Re-imagining Socialism

[MarxSchmarx]

"The Nation" is an American reformist magazine. In their coming issue they have a debate about how socialism should engage with the "economic crisis" by, surprisingly, non-authoritarian socialists:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090323/ehrenreich_fletcher
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090323/solnit?rel=hp_currently

I suppose they have their reasons for omitting the Trots and Maoists and Hoxhaists, but I think both articles raise good points.

For instance Ehrenreich and Fletcher come out and say that:


with both long-term biological and day-to-day economic survival in doubt, the only relevant question is: do we have a plan, people? Can we see our way out of this and into a just, democratic, sustainable (add your own favorite adjectives) future? Let's just put it right out on the table: we don't.Solnit responds that this is an unfair characterization:


We have thousands of them, being carried out quite spectacularly over the past few decades, for gardens and childcare co-ops and bicycle lanes and farmers' markets and countless ways of doing things differently and better. The underlying vision is neither state socialist nor corporate capitalist, but something humane, local and accountable--anarchist, basically, as in direct democracy. The revolution exists in little bits everywhere, but not much has been done to connect its dots. I think this last point by Solnit is very poignant. Despite some well-known efforts at cohesion (Alternate Social Forum), theoretical and historical efforts at justification (e.g., Graeber's monograph), and innumerable zines and websites, these attemps seem unable to move beyond a rut - even when partnered with the more established labor unions or peace movements.

Why is this?

Perhaps the problem is our old friend, sectarianism. But most of these movements are not particularly concerned with a correct line, although some do have a "holier than thou" attitude.

Indeed, the apt analogy to the impotence of these movements is not to the impotence of this or that Stalinist sect that argues over what should have been done in April 1943. The apt analogy is to the sectarianism of craft unions - workers organizing by trade rather than as workers - and how this leads to their weakness.

And many of Solnit's examples, such as farmer's markets, are less than inspiring. What Solnit's fails to address is the broader context in which these institutions exist - indeed, fast food joints dwarf urban farms, and at the rate we're going it will take life times before they even register on their blip.

What are people's reactions to these? What should we do as activists going forward? Do keep in mind "The definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result".

[Die Neue Zeit]

Comrade, before I write further, there is a historical precedent that needs repeating (precisely because it hasn't been repeated since the German revolution) - the centrist strategy:

USPD vs. KPD: lessons for organizing today (http://www.revleft.com/vb/uspd-vs-kpd-t103415/index.html)

Solinit is a plain lifestylist, although one not nutty enough to say "let's establish a remote commune." Meanwhile, the movements, because of their very nature, cannot put the pieces of the puzzle together, let alone pose the question of power (which requires addressing the puzzle).

On the other hand, Ehrenreich and Fletcher have yet again led their readers down the wrong alley. For example, the work of Cockshott and Cottrell isn't "utopian":

http://www.revleft.com/vb/jules-guesde-lenin-t102192/index.html


Despite the general impression that "scientific socialists" refused on principle to describe the concrete details of the future society, Angenot has discovered that during the period of the Second International, they did exactly that, continually and at great length. Party spokesmen felt the need to provide these detailed descriptions of socialist society in order to rebut continual attacks on socialism's lack of realism and to provide the militant with a concrete final goal. These descriptions are not packaged as novels in the manner of earlier utopias but rather are hedged about with appropriate qualifications (only a scientific hypothesis about probable future trends, etc.).

In regards to sectarianism, a lot of left groups pretend to pose the question of power in spite of their inability to put the pieces of the puzzle together.

[AvanteRedGarde]

Perhaps anarchists are so fixated on the purity of the means, that they have historically failed to meet their end- all around social transformation.

Many anarchists see the writing on the wall, anarchism is not an ideology for widespread social transformation, i.e. is not revolutionary. Outside an 'anarchist' solution, they end up voting democrat.

Moreover, why is it surprising that the Nation, a reformist magazine, would feature self described libertarian-whatevers. Anarchism has never accomplished a revolution, it ends up channeled into social democracy anyways. Its a perfect match.

[bobroberts]

It is because the people involved in the "little bits of the revolution", from co-ops, to farmer's markets, or whatever, are by and large ignorant of socialism, much less the different schools of thought behind socialism, although they might be aware of the politics behind the different issues involved with each. The people involved in these movements aren't impotent, they just aren't unified under a common political goal.

[The Feral Underclass]

Anarchism has never accomplished a revolution, it ends up channeled into social democracy anyways. Its a perfect match.

Both of those points are ridiculously inaccurate.

[Bilan]

Perhaps anarchists are so fixated on the purity of the means, that they have historically failed to meet their end- all around social transformation.

