Abstract
While recognizing the new ‘freedoms' of the labour contract, Marx and Marxist historians and theorists have emphasized its coercive origins and implications. In contrast, Weber and Simmel are struck by the extent to which rural labourers appear to opt for the labour contract even where this is not in their material interest. The article examines this debate and its continued significance for understanding contemporary changes in the nature of work and employment contracts. It argues that the significance of ‘personal’ freedom has to be acknowledged in analysing these changes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
