Rediscovering Lenin

Phil Gasper writes on Rediscovering Lenin.

Gaspar argues that Lenin was not an elist as portrayed in Western propaganda, rejects the two (2) arguments raised by leftist critics of Leninist parties:

The first argument is that Leninism has always been undemocratic and elitist. The second argument is that it is implausible to think that the experience of Lenin and the Bolshevik Party that he led to power in the Russian Revolution of 1917 has any relevance for anti-capitalists today operating in completely different circumstances.

Gaspar argues that Lenin saw:

… the whole point of a revolutionary party was to prepare the way for revolution. Historical forces might present the opportunity for revolutionary change, but without active organisation and intervention, the ability to influence a mass movement during a period of intense crisis, and an understanding of when to advance and when to retreat, the moment would be lost. More than that, socialists would have to spend years patiently engaging in smaller struggles, both to learn how to lead as individuals and to build a party with the capacity to lead a successful revolution in the future.

The core tenet of the Leninist theory of the party is:

…the principle of democratic centralism, which he summed up as “freedom of discussion, unity of action”. Lenin argued for the need to “work tirelessly … to see to it that all the higher-standing bodies are elected, accountable and subject to recall”.

Gaspar concludes that:

The bottom line is that revolutionary organisations today need to draw on the most democratic elements of Lenin’s legacy, and where necessary to create new structures and processes of their own. Democratic centralism requires not just formal democracy before unity in action, but a culture of debate and discussion, where those in the minority can express their views fully.

Read more!

Kotok on Gold

Barry Ritholtz reposts Kotok on Gold.

Kotok argues that:

…gold still maintains one important characteristic out of the three that we attribute to a functional currency.

These three (3) characteristics Kotok describes as:

1. “…the ability to exchange easily in transactions”
2. “…act as a unit of account, a method of measurement”
3. “…store of value…”

Kotok argues that only third characteristic applied to gold these days. And it is in this characteristic that the fall in the gold price can be accounted for:

In pressing Cyprus to sell, Europeans have announced to the world that there may be a large seller of gold. World traders in gold and other commodities will quickly jump on that trade. They know that if Cyprus breaks loose with the sale of its gold, countries like Greece, Portugal, and Slovenia may be next. They cannot see buying gold, thereby raising gold’s US-dollar-denominated price, in such a circumstance; but they can see selling it short, or otherwise trading it to the downside.

Kotok speculates that the stated intention by the Bank of Japan to buy gold mat eventually force the price of gold back up, but the main price driver seems to be the fear of the retail investor about what is happening in Europe.

Gold is also a consumer item in that it is used in electronic devices for wiring, and in jewelery.

Kotok's characterisations of gold all stem from its first one. The historical ability of gold to be used in exchanges between people allowed it to become money.

Although it is possible for me to exchange oranges for apples, I may not be able to exchange apples for toilet paper. However, I could exchange oranges for gold, and then exchange the gold for toilet paper. It is this general acceptance by people in making exchanges that turns gold into money.

Because gold can be readily exchanged for any commodities that I desire, I can make comparisons between different types of commodities in terms of how much gold I could exchange for the commodity. So, the ability to be exchanged for any commodity makes gold a unit of account.

Since gold is not perishable as copper or apples or oranges or toilet paper, gold can still be exchanged for commodities at some future time. Thus, the store of value is merely the anticipation of an exchange for commodities.

So, we have a contradiction due to the historical process of gold ceasing to be money in general circulation, but retaining the possibility that it could become money again sometime in the future.

Read more!

Some Thoughts on Worker Control

Some thoughts on worker-control under Capitalism.

The examples cited in yesterday's post about how Occupy Sandy boosts worker-run coops amid rebuild are really sparse.

Except for Spain and Venezuela, the other examples are about workers who have been forced out of the Capitalist system by the closing of businesses, and they are filling a gap in the economy that the Capitalists are unwilling to fill.

My concern has been about the lack of political education that has occurred in these cases. The difference in Venezuela seems to be that the political ideological is driving the change to worker-control, instead of workers taking control because they have no other choice. There the education of the workers seems to be proceeding along with the take-over of businesses.

Read more!

Occupy Sandy boosts worker-run coops amid rebuild

Peter Rugh writes that Occupy Sandy boosts worker-run coops amid rebuild.

Rugh gives a brief overview of worker-run co-ops around the world, especially in the coastal neighbourhood of Far Rockaway in New York City:

One of those bigger projects is a worker-run cooperative initiative, organised by Occupy Sandy and supported by the Working World, a group that specialises in incubating collectively owned businesses.

The initiative is well suited to Far Rockaway because worker-run enterprises have a history of flourishing in environments of economic distress or political upheaval.

In 2001, when Argentina defaulted on its international loans and the country’s ownership class fled, Argentines took over abandoned factories and established networks of producers and distributors.

In Venezuela, worker-run cooperatives were at the heart of the vision for 21st-century socialism, and Hugo Chavez’s administration helped create tens of thousands of collectively owned businesses over the last 14 years.