That is slander, and, outside of any substance, is also trolling.



Moreover, why is it surprising that the Nation, a reformist magazine, would feature self described libertarian-whatevers. Anarchism has never accomplished a revolution, it ends up channeled into social democracy anyways. Its a perfect match.

Heh, kind of like the SPD. :lol:

[cyu]

Despite some well-known efforts at cohesion (Alternate Social Forum), theoretical and historical efforts at justification (e.g., Graeber's monograph), and innumerable zines and websites, these attemps seem unable to move beyond a rut - even when partnered with the more established labor unions or peace movements.

Why is this?

To me, the answer is easy: lack of control of the mass media. Like it or not, information just doesn't go very far if it doesn't make it in the mass media. Britney got married in Vegas? Suddenly everybody knows about it. Some pro-athlete got caught doping? Suddenly everybody knows about it. Various alternatives to capitalism that can save the world economy? Almost nobody is talking about it.

If you want to get people talking to each other and connecting, you have to assume control of the mass media.

Of course, being influenced by anarchists myself, I'm not calling for control by state officials any more than I'm calling for control by corporate CEOs.

I would put content decisions in the hands of the electorate. If 25% want to talk about workplace democracy, 35% want to talk about workers' self-defence, and 40% want to talk about marine agriculture, then 25% of the news stories should be about workplace democracy, 35% about worker's self-defence, and 40% about marine agriculture.

[Mike Morin]

I had a subscription to the Nation for awhile many years ago, although just the title of the publication is repugnant.

Back in those days, I did not understand the "madness" that was emanating from their writers' pens. Possibly because of the absurdity, hostility, and oppression of being Socialist in the Capitalist Empire City.

Now, judging from the quotes supplied by MarxShmarx, the new staff has "lightened up" some and are making appeals for reasonable approaches to the crisis that has been with us all along (probably to a large extent explaining the "madness" of the earlier crew). The reasons for the shift, aside from the probable shift from socially radical to socially liberal writers, is that the crisis is now starting to hit the rich, and the rich have voice.

Ehrenreich and Fletcher ask, "do we have a plan?"

I do.

It will be difficult to summarize such a comprehensive Plan that has been evolving for 39 years (since reading the "Communist Manifesto" when I was 16 years old), but I will attempt to summarize it in two posts to follow, "Financial Systems and Property Ownership Reform", and "Demand Side Management, Neighborhood Redevelopment, and Transportation Planning". These posts are more long term in that it will take some time to get the wheels of transition in motion and the change will certainly not be frictionless.

As for the day to day crisis, let the rich cooperate with the transition plan, let them collect un-employment compensation, let them collect their FDIC, FSLIC, etc. government "obligations", let them have food stamps, and let them apply for SSI.

Certainly, do not mistake the essays to follow to be a fully comprehensive statement of the Plan.


Mike Morin
Peoples Equity Union

[Mike Morin]

Reforming Financial Systems



With respect to the "nature of wealth", I think that the "quality of life" paradigm in lieu of the "standard of living" paradigm needs to be stressed.

"Quality of life" includes personal happiness for self, family, friends, neighbors, and all others. It includes ownership opportunities for all and everybuddy having the things they need, including health, healthy and loving relations with family, friends, neighbors, and all the people of the world. It includes peace on earth, and it includes a future for all the children of the world.

"Standard of living" implies maximizing the consumption of things.

The current Capitalist dominated system is dysfunctional both from an equity/fairness and economic and natural resource sustainability perspective.

The dominant paradigm in Capitalist financial business operations uses something called the discount rate which assumes that money will be worth less (eventually worthless) in the future, thus creating a necessity to extract profits exceeding a "hurdle" rate leading to unfair and unwise exploitation of both workers and natural resources, and to rampant inflation.

The use of credit is not a good business or personal practice. In business, it should be discouraged because creditors have first claims on net revenues and hold liens on real property and capital assets. For "consumers", the use of credit is unwise because the system is set up to extract profits from interest thus assuring that when consumers use credit that they are losing money relative to inflation. Certainly the current foreclosure crisis in the USA is ample evidence of the inflation and the unfairness and unhealthiness of the mortgage lien process.

Credit Unions and Mutual Insurance companies are in theory attempts to institute non-profit economic democracies for their respective industries. However, because of the need to compete for customers, both of these relatively progressive financial service organization types are forced to play the same game that is basically destructive to individuals, families, communities, and the natural environment. Ideally, credit should only be used as a last resort, much more preferably not at all. We should replace all aspects of the extant financial system with an Equity Union. In some ways, a mutual insurance company is similar to an equity union. However, because such companies are required to realize profits in order to compete for "policy holders" (really investors), the companies that comprise the portfolios of the mutual insurance firms cannot be not-for-profit, can not be mutual organizations themselves.

