You do a good job of debunking reform and all arguments for it.
Yet your pronouncement in favor of "peaceful, democratic revolution" appears to be a hollow one.
How does such differ from reform? Are you suggesting "taking over the economy" by "voting in the work-place"?
I don't understand. I want to. I seek the same results as you. I know there are no simple answers, if any at all, but can we make some progress about how to carry out a "peaceful, democratic revolution" without restructuring (how does that differ from reforming?) the economic and political process? I know the WSM answer to the political process is to "dismantle governments" and much of that, aside from "safety net" programs does need to occur. But, can you not envisage an associated "government" of inter-syndicalist and inter-community faciltators?
If so, how do we get from here to there?
Thank you.
Mike Morin
Monday, June 8, 2009
Response to Jude
Jude et al,
Jude, if you are writing about my recent post on forming a local equity union, it is true that it will not be 'competitive" to "investors" in the inflationary Capitalist Economic system. Also Community Betterment Organizations (CBOs) will be subject to the same impossible conditions that the Capitalist system has created for itself and for us. Therefore, any equity sharing allotment will be subject to the risk of losing that money.
With respect to involving the poor and dispossesed, we must focus on youth (other than keeping safety-net programs for the more elderly) and we will need Government Assistance in the forms of educational and vocational training and direct allotments.
I hold no illusions. For a Peoples' Equity Union socialist restructuring to succeed, while evolving on the local level, everywhere, will require "capturing" the Treasuries of all, or at least most nations, eventually evolving to a worldwide treasury (a treasury without borders).
Jude, if you are writing about my recent post on forming a local equity union, it is true that it will not be 'competitive" to "investors" in the inflationary Capitalist Economic system. Also Community Betterment Organizations (CBOs) will be subject to the same impossible conditions that the Capitalist system has created for itself and for us. Therefore, any equity sharing allotment will be subject to the risk of losing that money.
With respect to involving the poor and dispossesed, we must focus on youth (other than keeping safety-net programs for the more elderly) and we will need Government Assistance in the forms of educational and vocational training and direct allotments.
I hold no illusions. For a Peoples' Equity Union socialist restructuring to succeed, while evolving on the local level, everywhere, will require "capturing" the Treasuries of all, or at least most nations, eventually evolving to a worldwide treasury (a treasury without borders).
Friday, June 5, 2009
Local
Hi Dan,
Great to "hear" from you, as always.
Does Ode Magazine have a website (version)? I will look.
Interesting that you would introduce the topic of altruism, one that we were recently discussing on a "World in Common" discussion group.
I think that the profit motive of Capitalism, (versus the needs of people motive of socialism (at least in theory)) leads to social atomization and alienation and thus to very unhealthy cynical cut-throat competitive behavior which precludes altruism. It is interesting that the example that you gave was from firefighters, viewed by many as champions of PUBLIC SERVICE.
I, too, have some discretionary funds that I would like to put into trust for public service and altruistic endeavors. Perhaps, you and I (and others if we can find them) should investigate creating a local Peoples' Equity fund. My idea on that is to see if we can open a group trust account in a Credit Union, where each trustee would have an individual account, yet allocations to community betterment projects could be done collectively, with each individual signing off on the amount that they want to dedicate to the project.
The idea would be that we would "invest" in community betterment projects with the care that we would expect to only get the par value of our "investment" back or we could choose to make individual and/or collective tax-deductible or maybe tax credit eligible contributions to "qualified" 501(c)(3) community betterment organizations (CBOs)
CBOs could be not-for-profit, non-profit or both.
That's enough for now.
What think?
Mike
Great to "hear" from you, as always.
Does Ode Magazine have a website (version)? I will look.
Interesting that you would introduce the topic of altruism, one that we were recently discussing on a "World in Common" discussion group.
I think that the profit motive of Capitalism, (versus the needs of people motive of socialism (at least in theory)) leads to social atomization and alienation and thus to very unhealthy cynical cut-throat competitive behavior which precludes altruism. It is interesting that the example that you gave was from firefighters, viewed by many as champions of PUBLIC SERVICE.
I, too, have some discretionary funds that I would like to put into trust for public service and altruistic endeavors. Perhaps, you and I (and others if we can find them) should investigate creating a local Peoples' Equity fund. My idea on that is to see if we can open a group trust account in a Credit Union, where each trustee would have an individual account, yet allocations to community betterment projects could be done collectively, with each individual signing off on the amount that they want to dedicate to the project.
