I wonder if we could have a thread where we discuss what sort of society we would like. This should be about our personal thoughts, wishes and desires. Telling others how bad/good any political party or person is or which newspapers say what is irrelevant here. It does not mean it cannot be confrontational or argumentative though as opinions will differ. I will kick off a starter for ten. The society I want is a modern one. I do not want to live in a commune or primitive village without modern transport or material possessions. I like cars, trains and planes and getting places quickly when I want to and not wasting hours sitting around in the cold waiting for public transport that is unreliable. I like TVs and computers. I value modern medicine that mends people even if it costs billions to produce the drugs needed. I do not think a simplistic society will produce that. I believe in personal responsibility. The blame it on others culture is noxious. If we all accept that nobody else is to blame for whatever it is we do not like that is good. We have a need then to produce what we want then. What we do produce is ours though - not a collective item. If we work harder or better then we will get more. Some people are better than others at having ideas and designing and creating things. Sometimes they create places where others who are not good at creating for themselves can be employed and so they too can get things they want. To me that is where society starts. As it gets more complex it is good to also help others who are struggling often for no fault of their own. As I say just a starter. Anyone else?
It is a good topic, but not one that you can give an off the cuff reply to. Need to think about it a bit.
Thank you both - hopefully it will be thread where when a person posts they are giving a little of themselves to it rather than spouting dogma dredged up from anywhere. I think it will show both a lot of common ground but also some very divergent views too
I agree with a lot of what you say as your starter. I would also like a society with less emphasis on work-to-live. A shorter working week, affordable housing for all, more emphasis on arts, music, culture, sports etc Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk
I presume that this is meant as a utopian thread in which the imagination can wander, and is not necessarily restricted to what could happen in the UK. If that is so then I can offer a few ideas - though these should not be accredited to any political party which I support in the UK I don't want to damage Corbyn's campaign. I would describe myself as an Anarcho Communist, and before you get visions of bomb throwing for the first and Gulags for the second I will explain. As an Anarchist I have an aversion to all hierarchies, and to exercise of power between individuals. This does not mean I believe in lawlessness - but I will live with my neighbour under laws which we have signed up to. I have no problem with the person stood next to me, only with the person who tries to stand above me without my consent. I cannot commit a crime against someone, because that would be an exercise of power (albeit temporary) - so bomb throwers are not anarchists. Unemployed people are also not anarchists. How can I be against the state, and then hold my hand out to it ? I do not want to be employed, or an employer, because both imply a power relationship. Communism means exactly what it says - rule by the Commune, not by the State. Such a thing as national ownership of the means of production can only really be valid if it is an interim step towards community ownership of those means. According to Marx the state would wither away with time, though I have never seen any signs of this happening anywhere. I want to live in a Communism from below in which the state, if it exists at all, is simply a voluntary confederation of communes. Not everything is publically owned - the watch on your wrist is your own but the factory which produced it belongs to the Commune. There may be some private enterprise but this is only for non essential products, and is restricted in growth. In my further dreams money is abolished and needs have been placed above means, because we will never have a truly just way of deciding which work should be paid more. So that's it basically. Man's needs would be covered by the basic surplus without the need of money. Jobs would be rotated wherever this is practical. As you can see I go under the assumption that cooperation is a greater force in nature than competition - as for the individualism which you like Leo, it still exists but becomes a free time activity in my Utopia. I am critical of the idea of individualism in our modern society Leo - there has never been a time in history when people were more dependent on each other than now. In our society someone else feeds you, someone else clothes you, someone else nurses you, someone else builds your car, someone else keeps your streets clean and safe etc. etc. By comparison a wolf cub can hunt at 9 months old !
I should add, as if that last post wasn't too long anyway, that in terms of its political organization Switzerland comes closest. In terms of economics some regions of Catalonia and the Basque territories come closest. Combine this with lots of young Italian women and no rain, and we're getting there. Important to add is that I also want people to face up to their responsibilities and not blame the state for everything. Here my starting model is not the state but rather the individual ie. I want to be a Communist - do I join the party ? Do I wait for a revolution from above ? No, I begin with myself and my neighbour - if it grows then great. I have a lot of respect for the Transition towns network which stresses that localities should take the responsibility into their own hands when tackling global warming, self sufficiency being an important ingredient in all of this. One last point - this is all multi culti, anybody can come to my commune if they share its values, or can live with them.
