House of Paine

plant dreams of the nice guy's finish first type

 

here's a beauty  .......

patty cake crap like this is less then useless 

unfortunately
i lack the energy
 to blister the fucker 
as well as it deserves
oh for a tenth part
of great karls seemingly
 boundless 
and utterly tireless 
urge for combat  


=============================



"the task of the party 
is not to invent 
some fashionable method 
of helping the workers.....
 we must  join
 the workers’ movement 
and  assist  
in the struggles
 they have already 
          started themselves"
                  sam webb's lenin 


=================================

 well mates

 heres some
 of them
 
 "fashionable methodz" 
---------------------------------

`AFTER
CAPITALISM' BY DAVID SCHWEICKART
                       ( ein flea kracker extra-ordinaire) 

as reviewed By 
   Carl Davidson
             (SECOND WAVE 
                SDS BIG FOOT turned maoite 
                  turned radically progressive fatuity turned ...
                                               turner )

-----------------------------------------------------

 " David Schweickart
 has given us 
 an excellent breakthrough 
in finding the road 
to a new
    socialism 
        for the 21st century"
   -------- a new socialism 
new road maybe but new socialism
what the hell does that mean ------------------

 Using both practical
and ethical arguments


------------ ethical arguments ?
           like what? greed begatz misery ?------

 his main objective 
is to take on
the neoliberals'
        `TINA' argument


`(T)here (I)s (N)o (A)lternative'
                  

He convincingly shows
 there is at least 
one alternative

 a `successor system'
 that he calls 
`Economic Democracy.'"

----------------------------------
" Schweickart's 
Economic Democracy alternative 
          is
a working hypothesis,
 and not
 a rigid or doctrinaire
                      model 

-well thats refreshing..---


While rooted in historical materialism

-------- hmmm dialectics iz omitted here why?------------

Schweickart's
 Marxian notions 
   of science
---aaahhhh marxian ie marxicocal not marxist
hence no dia-mat just histo-mat ----


 are more in tune
 with the `open systems' 
           and critical instrumentalism 
                          of modern pragmatism

   ------- labels here betray a silent critique ----------

 He casts a wide net 
to draw lessons from practice

---seeking truth from facts? -----------

from the failed Soviet-led 
                    command economies


---------- notice more burger type labeling
command economy buy that label and new socialism 
  must mean 
               "no plan worth a damn"   -------------


 to
 the ongoing surge
   of China's market socialism

--- what now thats socialism?
old or new?  ------

     to the new smaller
        and more tentative projects 
in Spain's 
Mondragon Cooperatives
 and 
Brazil's 
Worker's Party projects
   ---------- new and tentative these are praise words 
                                     one guesses----
 He uses all these as resources

 but he returns 
to American soil 
to work out 
his basic ideas and proposals"

---- ok so does this mean
   he's a first world first roade ?  ------------
------------------------------------

" `Successor-system theory
 Schweickart explains

 `is meant to be theory
   with practical intent'

 --- holy cow this is a map to the ttreasure
           not just another fucking
                 tinker bell wish list----
          

 'If it cannot offer
 a plausible projection 
as to how we might get
from here to there
 successor-system theory
 remains
 an intellectual exercise 
in model building'
  ----this is "too" stupid ------------

 interesting 
in its own right
 perhaps
 and
capable of providing
 a rejoinder
 to the smug apologists 
                  for capital
-- drafting up
"a nice place we can't get'
how is that  a rejoinder 
to those saying 
ok this iz a capitalistic nightmare
but face it 
 it's " the best" place we can "actually" get to ?------
   
 but useless 
         to people trying 
                  to change the world."

----------- indeed and 
whats even more true
          two plus two = four --------------

---------------------------------------------
" So what is `Economic Democracy'?

 The core idea:
 
 workers themselves
 democratically elect
 the managers of their firms

 ---- like rankers  elect their union leaders
                     hows this new by the way ?
or is this just first world oriented agitprop ?--------------


They also 
share the wealth
they create 
by sharing 
the profit among themselves

------------- hows thiz a big whoooooooooop ?
               universal    profit sharing 
is there some quantity into quality thing i'm missing here?
   whats the split between base pay and profit share?
whats the range of realistic risk  ?

who's sez the wagelings want this? --------------


They make their money
 the old-fashioned way:

 by finding consumer needs 
meeting those needs 
with decent products 
and selling them
 to satisfied customers 
                      at
                       reasonable prices"


------------- this sanctimonious earned it
 shit betrays a mind that once
  entertained  the plan road and looks back with shame -------------


-----------------------------------------
But how are things like 
costs, prices,
 new products 
        and
production goals determined? 