The idea would be that we would "invest" in community betterment projects with the care that we would expect to only get the par value of our "investment" back or we could choose to make individual and/or collective tax-deductible or maybe tax credit eligible contributions to "qualified" 501(c)(3) community betterment organizations (CBOs)
CBOs could be not-for-profit, non-profit or both.
That's enough for now.
What think?
Mike
Local
Hi Dan,
Great to "hear" from you, as always.
Does Ode Magazine have a website (version)? I will look.
Interesting that you would introduce the topic of altruism, one that we were recently discussing on a "World in Common" discussion group.
I think that the profit motive of Capitalism, (versus the needs of people motive of socialism (at least in theory)) leads to social atomization and alienation and thus to very unhealthy cynical cut-throat competitive behavior which precludes altruism. It is interesting that the example that you gave was from firefighters, viewed by many as champions of PUBLIC SERVICE.
I, too, have some discretionary funds that I would like to put into trust for public service and altruistic endeavors. Perhaps, you and I (and others if we can find them) should investigate creating a local Peoples' Equity fund. My idea on that is to see if we can open a group trust account in a Credit Union, where each trustee would have an individual account, yet allocations to community betterment projects could be done collectively, with each individual signing off on the amount that they want to dedicate to the project.
The idea would be that we would "invest" in community betterment projects with the care that we would expect to only get the par value of our "investment" back or we could choose to make individual and/or collective tax-deductible or maybe tax credit eligible contributions to "qualified" 501(c)(3) community betterment organizations (CBOs)
CBOs could be not-for-profit, non-profit or both.
That's enough for now.
What think?
Mike
Great to "hear" from you, as always.
Does Ode Magazine have a website (version)? I will look.
Interesting that you would introduce the topic of altruism, one that we were recently discussing on a "World in Common" discussion group.
I think that the profit motive of Capitalism, (versus the needs of people motive of socialism (at least in theory)) leads to social atomization and alienation and thus to very unhealthy cynical cut-throat competitive behavior which precludes altruism. It is interesting that the example that you gave was from firefighters, viewed by many as champions of PUBLIC SERVICE.
I, too, have some discretionary funds that I would like to put into trust for public service and altruistic endeavors. Perhaps, you and I (and others if we can find them) should investigate creating a local Peoples' Equity fund. My idea on that is to see if we can open a group trust account in a Credit Union, where each trustee would have an individual account, yet allocations to community betterment projects could be done collectively, with each individual signing off on the amount that they want to dedicate to the project.
The idea would be that we would "invest" in community betterment projects with the care that we would expect to only get the par value of our "investment" back or we could choose to make individual and/or collective tax-deductible or maybe tax credit eligible contributions to "qualified" 501(c)(3) community betterment organizations (CBOs)
CBOs could be not-for-profit, non-profit or both.
That's enough for now.
What think?
Mike
Re-Introducing Myself and My Work
Hi Folks,
I've noticed that this list is not very active, with the most recent posts being in Spanish.
Are there "lurkers" out there waiting to be stimulated into discussing eco/anarcho-syndicalist proposals and ideas relative to alternatives to the Capitalist status quo.
I am a 55 year old Friend who has a BS in Environmental Studies, Graduate and lifelong study and conceptual development in the fields of Economics (particularly Comparative Economic Systems), Regional and Resource Planning. I perceive myself to be somewhat unusual in that along the way while having to find work in the Capitalist system, I became a Socialist with a MBA degree. This has served me well in understanding and developing a somewhat new field of study, thought, and discussion which I call "Regional and Resource Allocation".
My thesis is that we gravely need to fundamentally change the way in which resources are allocated to and within communities, and within and among economic sectors with the mission of ecological economic neighborhood/inter-community/inter-regional/worldwide redevelopment based on the principles of equity, humanity, inclusion, quality of life, sustainability and peace.
I hope we can begin, again.
Thanks.
Mike Morin
I've noticed that this list is not very active, with the most recent posts being in Spanish.
Are there "lurkers" out there waiting to be stimulated into discussing eco/anarcho-syndicalist proposals and ideas relative to alternatives to the Capitalist status quo.
