Simple guide to socialism

You're viewing a single thread.

88 comments

What does it even mean to own the means of production? How are decisions made? Big decisions can go to a vote, but what about small ones? I don't see how any organization can function without some kind of hierarchy. But the way you describe socialism implies that hierarchy can't coexist with socialism.
- Maybe the pirate ship system would work well.
  Every man got the same share except the captain (2x) and quartermaster (1.5x) and the doctor (1.5x) any of that position can be replaced anytime by a vote
  
  Aye, this be a fittin' trajectory for ye politics
  
  Maybe the base pay the same for everyone but and only do a multiplies on profit sharing.
- The socialist democratically owned company would still elect a CEO or something like it to make those kinds of decisions, and if they don't make good decisions they can be recalled by the employees to be replaced with someone else. The way I look at it it would be like how companies are currently but with all employees owning shares of the company rather then outside investors or the owner of the company. Atleast that's how I interpret it but there's probably a million different ways you could set it up while still having it be much more democratic then the modern structure.
  
  That is capitalism
  
  "Capitalism is when there's management"?
  
  Many of the contradictions and crises of Capitalism are still present even under worker coop models in a market economy. Surplus value is still extracted, that money must be reinvested in the business to remain competitive. Meaning the Tendency of The Rate of Profit to Fall Remains, meaning capitalist crises remain. Imperialist incentives remain, and a worker coop nation-state would be equally imperialist as one with private corporations.
  
  Profit falling leading to imperialism seems like its because of profit/expansion driven leadership which isn't impossible under a coop model but seems fairly unlikely and is more or less a certainty under a more undemocratic and authoritarian hierarchy under capitalist enterprises.
  In fact, one of worker coop's "weaknesses" is that they have a tendency to not grow at all, which has been suggested as a major reasons why they don't dominate our economy despite tending to be more resilient than conventional firms.
  
  Many of the contradictions and crises of Capitalism are still present even under worker coop models in a market economy. Surplus value is still extracted, that money must be reinvested in the business to remain competitive.
  Other than the end-state of communism, a stateless, moneyless society, I'm curious as to what you think counts as 'not capitalist'?
  Tendency of The Rate of Profit to Fall
  Lord.
  
  You run an explicitly anti-capitalist community and don't believe in the TRPF?
  Other than the end-state of communism, a stateless, moneyless society, I’m curious as to what you think counts as ‘not capitalist’?
  I think socialism requires an explicitly anti-nationalist character and the elimination of the commodity form. This looks like production with quotas (use-value), probably labor vouchers (but its not a requirement) and some form of worker ownership, like workers councils.
  
  You run an explicitly anti-capitalist community and don’t believe in the TRPF?
  Marx himself regard the tendency of the rate of profit to fall as an incomplete aspect of his theories. It's highly contested, and ultimately, while important to 'scientific socialism' conceptions of why capitalism must fall, is neither explanation nor justification for those of us who believe that capitalism should fall, but will not necessarily do so of its own inherent contradictions.
  Marx was a brilliant theorist, and we are all deeply indebted to his contributions to socialist thought - that's not the same as thinking that every idea he put forward, with the limited evidence available to him, and him operating as a positive trailblazer in the 19th century as an exile in a deeply hostile society, was absolutely incontrovertibly correct.
  I think socialism requires an explicitly anti-nationalist character and the elimination of the commodity form. This looks like production with quotas (use-value), probably labor vouchers (but its not a requirement) and some form of worker ownership, like workers-councils.
  I mean, again, though, that looks to me more like the end-state of communism. If that's all you're willing to accept as non-capitalist, that's fine, I suppose, but that's a very high bar to clear, and many want clearer intermediate steps which will create the conditions to implement that.
  Upvoted for having a reasonable conversation, btw, this is what left discourse is for

88 comments