Most notably, Spanish workers in the Basque region created the Mondragon Corporation, the world’s largest federation of cooperatives, during the Franco dictatorship in the 1950s. Today more than 250 enterprises operate under the Mondragon banner. The federation, which spans 77 countries and employs 83,000 workers, has been widely praised.

As noted yesterday, Australia is beginning to see some progress in the adoption of worker co-ops.

Rugh argues that one important, immediate advantage of work co-ops is that:

Worker-run cooperatives, in contrast, could offer a way for community members to sell the products of their labor without selling their labor itself — a shift that would keep capital within the community and cash in the pockets of workers.

On the political development of workers' consciousness, Rugh writes that:

Richard Wolff, professor of economics at the New School and author of Democracy at Work, a study of cooperative businesses, argues that forming cooperatives can be the first step in enacting a sweeping social and economic shift.

Wolff envisions a transformation, similar to the social shift from feudalism to capitalism, in which cooperatives replace corporations and goods are distributed through a democratically planned economy.

The cooperatives that Wolff talks about, and the ones that Occupy Sandy is aiming to establish, are more accurately known as worker self-directed enterprises: businesses that organise democratically collective ownership at the point of production.

I would think that Wolff is naive to believe that the Capitalists are going to let the worker co-ops take over without a fight. As I noted in Argentine Factory Wins Legal Battle:

The main problem is that of dual power in Argentina. Some factories are controlled by the workers but they are relying on the Capitalist state for legitimacy through the parliamentry system. This deprives the workers' movement of a growth in consciousness in the hope of accomodation within the Capitalist system.

Unfortunately, one cannot accelerate the education of the workers about the Capitalist system, and the mythologies that are maintained about it. The workers will learn at their own pace.

Read more!

Worker-owner sustainable industry one step closer

Susan Price writes that Worker-owner sustainable industry one step closer.

Price writes that:

After a successful crowd-funding campaign that raised the funds for a manufacturing licence, Earthworker Cooperative Australia and Eureka’s Future Workers Cooperative will install their first solar hot water unit in Melbourne on April 15.

Australia definitely lags behind the world with development of manufacturing co-operatives. Australia does have a history of co-operatives in agriculture (especially dairy farming, and sugar cane), and financial institutions (credit unions, and building societies).

It will be interesting to see how this co-operative develops in the future, and how the workers develop their consciousness about their place in the Capitalist system.

Read more!

Class Hatred and Bad Memories of Thatcher

Juan Cole muses on Class Hatred and Bad Memories of Thatcher.

Cole reports that:

The hatred for the late Margaret Thatcher, former British prime minister, among a broad segment of the British public has manifested itself in visible and undeniable ways in the week after her death, but these are not highlighted on American television. The status quo corporate media are afraid of admitting that policy-makers who favor the rich and punish the middle and working classes are deeply hated by the latter. Dead leaders have to be represented on television as being revered by the entirety of the public (an imaginary public for which the corporate anchors can serve as ventriloquists). That many Americans despise Ronald Reagan is likewise an unmentionable on the airwaves.

The ideologocal state apparatus cannot deviate from the illusion that the neo-liberalism made Britain better. They must educate the under-class to correct thinking.

Read more!

Lose Your House, Collect $300

Ted Rall wonders why Why Aren’t Rioters Burning Down the Banks? in Lose Your House, Collect $300.

Rall reports that:

The foreclosure scandal helped spark the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Promising justice and compensation for the victims, President Obama’s Justice Department joined lawsuits filed by the attorneys general of several states.

Last year, Obama announced that the government had concluded a “landmark settlement” with the banks that would “deliver some measure of justice for those families that have been victims of their abusive practices.” The Politico newspaper called the $26 billion deal “a big win for the White House.” $26 billion. Sounds impressive, right?

Rall calculates that were about five (5) million people affected by these illegal practices by the banks. Most will get between $150 and $300 on average (assuming an average of two (2) people per household). The average for the overall settlement is $1,000.

Rall asks:

Why aren’t those five million people stringing up bank execs from telephone poles? It’s gotta be the Paxil.

I suppose it is the trained passivity of Western Society. Even the Occupy movement was heavily influenced by the non-violence mantra. This is probably why it faded from the scene. There is only so much that non-violence can achieve.

The basic premise of the non-violence is that the system can change peacefully and incrementally. But no system can contradict its core philosophy, and survive.

For Capitalism, the capitalists' return of investment has to be protected. Banks invested in these mortgages, so they should get their money back. This settlement is a small price to pay to let enough anger out of the system so that the thievery can continue unabated.

Rall is really appalled at:

But what really gets me is the 53 families who are getting $125,000 payouts for losing homes they were 100% up to date on.

Rall should realise that the only property rights that matter in a Capitalist system are those of the Capitalists which the state has been realiably protecting. The cops were protecting the stock markets and banks, not the homes of the workers.

Read more!