For me, EU referendum raised a question which nobody has so far asked, namely: if there was a case for a referendum, isn’t there a far stronger case for worker democracy?
Many of us were appalled by the atrocious standard of debate in the referendum. Robert Harris called the episode “the most depressing, divisive, duplicitous political event of my lifetime.” Perhaps Thatcher and Attlee were right: referendums are a “device of dictators and demagogues.”
Which brings me to the question. If you think the referendum was a good idea, you must surely think worker democracy is a far better one. I say so for three reasons:Worker democracy would be either social democracy or democratic socialism, with government of, by and for the people.
Stumbling and Mumbling
For worker democracy
Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle
9 comments:
There is one government within a nation - usually.
There are lots of businesses - all running with different management systems. And you can choose which one you want to work for - within reason.
As usual that's the bit that Chris misses. You don't have expert led systems in a government because that like having one company that does everything - a monopoly led by madmen with power over everything.
Similarly there is a reason you don't have a democratic army.
I notice the "Given that the case for worker democracy is obviously so much stronger than the case for a referendum, how can anyone who favoured having a referendum oppose worker democracy?"
That's another of the logical fallacies that seem to have become very popular amongst Chris's class. It's a riff on "not all Leavers are wacists, but all wacists will vote Leave".
It's almost like they believe that identity politics tricks actually have any effect outside their little clique. Rather than just being laughed at for their crudeness and obvious sophistry.
Worker democracy can mean democracy in the workplace, one workplace at a time.
Government CAN'T be of, by and for the people since the government subsidized usury cartel holds the economy hostage.
Let's end that hostage situation by allowing inherently risk-free accounts for all citizens, their businesses, State and local governments, etc. at the central bank and by abolishing government-provided deposit insurance and other privileges for the usury cartel.
Then, at the end of government-provided deposit insurance and other privileges for the banks, all remaining deposits at the banks shall be, by definition, at-risk, not necessarily liquid INVESTMENTS, not co-mingled with necessary day-to-day LIQUIDITY.
Worker democracy can mean democracy in the workplace, one workplace at a time. Bob
Except for hostile takeovers financed with government-subsidized private credit? Or if the co-opts join the oppressors themselves once they achieve so-called creditworthyness?
Privileges for the banks have to go. There's no way around it nor should there be any way around it.
Worker democracy cannot work if labor does not have higher bargaining power over capital.
For more democratic structures to have a chance at workplace people needs to have alternatives to "just starve".
In other words: JG and/or BIG or a combination would be the first start. There is a lot of business that survive because the threat of unemployment and sub-employment. In a reality where this was not the case people would be able to leave business which they don't like and vote with their fees for better management styles.
For more democratic structures to have a chance at workplace people needs to have alternatives to "just starve". Ignacio
Debt and wage slavery have a common cause - government subsidies for private credit creation including implicit subsidies such as the failure of monetary sovereigns to provide accounting and transactions services in fiat for ALL their citizens, not just usury cartels.
We are in agreement. I might add that having a charter helps a co-op stay on track and not 'sell out' to a private single entity when the co-op is successful.
Venezuela is prime territory for coops presently...
Post a Comment