I am a 55 year old Friend who has a BS in Environmental Studies, Graduate and lifelong study and conceptual development in the fields of Economics (particularly Comparative Economic Systems), Regional and Resource Planning. I perceive myself to be somewhat unusual in that along the way while having to find work in the Capitalist system, I became a Socialist with a MBA degree. This has served me well in understanding and developing a somewhat new field of study, thought, and discussion which I call "Regional and Resource Allocation".
My thesis is that we gravely need to fundamentally change the way in which resources are allocated to and within communities, and within and among economic sectors with the mission of ecological economic neighborhood/inter-community/inter-regional/worldwide redevelopment based on the principles of equity, humanity, inclusion, quality of life, sustainability and peace.
I hope we can begin, again.
Thanks.
Mike Morin
Thursday, June 4, 2009
In Response to Obama's "New Beginning" Speech Regarding Peace with the Islamic World
To David Axelrod - Senior Advisor to the President of the United States,
You wrote:
"The President outlined some big goals for this new beginning in his speech -- including disrupting, dismantling, and defeating violent "extremism" "
My response:
Why threaten with violence to stop violence.
Such an approach is counter-productive.
Lawlessness is the strength of the violent, not the non-violent. The law is the strength of the violent, not the non-violent.
Can non-violence work?
I like the word equity, because it means equality and it means ownership. Until people feel "enfranchised", they are going to do desperate things, like acts of violence.As long as others think that they have "God's blessing" or some other way of describing an earned or unearned "right" to superior economic holdings then there will be oppression, exploitation, enslavement and/or disregard for the poor. There will always be resistance to that. Moslems know the American History of and proclivity to genocide, and it is antithetical to their faith to yield to such.How do we convince a huge minority that hold Capitalist competitive advantage, and hide their "invisible hands" with obscurity and privacy, and either espouse or disingenuously practice disregard for their fellow humans, how do we convince them to reconsider and join in an effort of world unity?
Obama and the US need to do much work to reduce the US and Capitalist ally exploitation of the Moslem world, particularly the fossil fuel resource. For purposes of inter-factional peace, as well (pun intended) as to the domestic and worldwide survival and quality of life considerations regarding finite resources (most particularly oil), the USA must immediately commit to and undertake a program to reduce automobile usage by 80% over the next 20 to 40 years by implementing a demand side management and supply side reallocation plan, which would be a comprehensive socialist plan to rebuild all plans and reallocate goods and services so that all, or almost all, communities are "walkable" meaning that all folks can get what they need and reasonably want within walking distance of their homes. In most of the country, particularly environs further west, this will require substantial REBUILDING of neighborhoods. Think of the massive jobs and equity opportunities, domestically, and the opportunity to increase the quality of life for all, especially our least fortunate, while setting in motion a massive relief of tension that contributes to discord in the Middle East and South Asia, the unfair thievery and thuggery involved in the USA Geopolitical activities concerning the oil resources in that part of the world.
Face it, Mr. President, and have the courage (and I know you have the grace) to address the gluttonous squandering of such a precious natural gift (fossil fuels) and convince the people of the USA that we must fundamentally change course from a genocidal, ecocidal, suicidal "standard of living" paradigm to one that incorporates equity, inclusion, humanity, quality of life, sustainability, and PEACE...
With much love and care,
Mike Morin
You wrote:
"The President outlined some big goals for this new beginning in his speech -- including disrupting, dismantling, and defeating violent "extremism" "
My response:
Why threaten with violence to stop violence.
Such an approach is counter-productive.
Lawlessness is the strength of the violent, not the non-violent. The law is the strength of the violent, not the non-violent.
Can non-violence work?
I like the word equity, because it means equality and it means ownership. Until people feel "enfranchised", they are going to do desperate things, like acts of violence.As long as others think that they have "God's blessing" or some other way of describing an earned or unearned "right" to superior economic holdings then there will be oppression, exploitation, enslavement and/or disregard for the poor. There will always be resistance to that. Moslems know the American History of and proclivity to genocide, and it is antithetical to their faith to yield to such.How do we convince a huge minority that hold Capitalist competitive advantage, and hide their "invisible hands" with obscurity and privacy, and either espouse or disingenuously practice disregard for their fellow humans, how do we convince them to reconsider and join in an effort of world unity?
