ABSTRACT
As the language of Fordism and post-Fordism has entered everyday discussion it has also been vulgarized.1 This reduces its utility for theoretical understanding and empirical analysis and generates many confusions and controversies. This chapter critically reworks the conventional terminology of Fordism and post-Fordism by distinguishing four levels on which they can be analyzed. It also notes a fundamental analytical asymmetry between the two terms and calls for more cautious and critical use of the notion of post-Fordism.
