was to be represented by its industrial capacity and this floundered significantly after WW2. Its decline was represented by the inadequate means of valorizing capital through industry. Sterling was a commodity as capital but the extent which sterling was stored as a reserve was based on the extent that Britain’s trade was extensive. The logical means within capitalist production to valorize capital and extend your reach into foreign markets is on the basis of the export of commodities.  The US emerged from the ashes of the U.K because of its industrial might and the wealth of commodities produced. The U.K stagnated in this area. Quality is one thing but innovation is pointless in capitalism unless the commodity can be mass produced.  It is similar to how the Netherlands eventually became a predominantly commercial nation handing out loans from its developed financial sector. Britain did the same thing and now the US with its public debt and Wall Street operatives are exercising the same function and this will imply that relative decline is inevitable.

There is no such thing as a developed nation in the absolute sense because developed implies stagnation. All countries are developing within the context of valorizing capital. If a country accepted its status of developed it would not have to valorize capital significantly. It still has to continue developing within the context of capital for this system implies constant increase in the amount of commodities whether nationally or internationally. This developing is also significant for absorbing later generations of that particular nation. Only industry can achieve that not services. A country is only developed when it is highly industrialized i.e. its infrastructure is entrenched and the development of its factory system is ordered in a particular way to continue developing and valorizing capital. Highly industrialized therefore means that the infrastructure facilitates smoothly the production and circulation of the many commodities within its national borders. The production and circulation of commodities is done strictly within the context of the capitalist mode of production. According to the notion of developed Rome was developed within the context of landed property, slave labour and its military complex. The US is only developed within the context of capitalism. The mistake is assuming that this mode of production, capitalism, is absolute. Developing countries are considered such because they aspire to the capitalist mode of production while shedding the vestiges of previous modes of production: slave, colonial and feudal economies. The Soviet Union was also developed within the context of a command economy. The Soviet economy did not embrace communism as it should have been or as it will be, if even under another name. The current world crises, which will become even more severe in the future with more capital at stake, suggest that being developed is not sufficient according to various definitions and is meaningless in this mode of production.  There have to be commodities to produce on an industrial level so to imply that developed countries are post industrial is a mere pastiche moment for bourgeois economists. Within the context of the capitalist mode of production industry is essential. No country is post industrial for it does not exist within this mode of production. The capitalist mode of production involves the exploitation of wage labour by the few that own capital and the more countries that can embrace this concept will become developed because they would have embraced the necessary systems to manage the flow of capital in producing commodities in order to increase wealth.