Here Schweickart departs
from traditional socialist conceptions

 he affirms 
the primary role
 of the market 
rather than relying on
nationally centralized planning 


------------ jesus if this were 1956 ok 
but market guided socialized firms
   is  older then  fidel's  green hat----------


 What to produce 
is
shaped mainly 
by consumer demand

 what to charge for
products 
or services 
is determined 
by competition 
for market share 
with other worker-controlled 
            or private enterprises
  --- zing "private enterprises "?
what manner of  craft be these mates ...------------------


 pay  
is limited
by what's left over
 after total costs 
are deducted from
           total sales
---- christ more commercial addition and subtraction ---------

 
What about ownership? 

--watch things merk up here ---------


Each Economic Democracy plant 
or
workplace 
is controlled 
by each respective group of workers

 but the firm 
is not owned by each particular group 

The firms are socially owned
 by the public at large 
--- property of the whole people 
               my god how does this work?--------------

Because of this public ownership
 the local workers 
      are also required 
to meet the cost 
of paying into two funds

 a depreciation fund 
to be used locally 
          by the firm 
for capital expenditures
        --------- wait who figures this out ?
                     are the kids gettin to keep it
in the plant 
  they just  can't
          cut it up 
         take it home to momma ..?----
 and 
a government-controlled 
capital investment fund
 
This latter payment
is in the form 
      of a capital assets tax 
             also added
             to the firm's costs 

  ---why a tax why not a  loan?
they can pay off 
why make the social accumulation fund a function of some screwy "valuation" (using  book or replacement or whaever  )
 accumulation has no needed conection to any value
 the existing productive system might have
           the credit system can provide all the fu8nds needed
     and loan em out why jazz this up more then that ----------
In a sense 
the work  place 
is leased
by the workers 
from the government

----- well why not lease it then? 
a steel plant like an oil tanker why not ----------

 But what's left
after all the costs are met
 the profit
 the workers divide
   among themselves
 as they see fit 

 ----------- ok now thats got its possibilities 
  but what if the insider majority
    rigs up  something unfair to the rest 
ok they can leave but god is that kool??-------


The depreciation
 and capital assets taxes
 that the government 
takes in 
is used 
to finance 
new enterprises
to maintain 
and develop infrastructure projects 
and
other costs 
     spread across
              the whole of society


----------- no other taxes no loans no stock 
no red  wall stret type flexible commanding heights

just firms households and the state ? -----------------------

That's the bare-bones model


========================================

 Naturally
 it has further implications 
and raises many more questions
 
not the least 
of which 
is how we get 
from today's
 globalized capitalism 
to the `successor system'
 of Economic Democracy   

In the course 
of the book,
 Schweickart addresses a good deal
                      of these problems 
but for some issues
 he has only hints
 or open possibilities

Here are some 
of the critical
 implications 
of his theory

1. Labor is not a cost
 as it is under capitalism

Rather
 labor gets its return 
from the local profits 

This means 
there is no pressure 
to keep the workers'compensation low
 Just the opposite
 ----- to wage max or profit max?
there will be conflicting "roads" here----------


the pressure 
is for the local workers 
to produce good quality
 desired products
 efficiently
 since 
that is the best way 
to gain better profits
 and  thus 
a better share for each
                      of them

--------- this is way too abstract
not a hairs width beyond 
the co op thinking of the victorian era --------

2. Firms are under no pressure 
to `expand or die'
 as they are under capitalism

  --- non sense if there are 
          technical scale effects ------------

 If the workers produce 
and sell 
to a share 
     of the market
 that gives them
 a comfortable living
 all they need to do
 is maintain it over time 
---- love that "all they need to do" shit
    try the real market world on for size pal------
            
If the firm grew 
its market share 
simply by
adding more 
and more workers 
to produce 
more and more products
 to sell

---- ya but there are no proportional results 
in real world expansions ------------

