Abstract
This article critiques and extends Michael Burawoy’s perspective on the political apparatuses of production by arguing that he fails to take into account the embeddedness of labor control within legal institutions. Through a synthesis with new institutionalism and sociolegal studies the author argues that production regimes using unfree labor are favorable for capitalist labor subordination given their particular historical embeddedness in legal institutions, the other alternatives available for exploitation and capitalists’ social embeddedness in local institutions. This is demonstrated through an analysis of how capitalists in the Victorian English pottery industry used law as a foundation for the construction of a factory regime based in unfree labor.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