In a not-for profit Equity Union financial services system based on principles of mutuality working in concert with ethical, wise, knowledgeable, and intelligent community, inter-community, inter-regional, and worldwide planning there would certainly be an important role for financial service workers.

A major impediment to such an Equity Union would be the competitive advantage of the current financial sector and the fear of the friction of change to those individuals and organizations. Dealing with this sector of "the" economy, it would be more feasible with regards to Capitalist resistance and more humane, to orderly and peacefully transition to an Equity Union, coordinated with ecologically sound economic planning.

I am writing and talking about transitioning slowly, methodically, and with the minimum amount of friction and hardship from a dysfunctional financial system, based on self-interest, to one designed to benefit everybuddy.

At risk of understatement, it will take a huge amount of work to educate folks to the need and benefits of such change and to communicate the basic Plan. Transition Planning will also be a very difficult process, but I see no alternative to the current, impending and worsening global economic, political, social, and natural environmental collapse.

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.

We must replace the current equity trading systems, corporate conglomerate corporations, insurance companies, and usurious banking systems of the Capitalist status quo with a worldwide Peoples' Equity Union with branches in every community/neighborhood.

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



Housing and Property Ownership


Concurrent with financial systems reform, discussed in a previous essay where equity sharing and not-for-profit equity investing would replace the current financial paradigm of for-profit equity investing, equity trading, and usurious credit arrangements, we need to evolve to a different system with respect to residential and other real property occupation arrangements.

In lieu of rent or leases, people should be allowed to acquire equity in their abodes and business properties. For example, in the case of an apartment, if one paid $500 per month to a property management firm, let's say $50 per month would go to property maintenance, and another $40 to administration fees, insurance, etc. This would leave the resident with $410 of accumulated equity added to their account each month. If we had a large cooperative housing organization (preferably world-wide, and preferably the only form of property ownership) then when someone had to move or wanted to move, they could take their equity with them to the new property.

With regards to mortgages, they are horribly usurious and should be banned. The scenario related above would also replace the current system of financing "home ownership loans".

A huge problem that we are facing now is the terrible inflation in the market values of real property (and capital assets, for that matter). If we pooled our equity, pooled our assets, and collectively wrote off our liabilities, then we could significantly write down the market values of real and capital assets.


Mike Morin

[Mike Morin]

Demand Side Management, Neighborhood Redevelopment, and Transportation Planning

I would like to address the supply side scenario for energy production based on assumptions of economic growth requiring an increase in the use of energy.

The trouble with focusing on supply side economics and energy is that they both ignore demand. In relation to economics, the lack of effective demand for the plethora of consumer products will prove to be the downfall of this past generation’s experiment with supply side economics. With respect to energy, we must recognize that demand side management is critical to any possibility of a sustainable future. Liberal economics (laissez faire, the so-called free market) cannot deal with the problem(s). We need a planned economy to effectively retrofit the infrastructure and to rebuild our communities to be walkable, therefore eliminating the terrible daily waste of oil/energy resources for transportation purposes.

I have to differ with rosy scenarios regarding the contribution that photovoltaics can make. I’m not an electrical engineer or an electrician, but it is my understanding that PVs don’t have the oomph (be it voltage, amperage, and/or wattage) to contribute very significantly to the current and recommended increased usage of electricity. Sure, PVs and wind might be able to contribute to lighting applications and a few very high efficiency appliances, but they can not power our transportation, industrial, business, and home heating and air conditioning, hot water, agricultural inputs, refrigeration, drying, and cooking needs.

We could go full throttle to the building of nuclear power plants, but I am highly leery of their toxicity and safety issues. Even if we pursued the path of electrification with the maximization of nuclear power, it will require a tremendous overhaul of our transportation infrastructure, and other applications currently met by oil products, coal, and natural gas.

First of all, nuclear is not a “free market” technology. Government programs paid for most of the resources for development of such. Then, there is the waste issue. Is it not the Federal Government who is going to or proposing to pay for the waste depository at Yucca Mountain (Nevada)? Also, there is the issue of bringing back the so-called Price-Anderson legislation. This was legislation in which the Federal Government provided insurance for nuclear power plants and related operations. No private insurer would underwrite the risks, thus the Feds had to step in.

