Worker's Cooperatives

[Le People]

1. Are they revolutionary in nature, or a pipe dream of idealistic leftists?
2. What kind of a hassel does one go through in starting up one? The internet articles I have found pertaining to them are quite thin.
3. Is there any in the Washington D.C Metro Area?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Depends what business they're in. If they're into food banks, cultural societies, sports and other recreational clubs, funeral homes for the poor and the like, then they're worthwhile.

If it's another agricultural or manufacturing endeavour, then as a means of organizing the working class it's politically pointless.

[RED DAVE]

1. Are they revolutionary in nature, or a pipe dream of idealistic leftists? A pipe dream if you're thinking about politcs. Okay if you want slightly cheaper, better food, but don't confuse this with revolutionary action.

This idea goes back at least to Proudhon. The only modern differnce is that people seem to think that they can be some kind of an organizing tool as opposed to some kind of counter to capitalism within capitalism. There is no evidence that they serve as either one.

All kinds of coops were set up in the 60s, some of them large and well organized. Where are they now on the political scene?

RED DAVE

[anticap]

Just remember that while a co-op may do away with exploitation internally, it still has to go out onto the market in search of a slice of the profit pie, and that slice will have been extracted from other workers.

[bobroberts]

You might want to check out "For All The People (http://books.google.com/books?id=R6yOplR56RwC&lpg=PP1&ots=uBesiOgaPj&dq=%22For%20All%20the%20People%22%20john%20curl&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false)", a new book about the mostly forgotten history of the cooperative movement in America.

They are not useless in fighting capitalist exploitation, and should not be discounted. Generally they are more egalitarian, more socially responsible, less exploitative, and more efficient than a capitalist owned business and demonstrate the ability of workers to manage themselves. Whether or not they are revolutionary would depend on the situation and the attitude of the workers.

I work in a co-op that was started in the 60's, in one of the most liberal parts of the US, and most of the people there are leftists, some as far left as I am. The problem is that there has never really been a mass movement towards co-operatives to begin with, it's just tended to be something established out of necessity or by people with a sense of social justice trying to make a living. I also doubt most of the people who currently belong to a co-op understand what makes them different, or something to support, in a sea of capitalist owned businesses. They kind of seem like a red-headed stepchild of leftist politics, and that's unfortunate. They have the potential to be a stable source of political activism and could play a supporting role in labor struggles.

It is hard to start a co-op, at least in the USA, because capitalists own all the money and have nothing to gain by providing loans to start one. Generally they start small with investments from the community to fill a void that is not profitable enough for a regular business to fill, and gradually grow bigger, die off, or get bought out by a corporation.

[Bitter Ashes]

After I've learnt to drive I'm hoping to set up a cleaners' co-op here in West Yorkshire. The logic behind it is that without all the managers stealing the produce of our labour we'll be able to raise our salaries, cut costs so we can undercut the capitalists and not have managers barking at us all the time.

Of course, there is the fear that the bigger cleaning agencies can just run at a loss to undercut us further, which we couldnt really match unless we started booking our hours as overtime or something and not pay ourselves for it until we kill off the capitalists. Doesnt sound too inspiring does it?