Obama and the US need to do much work to reduce the US and Capitalist ally exploitation of the Moslem world, particularly the fossil fuel resource. For purposes of inter-factional peace, as well (pun intended) as to the domestic and worldwide survival and quality of life considerations regarding finite resources (most particularly oil), the USA must immediately commit to and undertake a program to reduce automobile usage by 80% over the next 20 to 40 years by implementing a demand side management and supply side reallocation plan, which would be a comprehensive socialist plan to rebuild all plans and reallocate goods and services so that all, or almost all, communities are "walkable" meaning that all folks can get what they need and reasonably want within walking distance of their homes. In most of the country, particularly environs further west, this will require substantial REBUILDING of neighborhoods. Think of the massive jobs and equity opportunities, domestically, and the opportunity to increase the quality of life for all, especially our least fortunate, while setting in motion a massive relief of tension that contributes to discord in the Middle East and South Asia, the unfair thievery and thuggery involved in the USA Geopolitical activities concerning the oil resources in that part of the world.
Face it, Mr. President, and have the courage (and I know you have the grace) to address the gluttonous squandering of such a precious natural gift (fossil fuels) and convince the people of the USA that we must fundamentally change course from a genocidal, ecocidal, suicidal "standard of living" paradigm to one that incorporates equity, inclusion, humanity, quality of life, sustainability, and PEACE...
With much love and care,
Mike Morin
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Comparative Economic Systems - Worker Ownership and Control
It has been a long time since I studied Comparative Economic Systems (in the 70's) and, needless to say, much has changed in the former Soviet Union sphere, and not much was ever known and/or documented in the "Western world" about "economic systems" in the Peoples Republic of China and in Cuba and other places. Much of what we hear or ever heard about changes in China, especially since the passing of Mao must be filtered through the lense of Western propaganda. With respect to Cuba, we get both reactionary Capitalist propaganda and eutopian socialist propaganda (such as the organic gardening and farming movement).
With regard to China we get charges of "State Capitalism", with respect to Cuba, we get promising reports of cooperative communitarianism in action.
Suffice to say, there is no perfect model, nor in a dynamic world rife with the horrors and continuing horrors of human history, could we expect such.
I hope that there are people on this list that remember and understand more about the economic systems in the second (Soviet sphere) and third (China, Cuba, and others) world when they were functioning at their best and their deterioration and/or adaptation in relation to the Capitalist pressures that have been applied. Such could lead to some interesting discussion and perhaps, at the risk of losing my ultimate cynicism, move us forward towards world unity in the hope of realizing an economic democracy.
From this point on, I want to discuss attempts to democratize the economy in the Capitalist world. There have been attempts at succession in the form of utopian communities such as New Harmony and various others that I can't remember to name. There have been attempts to compete, with mutual organizations (one person/one vote), the most salient being credit unions (which are very far from exemplary because they are in the business of making loans (reduced usury is still usury in a Capitalist Financial System which is fundamentally usurious)) and mutual insurance companies, which by their very existence in the Capitalist system have to compete for "investors" and therefore, and by definition of the workers' cooperative, can only hold Capitalist portfolios (for-profit companies).
There are marketing cooperatives, consumer cooperatives, and producer cooperatives (not really owners' cooperatives because they are (or were?) found mostly, if not exclusively, in the farming sector and it is well known about the history and existence of the dominance of the credit sector relative to farms. Such producer cooperatives really can't be considered workers' cooperatives because of the nature of their relationship to wage labor (particularly burdened by seasonality).
There appears to be an effort, if not a tiny minority of success of workers' cooperatives, in Capitalist Europe, Africa, South America, and Asia. I say this because of the existence of offices of the Internaional Cooperative Alliance in these areas. I have no other evidence.
A very famous recent experiment in economy of scale has been the Mondragon Cooperative Society in the Basque Region of Spain. Suffice to say, as they continued to expand, they ran into non-cooperating Capitalist pressures, coupled with the overall deteriorating economic conditions in the Capitalist world, it has caused them to buckle; to compromise their ideals, and to begin to experience business failures.