 Each worker 
 would still receive
just  about the same 

  ---- true diff here
  since 
this further  expansion under
      private capital 
produces "leverage"
if the number of  exploiters
dosn't expand as fast as the work forces hours 
the capitalist gets to  exploit  more workers 
but thats not what forces the system forward ....----------


Economic Democracy's tendency,
 then,
 is to maintain 
small and medium-sized firms
 supplying more local and regional markets
 rather than to expand into
                larger firms 
             reaching a global scale

--- this is pure small plants iz my green dream 
                        non-sense
   market comp drives technical progress
scale effects abound in tech change up and down
the pressure to operate at highest possible levels to spread the nut 
the cap system need not rely
on subjective "profit  greed" 
the nut spreader gets it done 
along with the chronic over capacity in any real 
comp market
that makes markey sharing among firms
                         a vicious struggle------------

3. Worker-controlled firms 
do have an incentive 
for technological innovation 
but differently 
than under capitalism 

They will want 
to increase productivity 
per worker
 but not to eliminate workers
 except perhaps through attrition


--- non sense non sense 
 " cut  out those ass holes"
   bitz
 will run thru the job site
like a fold out  thru a locker room-----

 They will, however,
 want to eliminate drudgery
 but in a way that enhances 
                    and upgrades
 the skills 
of all workers
 --- jesus we'll be angels 
in those days 
lets get at that  revolution -------

and/or 
         in a way
              that shortens 
                  the working hours per worker
  ---- maybe not maybe the majority 
will want to hog all the work time they can grab---------

But they
will not want 
to enhance profits
 via automation 
at the expense of themselves 
as the current system 
  works now
---- see what non sense 
this all is
fulfill this poke's 
fairs fair wish  mr Gin 
and watch what a mess we get in 
but i'd love the scrap 
so go for it ------------


4. Inequality will exist 
in worker-controlled firms
but not to the degree 
of the huge inequalities 
between CEOs 
and production workers 
under capitalism 


-------- really?
 no stars 
like in sports and hollywood 
no rain makers no instant cred guyz
no turn around kings 
selling themselves to the highest bidder
" i'll get you all diamond studded  shorts " --------


To keep
especially good 
or skilled workers and managers

--------see above wally -----------


 or to account for 
the difference  
between new and older workers

--------- what? seniority why ?----------
 
the factory council 
will likely
 give some categories 
a greater share 

----- whos to say what the majority will do ------------



Otherwise a competing firm 
may lure them away 

--------- again think this all the way thru pokes------------ 

But the varying compensation packages 
will be set
 by a process 
         of one vote per worker 
                    in the enterprise
--------- fuck one wager one vote 
thems the rules what ? by law ?
wheres your worker control 
oh but there are universal rules 
the slope feels slide- able to me now ----------

 This creates a different
 and more restricted dynamic 
than the current setup
--- really ?------


 where decisions are made 
by management
          arbitrarily 


----- not profit guided you mean?----


or by stockholders 
            with one vote per share
                                of stock 
                              with vast differences 
                     in the amounts of
                                    shares held per voter

--- point here is
 the disregard of  wagery's welfare as people 
in pursuit of higher profits
fine
but the wagery majority might prove even more savage -----------

5. Entrepreneurship 
will be  encouraged 
under Economic Democracy
 but in a different way

 Groups of
              individuals with projects
       for new products or
enterprises could apply 
to the government's capital
                     investment fund 
and its subsidiaries
 rather than
relying on venture capitalists

---- jesus why ?------------

 If approved 
as risk worthy 
socially appropriate 
and capable
 of generating
               new wealth 
      the project would be funded 
   with a grant not a loan

---- double why?
grants are a bold face 
 patronage  system 
  we have too many of them all ready
take basic science funding....
despite what the goo goos may think ...
well no lets keep on topic here
 best principle here iz still:
the state invests the peoples money 
           expecting 
      to get paid  back plus 
this  is the sensible
         basis 
helping to enforce 
 social responsiblity on both sides
          the loan system needs expansion
 not replacement with feudal grants -------

 The grant
      however 
would become 
part of the new enterprise's 
              capital assets 
             and hence taxed
                        over time

---- big deal tax interest payment whats the diff -------------
 
assuming the project is successful 
The creators 
of a successful project 
could pay themselves
 a startup fee 
for launching 
a successful enterprise

--- my god founders capital reborn -----------------

 but afterwards
 would only be compensated 
if they were a worker 
or working manager
--- thank god no perpetual  free ride 
here 
except the self paid start up fee
paid out over a life time say or maybe ....
again whats the diff-----


 Straight-up capitalist entrepreneurs
 can apply to the capital assets fund
 or even raise money privately
 and make money from their ventures
 (subject to being taxed, of course)
 Under Schweickart's model
 however
 a capitalist firm, 
when sold, 
must be sold to the state

---  hotel socialism 
      you can check in 
 but you can't check out ---------- 

6. All information about a firm 
and its finances is open to all workers
 in the firm,
 unlike the many restrictions
 on information 
needed for decision-making
under capitalism. 