Hoped this thread would inspire you Cologne - and I am not disappointed. Your post gives a lot of room for comment. As you say I hoped the thread would not be taken as "what should we do in the UK" - or Germany or anywhere else specific actually. However it does need to be taken as a society that could exist. So anyone whose idea is a Rolls Royce and Mansion for everyone with no work and Watford winning every game needs to create their own fantasy thread
I took it as it was intended ie. a utopian idea Leo. I am aware that much of what I described exists in monasteries, or if not that, describes communities in the past which also shared some common religious idea, Shakers etc. That is not what I am describing here, although religious communists are also welcome.
Well having given some thought to it, and as with most things there are no simple answers. The nearest I can come to it is where a society appreciates that everyone has something, and can contribute to it. I employed people with varying amounts of ability, and my main aim was to get them to believe that they were doing their best. It gave them a sense that they were being treated fairly when they were rewarded for doing just that little bit more. I think that the main thrust of what I believe in, and would like to see more of is fairness. There are people through no fault of their own who need help. Medical services, housing, feeding are the minimum that any society should make available, and if there is insufficient money to provide these basic needs then it should be raised through taxation. If you are lucky enough to be a high earner, then my sense of fairness says you should pay more to support those who earn less. It cannot be right to have a minimum wage that you cannot get by on while the boss is taking home hundreds of thousands, and can afford to pay clever accountants to find lawful ways of avoiding paying a fair share. This doesn't approach real problems of just how the country can earn money through trade to provide the basics that I want to be available. Having studied how others do earn this money I see a mixed economy of part owned private companies with some state involvement as a fair model. This ensures that some money through the state stake does come back to the country. I do not like the state selling off what is public property/services simply to raise funding as it nearly always finishes up with the people using the service paying not only the running costs, but the profits to the purchasing company. I would also want to have private companies create employee share ownership schemes so that everyone can have some of the profit if a company does well. My ideal society would also include a different form of education for everyone. Let people be aware of their surroundings and how to treat the environment which if ruined can only make everything worse. Let that information include how to cooperate with the people around them, and indeed people from the world at large as we all rely on each other these days. I can pick holes in all of these points, and frequently ask just how do we get from where we are today to what I would like to see. That is a far harder question to answer.
Everybody has something to offer Frenchie. Unfortunately many Western societies have come to accept human wastage - maybe in countries with smaller populations such as Finland it is different - there they need everyone. Both your vision and mine have similarities and differences, but they both presume that our societies are inhabited by the 'right' people. No system is perfect because we ourselves are not perfect. My system has holes in it just as yours does. If I am on my collective communal green patch where we each have a small piece of ground and I grow potatoes on mine then I have no problem sharing them with a poor neighbour who cannot do the same. If however my neighbour sits on his deck chair the whole year, mocking my efforts, and then expects to share my harvest then he can whistle for it. All systems depend on having the right people at the right time.
I am sure that no one on here would have exactly the same idea cologne, but I do believe from all the posts I read, there is a feeling that not all is well with our current society. That is not based on any one country by the way. Your ideals are far more radical than mine, but we have probably been conditioned by our past lives. While I was running a business I believed that I could get most out of my employees by trying to treat them as equals. They were happy when I passed on the success and failure in my weekly shop floor meeting with them, being as honest as I could be, and letting them share when the company made some money. It is a difficult line to tread when you have shareholders wanting more than they are due, but in the long run they did gain. Lots of things where I live now were done on a communal basis. I have the communal rabbit food store, and just around the corner is the communal wine store. Both were wartime innovations. Many of the small farmers were in cooperatives until the large companies came along and offered better prices for their produce. It is difficult to tell people that they still need these things today. What we don't have today is a commune, but we do have a community where we all look out for each other, know that if we need help to do something that help is at hand. The elderly who are getting a bit housebound will have people take them to the supermarket or street market, or if they don't wish to go out take a shopping list and buy for them. Nearly everyone has modern electrical goods. No one takes their washing down to the river anymore. The locals have all welcomed the Brits and Dutch who have invaded their community, and have taken time to help us integrate. My route to a better society is as usual middle of the road as I try to take what exists and finding ways to improve it. I do not subscribe to the free for all markets, or to the state knows best argument. What I do believe in is giving an individual the chance to do what he feels is best for his family, but being prepared to stand him up again when it sometimes doesn't work out.
