Economic and Political Reorganization

As Socialism/Communism and Capitalism are terms that address the the way that economies are organized, I believe that too much emphasis is placed on political organization and not anywhere near enough on economic reorganization.

As an anarcho-syndacalist of sorts, I believe, in theory, that we should focus primarily on economic restructuring and let the political organization evolve concomitantly on an ad hoc basis. The basic problem related to the necessary reallocation of resources for acheiving socialism is that Capitalists hold a oligopolistic virtual monopoly with respect to the ownership of assets, and are not very likely to do an about face and decide to share ownership with workers, the indigent, and the oppressed.

Whereas, current Capitalist dominated States stand as major obstacles to forming a socialist economy in that the States have Capitalist supporting financial resources whose representative democracies and executive administrations are bought by Capitalist interests. States control military resources (or does the Military/Police/Prison/Security Industrial Complexes control the States?). Capitalists control the press, the media, educational institutions both private and "public" both directly and through the effectiveness of their generations of propaganda. The only positive development relative to the past is that States have very little prestige left, though "socially liberal" Capitalists and, in America the Democratic Capitalist Statists work diligently to recapture that prestige at least with a ruling plurality.

So, socialist economic reform, restructuring, will not occur without a concomitant change in the political composition of the states. It has been pointed out that the objective of Socialists (I guess of the anarcho-syndicalist sort) is to gain control of the States "in order to dismantle them". I would modify this statement to read "in order to minimize them". I believe that States can play a minimal role of government to help foster and facilitate the evolution to a socialist economy, BUT in the meantime we need to have a well developed plan as to how that economic democracy is going to evolve. We need guiding values, principles, a mission, a methodology for formulating, inculcating, and assuring policy. We need strategies and tactics for implementing the planned economy of a local/inter-community/inter-regional/worldwide organized economic democracy. We need to change the way in which resources are allocated to and within communities and we need to change the way that resources are allocated among and within economic sectors.

But if that seems impossible, think about the concomitant need to change the leviathan corrupt Capitalist states, through the "democratic" political process.

As a lover of life, and a believer that modus operandi persists, I do not advocate violent revolution. Besides, even if worldwide violent revolution could work politically, it would not change the economic system, at least in a manner that would be consistent with a smoothly functioning economic democracy. It would be economic anarchy also.

Mass strikes are not likely at this time in the United States. Safety net programs, desperate stimulus programs and their accompanying promises of recovery, and deeply ingrained propagandized and misinformationed mentalities all are working sufficiently to provide a situation for which there is not even a spark of such.

In the longer run, education about economic democracy and its potential for a better life and the role of the States in inhibiting such progress is the first order of business. Maybe somewhere down the road, mass strikes, and bloodless coups (or a peaceful cooperative transition) of both the means of allocation, production, and distribution and the obstructionist states could occur.

Keep hope alive!


Mike Morin

A Response to Richard

Richard,

Thank you for your intelligent response.

I concur 100% with the aim of "Socialists" for taking over the Government is to dismantle it. I also agree with the IDEAL of a moneyless society where the means of production and distribution are held by the workers, but in transitioning to this eutopia (good place) we will need to have some direction over the various national treasuries until we can evolve to a world currency before we can evolve to a moneyless economy. "Safety-net" programs are usually a function of the Treasuries.

With respect to the idea of Socialists winning control of the the US Government via the ballot box seems like an impossibility, so we are left with the options of revolution or the rational convincing of the current branches of government that the aims of "Socialists" stated previously (dissolution with exceptions noted).

I favor an economic democracy where local/inter-community/inter-regional worldwide solidarity based on a socialist vision, planning process, and policy guidelines. All across the spectrum (from workplace to local to global) there will be need for dispute resolution, but the political aspects of the "political economy" need to be explicitly kept to a minimum and that concept inculcated in all worker/citizens, and those necessary decision makers that realistically there will have to be. Structural hierarchies, (although particularly odious in Capitalist organizations, governments, and organizations like the Catholic Church) are not unique to Capitalism, it is basic to animal and human behavior and necessary when there is disagreement about how best to accomplish a task, establish a process, and develop and interpret policies, in a timely fashion. It is a trade-off between such and true consensus on every minor point. But I also contend, that every effort to involve all in the democratic process is fundamental. This is why education is so basic to the success of a working ecological economic system.

I have not once stated, nor would I, that I propose to maintain the economic relations of Capitalism. My goals are quite to the contrary. My approach is to reconcile in practical terms, Marx's Labor Theory of Value, with a quite common Capitalist held belief, Locke's Labor Theory of Property, which contends that property, real and capital accumulation, arose due to the fruits of labor. I ascribe completely to the former (Marx) and view the latter (Locke) as bunk, propaganda, with the exceptional realism (perhaps you've heard of "the American dream").

But even in the rare cases where Locke's Theory of Property is true, it needs to be discouraged as appealing to the more base instincts of human nature (domination versus cooperation, equity, and camaradarie) and as a false promise to all those shackled by the current economic system.

The point is that I am trying to propose practical solutions. Hegel wrote that we can spend our whole lives just trying to figure it all out. Marx argued that we needed to do more, we needed to do something about it. I don't mind taking the time to explain, but eventually we need to apply our ideas to the real world.

I'm a Work kin for peace and cooperation.

Best regards,

Mike Morin

Pandora's Box (Without the Hope?)

Things are moving slowly, way too slowly, with respect to efforts to organize in the Eugene/Springfield & Vicinity Region.

Two members, thus far, and very little in the way of real solid interest expressed to me thus far.

Too many special interests, too many diversions, too many special interests, too many myths, too many special interests, too much diffusion and libertarianism and anarchy and entropy, too many special interests, and too many egos.

We live in a genocidal, ecocidal, automobile culture that can't or won't get the message, or just don't care that they are suicidal, as not so well.

So, I'm frustrated.

In response to your note: we can barter with our neighbors, if we know them and each has something to contribute. I'm not a fan of local currencies, and we have left the gold and silver standards far behind.

The key is to dissolve the Federal Government except to have direct access to the Treasury, at least until we have the time to move to a world currency.

Right now, we have pandering businessess: of the businesses, by the businesses, for the businesses and a servile TO business and oppressive FOR business system of Governments that are: of the Businesses and Governments, by the Businesses and Governments, for the Businesses and Governments.

Our tall order is to replace this with a system that is an economic democracy of the people, by the people, for the people.

At this moment, I'm not feeling very hopeful.


Mike Morin

Governing the Peoples' Equity Union

The Peoples' Equity Union concept is designed to be a grass roots, popular choice "movement". I am organizing with individuals, workers, and shopkeepers in my neighborhood, adjoining neighborhoods, and through the inter-net to whomever I can attract an interest in the concept.

The focus is primarily local, yet global at the same time. It is my dream, not a hope yet, to encourage a critical mass of people to organize locally around a unifying mission, unifying principles, unifying strategies, and unifying tactics in order to minimize the amount of executive administration at the regional and global levels.

The theory is that neighborhood locales, the neighborhood community/worker hybrid association will have maximum autonomy and will be guided only, in their inter-community and inter-economic sector relationships by regional Planning Boards and a Global Policy Committee.

The goal is to be a true economic democracy: of, for, and by the people.