This way, workers can make 
informed decisions 
via direct democracy 
in periodic assemblies,
or through the managers 
they choose to hire or fire
 as
their representatives
------- the see thru enterprise means more then this
it means we all get to see the whole deal
no more hidden card games like  poker
 only open above board games like chess-------

 Workers can also 
still have
their unions
 to settle problems 
with management
 and to
work on larger social issues
--- belts and suspenders
seems the creatrix here 
fears the new
 and as a back up 
wants to keep the old ------

Schweickart offers only 
a brief concluding chapter
about the strategy and tactics
of getting 
to economic democracy

  
it is
quite flexible and open
 but he mainly discusses 
two
possibilities:

1. A political party 
      of popular
 and economic democracy

could win a majority
 of the electorate
 and take a majority 
of seats and positions 
at all levels 
of
government

 The new administration
 would decree
economic democracy 
by passing laws 
and executive orders
that would nationalize
 stock and redefine corporate
                             charters 
with varying degrees 
              of compensation

------------- pure social democracy 
wheres the diff
                 are these   new ideas really ?----------------


2. Economic democracy,
 including its firms and
political groupings
 could be grown over time
               as an
expanding counter-hegemonic community
 within the existing order
 Step-by-step
 it would demonstrate 
its superiority
 to the old way
 of doing things
              competing
    over a longer period 
within a mixed system 
but as a growing force
 that ultimately would supplant
                         capitalism
--- now we really have the da da da
     a counter sector 
now we really are back to victorian co-ops
wind power 
green re-villaged
 intentionally  miniscule 
circle jerkery ----------------
 
(theres here interjected
a  carl davidson third way
i'll paraphrase roughly 

 at a time of old regime-state collapse 
perhaps 
 triggered by a particularly
violent economic spasm

---- those fucking contradictions of capitalism --------

hardened cadre 
of the 
revolutionary
 Economic democracy party
would lead the way 

with the slogan
' all power 
to the  plant level councils'

abolish the parley- gubmint 

and thus 
 resolve 
the crisis and
put the country 
  back on its feet again

--- i think this may already have happened before...--- )

===============================

(klown time side bar)

" Systems with  elite
privileged groupings
 Schweickart calls `polyarchies'

Since that accurately describes
 our existing order
Schweickart bluntly states

 `we do not live in a
                        democracy"

--- say no more bro-----

====================================


 The practice of participatory
democracy in the workplace

which is
usually punished
 in today's world
would
likely stir political participation 
and a multiparty
system in the political realm
           of the broader society
 ---- notice the pure class free pluralism here -----------


==========================
back to 
more carl der yammer 

"Schweickart stumbles a bit 
 on the `safety net' issues 
of guaranteed full employment
 and the guaranteed annual income

'Jobs or
Income Now'

as the old slogan declared

 One problem is
that these reforms 
often receive substantial opposition
within the working class itself

----- no they don't only grants 
just for the askin' got trashed ----------

 `Guaranteed Jobs' 
          is
often seen as `make work' 
that creates nothing of value
and drains public resources 
--- monstrous falsity
wagery
 has no such category as make work
vs real work
thats a cap distinction 
based on whether theres 
a profit angle or not
job rights are a fear
 of the caps 
cause they need the rau
to keep wage shares down
and job effort and hours up ------

`Guaranteed Income' 
        is
only supported 
for the physically disabled 
but opposed
as a subsidy 
for slackers and freeloaders


---- oh my god
 what a pander 
to the dark side of wagery
the wpa worked ass hole
and wagery never objected to it even for a moment 

believe me
 work free no show jobs
are not a necessary
problem when "the state"
hires the jobless remnants
shit "the state"
can  make you "work ie sweat "
  for your wage like nobobdy else 

check out an alabama  chain gang

america's  gulag --------------


======================

so carl proffers 
goo goo  dribble
that might well back fire ...

