Why does the Right acquiesce to negative stereotypes?

AngryHippie

The Corinthian wrote: »

Actually, coops are another example related to of this kind of model, so I wouldn't rule it out altogether.

I'm pretty sure Evergreen was the organization that Naomi Klein made reference to.

However, in all of the examples given, the environmental conditions for the foundation of the co-operative were either

• At the stage where the original enterprise was being closed (i.e everyone out of a job - Nothing to lose)
• At the stage where the enterprise was being closed, but there were mechanisms in place for the workers having first bid in a bankruptcy fire sale
• There was a benefactor organization who "gifted" the start-up resources to be run by the co-operative

Now I'm not saying that it's flawed, or not possible, all I'm pointing out is that a very specific set of circumstances involving either distressed businesses, or some no-strings philanthropy are required for it to come into being.

The danger of the first (which has been brought into law in Venezuela) is that workers unions, or disgruntled workers could effectively force a business owner to sell, with themselves as the only possible buyers. Again, I'm not waving a red flag, nor am I spewing forth about commies, but there are very real risks involved with enshrining that policy in law. How will it pan out, I just don't know, and unfortunately, I don't have enough reading time to find answer all the questions I have on the topic, but Boards being Boards, i'm sure someone will lob some answers and links to save me the search time...;)

The Corinthian

AngryHippie wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Evergreen was the organization that Naomi Klein made reference to.

I was responding to what you wrote, not anyone else.

However, in all of the examples given, the environmental conditions for the foundation of the co-operative were either

• At the stage where the original enterprise was being closed (i.e everyone out of a job - Nothing to lose)
• At the stage where the enterprise was being closed, but there were mechanisms in place for the workers having first bid in a bankruptcy fire sale
• There was a benefactor organization who "gifted" the start-up resources to be run by the co-operative

I'm pretty sure that this was not the case with the Dairy Disposal Company, which went to become Kerry Co-op (later the Kerry Group).

Now I'm not saying that it's flawed, or not possible, all I'm pointing out is that a very specific set of circumstances involving either distressed businesses, or some no-strings philanthropy are required for it to come into being.

Not really, as there are a number of restaurant bars in operation in central Europe that have been following this model for quite a while. One exampe would be the Widder Gasthof in Winterthur, Switzerland, which has been run as a collective (with stakeholders/employees periodically buying into/out of the venture) and did not come out of any of the scenarios you described.

The danger of the first (which has been brought into law in Venezuela) is that workers unions, or disgruntled workers could effectively force a business owner to sell, with themselves as the only possible buyers. Again, I'm not waving a red flag, nor am I spewing forth about commies, but there are very real risks involved with enshrining that policy in law.

I agree, with you and am not trying to put this forward as some viable alternative model to capitalism. It has serious inefficiencies and flaws, as with the one you suggested, and frankly only works in certain SME sized ventures - with larger enterprises, it's shortcomings quickly become apparent.

My reason for responding was simply to point out that such ventures do exist, despite your not being to recall one.