Parecon?

[rakasha]

I've come across a few references in the lit to Participatory Economics, but can't find the straight dope on what it actually is. Can anyone here enlighten me? Is it just a rehash of council communism?

[InTheMatterOfBoots]

It's a modern variant of mutualism and as such draws from some aspects of the anarchist tradition, e.g. workers councils and self-management. But not communist at all really. Most argue for some sort of democratic control of the economy via co-operatives, credit unions etc. The mode of exchange would still be essentially capitalist in character though, i.e. the trading of commodities on a regulated market. No free exchange according to need, as a council communist would advocate, but according to "effort" and "sacrifice" in work.

[KurtFF8]

I'm not too sure that a market is what is argued for in ParEcon. If you take Michael Albert's book, for example, he spends quite a bit of time criticizing markets (including Market Socialism).

He argues that ParEcon is indeed a planned economy, just not a "centrally planned" economy. I would argue that it is in a sense "council communism" but with some differences and ParEcon is certainly socialism.

[rakasha]

So it's a wiki-economy of sorts?

[Hoxhaist]

has participatory economics been practised anywhere? are there any parties that support it?

I've never heard of it???

[InTheMatterOfBoots]

I'm not too sure that a market is what is argued for in ParEcon. If you take Michael Albert's book, for example, he spends quite a bit of time criticizing markets (including Market Socialism).


To me "the market" is about exchanging forms of alienated labour, whether goods produced from labour or services or otherwise, no matter how regulated that might be.

[rakasha]

So it's a wiki-economy of sorts?

[Hoxhaist]

To me "the market" is about exchanging forms of alienated labour, whether goods produced from labour or services or otherwise, no matter how regulated that might be.
markets seem to lead to exploitation because someone always seems to end up on top and the others get the shaft

[InTheMatterOfBoots]

So it's a wiki-economy of sorts?

It does have some central planning mechanisms (although I believe that they are meant to be democratically accountable). Similar in intent to Proudhon's mutual-credit bank.

[el_chavista]

Paths Toward an Anti-Capitalist Liberation
November 11, 2005 By Chris Spannos
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/5041

Participatory Economics
A participatory economy is comprised of social rather than private or state ownership; nested worker and consumer council's and balanced job complexes rather than corporate hierarchy; remuneration for effort and sacrifice rather than for property, power, or output; participatory planning rather than markets or central planning; and self-management rather than class rule.
The balanced job complex is a redefinition of our concept of work. Basically, jobs are organized so that everyone has an equal set of both empowering and un-empowering tasks. Jobs are balanced within each work place and across work places. Balancing jobs within work places is done to prevent the organization and assignment of tasks from preparing some workers better than others to participate in decision-making at the workplace, or what would be the result of our standard work place corporate division of labor. Balancing work across work places is equally necessary so that disempowering and menial work places are not ruled by empowering ones. The outcome of the participatory balanced job complex is that everyone has an equal share of both desirable and undesirable tasks, with comparable empowerment and quality of life circumstances for all.
Another key element is remunerative justice, or pay for effort and sacrifice. This method of pay insures that unequal outcomes are not produced and reproduced, due to ownership of the means of production, bargaining power, output, genetic endowment, talent, skill, better tools, more productive coworkers, environment, inheritance, or luck. Of all these factors people control only their effort. So, effort and sacrifice is the remunerative norm in parecon, tempered by need as appropriate in cases of illness, catastrophe, incapacity, etc.
Participants are organized into federations of workers and consumers councils who negotiate allocation through "decentralized participatory planning". Workers in worker councils propose what they want to produce, how much they want to produce, the inputs needed and the human effects of their production choices. Consumers propose what they want to consume, how much they want to consume and the human effects of their consumption choices. "Iteration Facilitation Boards" (IFB) generate "indicative prices", using both quantitative and qualitative information, which is used by workers and consumers to update their proposals for further rounds of iterations. The IFB whittles proposals down to a workable plan within five to seven iterative rounds. A plan is chosen and implemented for the coming year.
A participatory plan is a feasible and desirable choice distributing the burdens and benefits of social labor fairly. It involves participants' decision making inputs in proportion to the degree they are affected. Human and natural resources are used efficiently providing a variety of outcomes.

This is only a thumbnail sketch of a participatory economy. Further in depth reading and introductory material can be found at:

Life After Capitalism:
http://www.zmag.org/books/pareconv/parefinal.htm
Looking Forward: Participatory Economics for the 21st Century: http://www.parecon.org/lookingforward/toc.htm
The Political Economy of Participatory Economics: http://www.zmag.org/books/polpar.htm (http://www.zmag.org/books/polpar.htm)

[apathy maybe]

Not surprisingly, the idea has been discussed a number of times before.

The similar threads deal at the bottom of the page turns up:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/parecon-t15348/index.html a thread from 2003 with no responses.
http://www.revleft.com/vb/parecon-t51939/index.html thread from 2006
http://www.revleft.com/vb/parecon-t59471/index.html thread from 2007
http://www.revleft.com/vb/parecon-t91342/index.html thread from 2008...

Moreover, the following threads would have turned up in any simple bloody forum search...

http://www.revleft.com/vb/parecon-way-forwardi-t43979/ another thread from 2006

And most interesting:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/parecon-welcome-back-t18160/index.html?t=18160 thread from 2004, started by the venerable redstar2000, with the final quote from his first post being:

What then? If you want to dissent, you must ask permission or starve. If you want to live and work outside the system, parecon has laws for people like you

[rakasha]

Interesting. Thanks, everyone; I didn't mean to necropost or anything.

[Pogue]

At the London Anarchist bookfair there was a talk about it by a group called the Parecon society or something similar, so they have an organisation and are active. When I was listening to it, it basically sounded like anarchist economics without the political anaylsis. It was like dressing up the stuff we already know and re-selling it as something different and 'modern'.

[RebelDog]

It's a modern variant of mutualism and as such draws from some aspects of the anarchist tradition, e.g. workers councils and self-management. But not communist at all really. Most argue for some sort of democratic control of the economy via co-operatives, credit unions etc. The mode of exchange would still be essentially capitalist in character though, i.e. the trading of commodities on a regulated market. No free exchange according to need, as a council communist would advocate, but according to "effort" and "sacrifice" in work.

I've read Parecon and there are no markets, so what you are saying is false. Part of the reason I have a lot of time for Michael Albert is the fact he rails against markets. Under Parecon everyone would have access to a minimum amount of goods and services and ones income can be augmented through extra reward for doing undesirable or dangerous jobs forinstance. Resource allocation for industry and communities would be done by workplace and community planning councils made up of those it effects. Although I am not 100% in favour of Parecon I realise it has some exellent features based around an anarchist vision of the economy. Parecon would be an economic system democratically allocating according to need. If people have problems with the reward system I would ask them how they propose to destroy the division of labour and if they think coal-miners should work the same hours and be rewrded the same as office workers? We need to build alternative models and Parecon is on the whole an exellent attempt at doing that. Parecon was never meant as a rigid framework so workers and communities could tweak it to suit themselves. I think a mass movement for Parecon could well happen somewhere one day

[JimmyJazz]

markets seem to lead to exploitation because someone always seems to end up on top and the others get the shaft

was this intentional

[Hoxhaist]

was this intentional
oh sorry!:blushing: I had no idea how awkward that was when I was writing that!!