(One alternative solution 
to these reforms
is the concept
 of the `social wage.'

Here anyone who creates social value 
would be able to
obtain a subsistence level
 of financial support

say
$18,000 per year. 
--- jesus ---



the idea is that value for society
can and is created in realms 
that reach beyond the job
market

--- public goods?-----

 Students learning in schools 
for instance
-- lend em the money ----


create value in the form 
of their skills;


---sure so they pay back the loan----

 
caretakers of
young children 
create value 
in raising the next generation
 of producers and creators;

--- sure in a day care center not at home -----
 

teaching sports
in the parks creates
 value in the form of public
wellness and health,
 and so on  

Third sector nonprofits
can set the base standards 
for what constitutes social
value
---- why not goose up
the npo's employment levels
with matching funds
and vouchers etc

you know  
stay the fuck 
out of 
 public goods production 
where ever possible  
npo-ngo's are no diff in this regard 
            then profiteer outfits 
why not handle em 
             the same way -------------



 but the social wage package 
would be low enough
and on a sliding scale
 to always reward 
regular part-
time or full time employment

 Since full employment 
is
not naturally built into Economic Democracy
 this would
be an important supplement 
to regular employment)
---------- a rau substitute
no jobless hell here
like under capitalism
only a socialist  
   benign purgatory
a basement to the  market job tower
where one gets 
a modest stipend 
for work not valued 
 by the market 
===========================

how does Schweickart 
relate Economic Democracy
to the broader problems 
and conflicts 
of globalization?

Our country
 after all
 exists in a world 
of savage
inequalities 
between North and South,
 and a reverse flow of wealth 
         from South to North
--- what !
our country "exists" 
in 
a north south world 
fucking hell 
we created this fucking world
 for fuck sake...----

Schweickart points out
 first of all 
that since
Economic Democracy 
has no `expand or die' dynamic
 it
has better conditions 
for a more progressive 
and
democratic foreign policy

--- if one means no ' market driven urge' to trade 
internationally
     this is non sense-----

 If anything, 
it has a bias
toward promoting
 Economic Democracy elsewhere
  ----- help me here ...---------


-------------what follows next 
is the usual big apple  circus parade
i include it
only for your evenings enjoyment-------------

 Schweickart goes on
 moreover, 
to promote 
a number of
measures to help reduce 
the North-South divide 
that
have been around 
for a few years

the
Green Tax to price commodities 
at their true social
 and
environmental impact costs

 Carbon Taxes
 to deal with
pollution 

stock transfer taxes 
on the global financial
transfers

 Even if petroleum alone 
were priced at
its true cost 
it would change
 the price differentials
between 
North and South
 due 
to the higher 
or true cost
        of transport

 `Free Trade' is often 
riddled with hidden
               subsidies

---- beyond parody -------------

-- but now here's something "new"...----------

Schweickart
 offers a new and controversial
solution 
that he calls
 `socialist protectionism.' 

Here
our government would 
put a tariff 
on U.S. importers 
to
raise the price 
of imported goods
 to be competitive
with goods produced here

 Nothing new here 
but what
Schweickart wants to do 
is to remit the tariff
 not to
the US treasury
, 
but to the country 
of origin 
to
improve conditions there

hence `socialist'
protectionism

It's an interesting idea 
as it transfers
 some wealth
from North to South

 But the devil 
is in the details

Who would get the remission? 

The Third World
governments? 

The local unions 
or NGOs?

the third workers
themselves?

-------- obviously these guys don't think much 
about the exchange rate solution 
in a pangloss world
the tariff is un-necessary cause
the deficit trader sees his currency fall till the deficit is gone 
one hopes this is swift often and immediate 
now it never is 
deficits widen for years and 
the adjustments are torturously jagged
under my command it would be different 
of course trade deficits would be liquidated 
like kulaks cow herds ----------------

[by the way
  David Schweickart is 
professor of philosophy 
at Loyola Katho-lick 
              in Chicago
 and "holds" Ph.D's 
"in both"
Philosophy and Mathematics ]

------would that this pangloss 
held advanced degrees 
in not just 
the hack world but 
the real  world  too -------------