In the United States and elsewhere, Corporations sometimes offer Employee Stock Ownership (ESOP) Plans to workers, thus making workers into small-time Capitalists. Such workers probably tend to hold these relatively small holdings closely. So, if the Corporation is faring well then the workers reap some of the benefits of being Capitalists (dividends and to a much lesser extent profit-taking on speculation and equity trading). In the past twenty years or so, particularly in the Midwestern United States Capitalists have negotiated increasing use of ESOPs in lieu of wages to sell obsolete capital to workers (including management).
There have been some initiatives to organize workers into workers' cooperatives in the failing mill regions of northern New England to sell the obsolete capital to the workers' cooperatives. Semi-fortunately, they were repeatedly advised by a Consulting Group in Boston, not to buy. However, when the mills closed they were left out of work.
In a quasi-syndicalist "movement" by Labor Unions in Capitalist Europe, the Unions in some countries bargained for or legislated equal representation with the Capitalists on the Boards of Directors of Corporations. This is called co-determination. In the United States, the only known or well known instance of Union Representation on a major Board of Directors was ONE SEAT given to the UAW as part of the US Government bailout of Chrysler (before they were bought/merged with Mercedes).
Mike Morin
With regard to China we get charges of "State Capitalism", with respect to Cuba, we get promising reports of cooperative communitarianism in action.
Suffice to say, there is no perfect model, nor in a dynamic world rife with the horrors and continuing horrors of human history, could we expect such.
I hope that there are people on this list that remember and understand more about the economic systems in the second (Soviet sphere) and third (China, Cuba, and others) world when they were functioning at their best and their deterioration and/or adaptation in relation to the Capitalist pressures that have been applied. Such could lead to some interesting discussion and perhaps, at the risk of losing my ultimate cynicism, move us forward towards world unity in the hope of realizing an economic democracy.
From this point on, I want to discuss attempts to democratize the economy in the Capitalist world. There have been attempts at succession in the form of utopian communities such as New Harmony and various others that I can't remember to name. There have been attempts to compete, with mutual organizations (one person/one vote), the most salient being credit unions (which are very far from exemplary because they are in the business of making loans (reduced usury is still usury in a Capitalist Financial System which is fundamentally usurious)) and mutual insurance companies, which by their very existence in the Capitalist system have to compete for "investors" and therefore, and by definition of the workers' cooperative, can only hold Capitalist portfolios (for-profit companies).
There are marketing cooperatives, consumer cooperatives, and producer cooperatives (not really owners' cooperatives because they are (or were?) found mostly, if not exclusively, in the farming sector and it is well known about the history and existence of the dominance of the credit sector relative to farms. Such producer cooperatives really can't be considered workers' cooperatives because of the nature of their relationship to wage labor (particularly burdened by seasonality).
There appears to be an effort, if not a tiny minority of success of workers' cooperatives, in Capitalist Europe, Africa, South America, and Asia. I say this because of the existence of offices of the Internaional Cooperative Alliance in these areas. I have no other evidence.
A very famous recent experiment in economy of scale has been the Mondragon Cooperative Society in the Basque Region of Spain. Suffice to say, as they continued to expand, they ran into non-cooperating Capitalist pressures, coupled with the overall deteriorating economic conditions in the Capitalist world, it has caused them to buckle; to compromise their ideals, and to begin to experience business failures.
In the United States and elsewhere, Corporations sometimes offer Employee Stock Ownership (ESOP) Plans to workers, thus making workers into small-time Capitalists. Such workers probably tend to hold these relatively small holdings closely. So, if the Corporation is faring well then the workers reap some of the benefits of being Capitalists (dividends and to a much lesser extent profit-taking on speculation and equity trading). In the past twenty years or so, particularly in the Midwestern United States Capitalists have negotiated increasing use of ESOPs in lieu of wages to sell obsolete capital to workers (including management).
There have been some initiatives to organize workers into workers' cooperatives in the failing mill regions of northern New England to sell the obsolete capital to the workers' cooperatives. Semi-fortunately, they were repeatedly advised by a Consulting Group in Boston, not to buy. However, when the mills closed they were left out of work.
In a quasi-syndicalist "movement" by Labor Unions in Capitalist Europe, the Unions in some countries bargained for or legislated equal representation with the Capitalists on the Boards of Directors of Corporations. This is called co-determination. In the United States, the only known or well known instance of Union Representation on a major Board of Directors was ONE SEAT given to the UAW as part of the US Government bailout of Chrysler (before they were bought/merged with Mercedes).
Mike Morin
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
