Quote:
Originally Posted by blutzski
Marko,
So if the "free market" has never existed and most likely never will, what system do you and Chomsky advocate that has existed and has been proven to work over an extended period of time (multi-generation).
|
-- More horizontal type of democractic decision making processes in the political and economic spheres. Not too radical. In fact, there are numerous cases where democratic, worker co-operative, type of business structures are doing very well.
Mondragon corporation is the "7th largest Spanish company in terms of asset turnover," provides 80,000+ jobs, and has been operating since 1956 (mulit-generational)
Isthmus Engineering and Manufacturing is a U.S. example of a successful worker cooperative with annual sales of $15 million. There are many more of these types of worker co-operative business structures, and I would love to see these types of businesses begin to thrive and counteract the highly concentrated top-down structures of power found in the corporate culture.
As for Chomsky, you will have to read him to get a better understanding of what he advocates. I'm not gonna speak for him because the plethora of essays and books he has written on this subject can explain themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blutzski
Short-lived experiments in anarchism don't count.
|
Actually the short-lived (two plus years) Spanish revolution experiment in libertarian-socialism speaks volumes - mainly that the workers and the masses were quite capable of democratically organizing and managing their own affairs (politically and economically) without the need of coercion from above. It didn't fail because of internal problems; it failed because the dominant top-down hierarchical structures (the fascist and communist governments, and the liberal-capitalist governments to a small degree) destroyed the movement by force. This period is inspirational testimony (at least for those who spend time really understanding the history of this time and place) of the ability of poor working people to manage and organize themselves, very successfully, without coercion and control. However, this wasn't a spontaneous thing that just happened. This movement spent 30 plus years educating and organizing multiple generations before the revolution happened. This leads me to the next point I was going to make about how this is relevant to our situation... (stick with me, because, as usual, I need to write an essay to make my point)
Quote:
Originally Posted by blutzski
It's not good enough to just tear down one philosophy without offering an alternative. No system is going to be perfect, just better than the alternatives.
|
-- There is no need to tear down one philosophy and abruptly replace it with an alternative - I think history shows us how this usually ends in disaster. And as I pointed out...the alternative, democracy, isn't too radical of a departure. As Sheldon Wolin wrote about in his book "Democracy Inc. "...it's not about what new powers we can bring into the world, but what hard-won practices we can prevent from disappearing."
What he meant by "hard-won practices" is democratic practices. And the reason these things are disappearing are due to the organized efforts of the corporate capitalist culture who are savagely trying to eradicate democracy because it is antithetical to their very existence. Democracy to the corporate culture is like kyrptonite to Superman. He wrote, "The [American people] are drawn to democracy not because ordinary people expect to rule, but because, in theory, democracy legitimates the expression of widely felt and usually deep-seated grievances, the possibility that those who have only numbers can use them to offset the power of wealth..." And while "the American political system was not born a democracy" the idea of democracy has been in the minds of the American people since the first days after the American revolution.
"The fate of democracy is to have entered the modern world at the same moment as capitalism... As a consequence the course of each became intertwined with the other. This meant, among other things, that the attempts to establish a democratic culture were an uphill struggle.... The persistent conflict between democratic egalitarianism and an economic system that has rapidly evolved into another inegalitarian regime is a reminder that capitalism is not solely a matter of production, exchange and reward. It is a regime in which culture, politics, and economy tend toward a seamless whole, a totality. Like the regimes it had displaced, the corporate regime manifests inequalities in every aspect of social life and defends them as essential. And like the old regimes, the structure of corporate organization follows the hierarchical principle of gradations of authority, prerogative, and reward. It is undemocratic in its structure and modus operandi and antidemocratic in its persistent efforts to destroy or weaken unions, discourage minimum wage legislation, resist environmental protections, and dominate the creation and dissemination of culture (media, foundations, education)."
So, here is what I am advocate of: More democratic types of worker co-operative businesses - they have been proven to work over a multi-generational period. And more democracy in our political world - it has proven to work to redress the grievances of the masses. The faux "managed democracy" we have in this country is not working very well anymore...
However, a democratic revival is desperately needed in this country, and it will take many many years of popular struggle and education to reverse the course that the corporate culture has taken this country. A brilliant man by the name of Murray Bookchin once elucidated on a concept called, Libertarian Municipalism, and how this could possibly help counter-act the highly centralized power monopoly the corporate culture has on American politics and the economy. Bookchin was a left-libertarian (the OG's of libertarian thought) but I think you may find much relevance in his idea if you took the time to read his stuff (especially given the most recent post you made to Cayo)
"The immediate goal of a libertarian municipalist agenda is not to exercise sudden and massive control by representatives and their bureaucratic agents over the existing economy; its immediate goal is to reopen a public sphere in flat opposition to statism, one that allows for maximum democracy in the literal sense of the term, and to create in embryonic form the institutions that can give power to a people generally. If this perspective can be initially achieved only by morally empowered assemblies on a limited scale, at least it will be a form of popular power that can, in time, expand locally and grow over wide regions. That its future is unforeseeable does not alter the fact that its development depends upon the growing consciousness of the people, not upon the growing power of the state--and how that consciousness, concretized in high democratic institutions, will develop may be an open issue but it will surely be a political adventure."
Fortunately, and sometimes unfortunately, I have an insatiable desire to understand the world. For some reason I constantly asked why and sought answers while growing up. Somewhere along the way this process helped create an innate ability to smell bullshit from a mile away. And considering the mainstream discourse in the US is overflowing with BS, I find myself seeking obscure books to satisfy my insatiable desire to understand the world. The unfortunate part about this is, at times, I can feel like a stranger in a strange world when having political or economic conversations with people. Luckily I love to follow sports, select pop cultural aspects, ski and kayak to keep myself from being the total nerd sitting by himself in the corner.
Linear Mode
Chevy Camaro Forum
Ford Mustang Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum
Volkswagen Touareg Forum
Land Rover Defender Forum
