|
-
Economic Democracy
As socialists,
we believe that political democracy
alone does not go far enough. In fact, with great inequalities of
wealth, political democracy itself is threatened and sometimes negated.
As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis put it, “we can have democracy
in this country or we can have great wealth in a few hands, but we
can’t have both.”
Many of the fundamental decisions that affect us
everyday are made not by representatives chosen at the ballot box, but
by executives in corporate boardrooms who are answerable to no one
except capital. Workers should not be contributing their labor to the
domination of capital, but to their own collective benefit.
Concretely, this
means:
1. Public ownership of (at least) the commanding
heights of the economy. One example we have currently is that of public
electric power, which has consistently been cheaper than electricity
produced by investor-owned utilities (IOUs). These economic sectors
should be democratically controlled by the communities they serve.
2. Joint worker-consumer control of the economy. This
does not mean a takeover of small business and family farms. Our goal
is worker-consumer ownership and control. They family farm is an
example of worker ownership in the present economy, but control is in
the hands of food corporations, and banks, who establish prices and
credit, and often drive small farmers off their land. In our modern,
post-industrial society, we will also need to find ways of realizing
democratic control of the means of communication.
The embryos of some of the institutions that would form a socialist
economy already exist in today’s economy. Such places as producer
co-ops, consumer co-ops, and worker collectives provide suggestions and
experiments on how a socialist economy might work on a larger scale.
The multi-industry Mondragon Cooperative, for example, is a major
factor in the economy of the Basque region of Spain.
Capitalist enterprises alienate workers from their work in several
ways. One way is the production of goods for profit, not use. This
leads to the production of useless goods, followed by a psychological
manipulation of the public in order to create a “need” through
advertising. Production without regard to the consequences leads to
environmental despoliation and arms races between nations.
Two examples of production
for profit, no need, in the current system are:
1. The failures of drug companies to develop or
manufacture “orphan drugs” – drugs that treat diseases so rare that
there is no profit in their production. Even though drug companies have
the highest rate of profit of U.S. industry, the Reagan administration
had to sign a bill giving a tax break to drug companies before they
would agree to make such drugs. (And the companies still opposed the
legislation!)
2. The disappearance of trolley cars. Trolleys in an
age of energy shortages could be a cheap, clean, energy-efficient way
of moving people around our larger cities. We don’t have trolley cars
in most U.S. cities today because during the late 1940’s and early
1950’s, General Motors bought up the trolley car companies, not to run
them more efficiently, but to tear up the tracks so they wouldn’t
compete with CM cars and buses.
A socialist economy would be based on production for use. “What makes
the most profit” but “What do we need?” This would be possible because
the people making decisions would not be a few rich executives in
corporate boardrooms, but representatives of society as a whole.
An economy based not on competition but on human need would be able to
plain how to prevent the crises inherent to the capitalist system.
Frederic Engels in A Critique of Political Economy put it this way:
The law of competition is that demand and supply always strive to
complement each other, and therefore never do so…If demand is greater
than supply, the price rises and, as a result, supply is to a certain
degree stimulated. As soon as it comes to the market, prices fall; and
if it becomes greater than demand, then the fall in prices is so
significant that demand is once again stimulated. So it goes on
unending – a perpetually unhealthy state of affairs…The economist comes
along with his lovely theory of demand and supply, proves to you that
“one can never produce too much,” and practice replies with trade
crises, which reappear a regularly as the comets.
A socialist economy could plan collectively and democratically how much
of whatever needs to be produced. There is disagreement among socialist
about how centralized this would be. Some Socialists still see a place
for a market, as was present in the decentralized self-management
collectives in Yugoslavia.
The ultimate goal of Socialism is to create a classless society, with
no rich and no poor. Everyone will have equivalent relationships to the
means of production. This doesn’t mean absolute equality – there may be
pay differentials based on need and type of job. But everyone’s
fundamental needs will be met, and no one will get rich at the expense
of others. Society will be structured along the line of the old slogan
by Louis Blanc, “From each according to his or her abilities, to each
according to his or her needs.”
For this goal to be reached, a new ethics will have to be cultivated,
in which cooperation replaces competition and conflict. Some people
will object to this as “contrary to human nature.” Many socialists (and
anthropologists) believe that human nature is not set in stone, but
rather that it is a product of our environment. As Dorothy Day, founder
of the Catholic Worker movement, put it, “ We want a society where it
is easier for people to be good.” Even if we were to accept that humans
are evil by nature, is this a reason for society to cater to such
instincts? This seems an argument for murder, rape, and slavery as much
as for competition or war. But we need not deny self-interest in
advocating cooperation. We need to equate self-interest with class
interest and ultimately our survival!
In doing so, we will need to identify what Marx called “false
consciousness” – the tendency of the working class to mistakenly
identify its interests with the interests of its rulers, and the
widespread belief that “anyone can get ahead in this society.” In fact,
the odds are four to one that you will die in the same social class in
which you were born.
What the Socialist
Party Believes
Working Class Unity
Class Consciousness
Internationalism
Socialist Feminism
Ecology
A Multi-tendency
Organization
Defining
Democratic Socialism
Strategies for
Transition to Socialism
Tactics/Organizing
Socialist Party
History
-
|