Perhaps a better scenario could be realized if we started very soon with a planned economy that focused first on economic and energy demand side management and also retrofitted infrastructures with respect to very scarce and relatively clean (I view carbon resources, if appropriately used, to be cleaner than nuclear) energy applications.

The potential for solar thermal hot water is immense. Imagine all hot water demanding properties on the planet equipped with such devices. Imagine all the (community/worker owned) jobs involved with the production, installation, and distribution of these units. I list distribution last, because all efforts need to be made to maximize the localization of such production and installation, as well as any other products for which going towards relocalization may be possible (e.g. food).


Passive solar design combined with electronic environmental sensors and controls (also relevant to solar water heating and weatherization projects).

However, priority to upgrading housing and housing ownership conditions for the poor should take precedence over these type of projects.

Relocalization is part of the plan (and not just for food). Instead of reversalism, the term that the author Staniford has coined as being emblematic of the relocalization paradigm, let me offer the following "re" words that imply a gradual evolution to a future which incorporates the best of the past, for your consideration, response, and action.


Reformation

Little to no beneficial change will occur without an almost religious change from the paradigm of economic growth and standard of living to one that emphasizes community redevelopment and quality of life. This is an important educational component of an alternative ecological economic plan.

Reorganization

If we can be successful and realize the educational/reform component, the next (concurrent) step is to reorganize to one of cooperative (or at least partially so – we will probably need to compromise on the divide between one dollar/one vote and one person/one vote as the dominant paradigm of economic organization) communitarian local and regional economic entities, at least until the day that we are all nearly equal in terms of ownership of the means and goods of production and distribution. How to assure the transition from inequality is problematic. However, as the entire economic system begins and proceeds to fail, those wealthy seeking to avoid total financial ruin will welcome the opportunity to accept the quality of life paradigm, foregoing their opulent, ostentatious, enslaving, ecocidal, genocidal, and suicidal "standard of living" modus operandi.


Reallocation

We need coordinated regional planning agencies that agree on the fundamental mission of a global ecological economy that have the three basic pillars of equity, humanity, and sustainability. These “planning” agencies would work together and with the local/regional economic entities to determine how resources are allocated to and within communities based on the relocalization paradigm and other governing principles. The vehicle, That I envision here is a Peoples’ Equity Union with “branches” in all communities/neighborhoods.



Restructuring

Many communities will need to be physically rebuilt to make them liveable and walkable (i.e. new urbanism, retrofitting residential communities built in the oil/automobile age by renovating, building or otherwise appropriately employing community economic and cultural centers making necessities and other important quality of life amenities, available to all within walking distance of their homes Also such a plan should include housing and other built environment improvement and ownership opportunities for all. Included in such a plan would be neighborhood work stations which would aid in the ability of office workers to telecommute in their occupations as we transition from a supply-side nightmare to a sustainable, equitable, and quality of life economy.

Imagine all the jobs!

But jobs are not enough, restructruring equity arrangements and reallocating resources in an equitable, humane, and ecological manner need to be a fundamental part of the plan.

Reduce

Reuse

Recycle.


With respect to electric vehicles, my thoughts are that they may be a small part of a longer term solution and probably restricted to rebuilt/walkable urban and suburban neighborhoods for the use of the elderly and/or infirm. The top priority with respect to fossil fuels and other energy resources is demand side management. The chief priority in planning the role of the automobile is to reduce automobile use by 80% in the next 20 to 40 years. We are currently burdened by a terrible oversupply (including owned and overstocked inventories at factories and dealerships) of fuel inefficient and poorly designed internal combustion vehicles. If these vehicles weren't so poorly designed, there could be a significant opportunity to convert a minority of them to hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles. But they are very poorly designed. Perhaps the current population of vehicles should be deconstructed and parts reused or recycled. New vehicles should be exclusively, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric, except maybe for long-term transport and work vehicles..

There could be tremendous amounts of work generated by the reconstruction of neighborhoods and the rearrangement (read reallocation) of production, distribution, and communication systems to make them neighborhood friendly. In addition, a great potential for work lies in the field of deconstruction of transportation and related infrastructure adaptation. Parking lots could be torn up and converted to community gardens. Streets (and rail systems) could be torn up and converted to walking and bike paths and others altered to be less wide, restoring the liveability of housing located on these very noisy busy passageways. Parking garages could be torn down and replaced by mixed use developments. Highways could be dedicated mostly to bus travel, long distance transport, and perhaps some, if not many, of them torn down and reclaimed as natural and agricultural land. For automobile usage, it would be optimal to encourage the development of car-sharing cooperatives. All vehicles left in use must be quiet, and all vehicles slower (with the exception of busses, trains, and long range transport). With respect to transport and distribution systems (and production systems) relocalization and neighborhood telecommunications (including teleconferencing facilities) should be the major goal, greatly reducing the need for long-range transport.





