Totality and representation: A history of knowledge management through European documentation, critical modernity, and post‐Fordism

This article presents European documentalist, critical modernist, and Autonomous Marxist influenced post‐Fordist views regarding the management of knowledge in mid‐ and late twentieth century Western modernity and postmodernity, and the complex theoretical and ideological debates, especially concerning issues of language and community. The introduction and use for corporate, governmental, and social purposes of powerful information and communication technologies created conceptual and political tensions and theoretical debates. In this article, knowledge management, including the specific recent approach known as “Knowledge Management,” is discussed as a social, cultural, political, and organizational issue, including the problematic feasibility of capturing and representing knowledge that is “tacit,” “invisible,” and is imperfectly representable. “Social capital” and “affective labor” are discussed as elements of “tacit” knowledge. Views of writers in the European documentalist, critical modernist, and Italian Autonomous Marxist influenced post‐Fordist traditions, such as Otlet, Briet, Heidegger, Benjamin, Marazzi, and Negri, are discussed.1