Another Iteration of “the Plan”
There is No Alternative to Socialism



We need some perspective.

Fossil fuel use is about 150 years old and automotive use about 100 years old. Look how absurdly, the personal automobile dominates our life and is destroying any hope for a future.

We need to deal with more than incremental adjustments from the modern automotive age. If we want to continue the many benefits of precious fossil fuels, the many opportunity costs of those fuels, to personal automobile usage, then we need to set as a goal (here in the USA) and realize it, to reduce the use of the personal automobile by 80% in the next 20 to 40 years.

It is not encouraging, because Obama explicitly stated the other day that the automobile is such an important part of American history and culture and needs to remain so. This is a statement of a myopic politician beholden to special interests.

If you've never lived in the Northeast (USA) where much of the city, town, and village centers were built before the automobile, it may be hard to imagine a future with the greatly reduced automobile use, but it is very possible and absolutely desirable.

The key is the walkable neighborhood. That is, neighborhoods for everybuddy where everyone can get what they need within walking distance of their residence. This will take a major shift in the way that resources are allocated and products distributed to communities. The major over-supply side mall outlets (for those products and services that have utility) could become regional warehouses and older town and village centers, where they exist could be explicitly brought back as outlets for these products. Where the town and village centers do not exist, such as here out West (I'm in Eugene, Oregon), where the mindless assumption of the automobile has led to the mindless, endless residential districts with their equally alienating and squandering strip malls and malls, communities could be rebuilt (think of all the jobs) to provide community centers and outlets.

Of course, this will not happen in the absence of a complete commitment to neighborhood/inter-community/inter-regional/worldwide ecological economic resource planning and allocation and redevelopment.

This Plan is too bold for American Politicians. This Plan is Socialism. With advances in communications technology, much progress, in the development of community centers, could help greatly increase the amount of tele-commuting that could help people work from and/or near their homes.

The resource allocation issue could be handled with a reformed economic system, an equity union, with a "plan and implement" modus operandi for economic operations. Reforming the financial system to take the fundamentally inflationary Capitalist aspect of "discounting the future" (i.e. assuming that money in the future will be worth less) could lead to a system of ecological economical redevelopment where only true growth in wealth would occur and be shared and could occur under the aegis of a mission emphasizing peace, equity, humanity, quality of life, and sustainability.

Removing the gluttonous oil resource use by the USA and Capitalist automotive oriented allies would slowly rescind the need for the hegemonic occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and the world acting in concert would stand much better prospects for peace.









The Ecology of Redevelopment


A big part of my redevelopment plan (aside from the financial systems reform) is the REBUILDING of neighborhoods to make them liveable, and walkable for the necessities of life (that is, assuming a goal of a much less harried pace than today, but also assuming that people will have responsibilities, obligations, and desires). Such a plan would include a massive education program in retraining workers and training in youth in the building trades. Human resource management would be utilized to try to maximize the match between where the primary contractors/instructors and student/workers lived and the neighborhood building projects.

Communities would be rebuilt to emulate mature ecological systems, in that they maximize the efficiency of energy and resource input into the community so that once resources enter a community, they stay in the community for the maximum amount of time possible. Once all communities are sufficiently rebuilt (a timeline of 20 to 40 years?) under such guidelines, they would evolve to ongoing day-to-day and maintenance communities and the amount of heavy labor required would decrease and the amount of leisure time increase greatly. Again, (day-to-day and maintenance) workers would be employed in, surrounding, and/or as close to their residency as possible and it would be a priority for real and capital assets to be owned by the workers and the community patrons who ideally would be one and the same. The Neighborhood Equity Union would replace credit unions and of course, other forms of financial institutions. Parks and gymnasiums would be an important part of the plan as leisure time increased and the healthy aspects of physical labor decreased.

Concurrent with rebuilding, and the reallocation of production and distribution resources, would be efforts to make office, communications, knowledge and intelligence based labor into primarily home and/or neighborhood based vocations. Occasional travel would be necessary and desirable, but quiet bus and train travel and car-sharing cooperatives could be employed to fill this need along with family visit and recreational needs and desires. With respect to the former, extended families would be encouraged to reunite geographically.

Mike Morin
Peoples' Equity Union

[Rawthentic]

sorry to derail this thread, but, tat, do you think anarchists have ever made revolution?

[benhur]

sorry to derail this thread, but, tat, do you think anarchists have ever made revolution?

Anarchists ARE the revolution.