I know that some employers really do respect and care for their workers Frenchie, and I would not lump them all into one pot. This can also vary enormously dependent on other factors such as religion or culture - Japanese employers consider they have many more obligations to their workers, and, generally Jewish employers as well. You are right in your environmental concerns, and I share them - the World has enough resources for our needs but not to satisfy our greed. This is my concern about our present system - it appears to know no such thing as limits to growth, or is prepared to share our World with any other philosophy other than its own. I have claimed to be a Communist - but there the problems begin: Collective ownership of the means of production is a sweet phrase - but what does it mean ? Ownership by the state, by the commune, or by the workers themselves in the form of Worker's Cooperatives ? Does it mean everything, or just the means of production ? Does it mean all of them, or only those products which are necessary ones ? Or does it mean enslaving Capitalism in the service of the state ? How is it to be achieved - through bloody revolution, through democratic means, or, small scale through trying to change your immediate surroundings ? How are human rights to be protected in such a system ? Can this system I have described coexist within a larger Capitalist system ? Can a country have 2 completely contradictory systems within it ? And lastly, my biggest doubt of all, are the workers really interested ? Or are they happy to draw their wages, and simply get on with their lives without busybodies like me stirring things up ? I can't answer these things but I know that I cannot accept a World where the rich get richer, where the Earth is seen only as a resource to satisfy our greed, and where we are all relegated to slaves of the market - consumers, and little else.
Very good thread this as it is making us think about what we really do believe in. Not much help will appear from the press, it is a case of digging into yourself and trying to answer all of your own doubts. My instincts tell me that I want change, but how do we get there which I think you are saying as well. I know when we have both gone down a similar path of discussion before, you have your idealistic views of what things should be like, whereas I being someone from a different background had to find and implement solutions that dealt with the current situation. Do as to others...... Don't pass by on the other side..... are Christian principles that I grew up with. I am sure that the same applies to many other religions. Despite having many doubts and my own theories, I can happily subscribe to many of the principles. I watch both extreme left and right political parties constantly splitting as groups form and wish to impose their view, but although they seem to be happy dancing on a pin, it doesn't appeal to me as I consider how we get from A to B, with A being where we are now to B where I would like us to be. We would not have had this discussion 50 years ago. Everything has changed so much. But that is how the world is, constantly changing, and I have to believe that new problems need new answers. Nothing stood still when I had my business, and I had to keep ahead of the change or fail because others didn't stick to the idea that yesterday's solutions provided the answer to today's problems.
I look forward to questioning some of your thoughts. I would be interested in whether you believe your views are purely utopian or whether you see any real society being formed along the lines you suggest.
Interesting points made by you Frenchie and I find it difficult to find any part that I disagree with.
In your society then you do not use the organisational or leadership qualities that some people possess and others do not. How does a football team operate if each player is free to decide tactics? In a company some people have to make decisions on what to buy, make sell etc. To suggest everybody could be equally skilled is just not true. In a local community do you only do what a continual referendum of the people dictate? What happens t those in the minority who do not agree with the decision? So if I start a company making furniture and I have the vision and know-how to make it then I can only become as large as my personal work will achieve? Why would I work with somebody else when it is me who has the skill? The result is that less furniture will be made. What about my neighbour who could not work out how to design or build anything - how does he feed himself unless he has skills he does not possess? Is he not better to be my employee and do as I instruct? So we have personal items - but from the thrust of this those would be relatively insignificant. I would not be able to own a car or house? No enterprises would exist that the Commune as a whole did not endorse. So as a person I am told what to do by a majority - and if they disagree with me then I cannot do as I would like. I strongly doubt that any modern high tech industries would be formed. So how do I get fruit if I grow vegetables. Barter is money by another name. On what basis do you suggest there is a basic surplus? I would be more convinced if part of your policy was to eradicate 90% of the world's population. With 8 billion and the logistics of moving things around - made worse by lack of anything larger than communal enterprises - there would always be shortages and starvation. Why does cooperation or competition have to be the greater force? In nature both coexist. I agree we are all dependent on the output of others but for each of the goods and services you mention I have supplied something that has been exchanged to create a common means of trade. I do not equate individualism with dependence - individualism to me is the freedom to express ourselves differently from others. I have concentrated here Col on questions about your ideas rather than to suggest my alternatives but promise I will come to that.
A nice set of questions to grapple with Arthur. I must admit that dislike of hierarchies is a bit of a foible of mine - it comes from having had a soldier for a father ! You will notice that the Capitalist class has disappeared from my utopia - but I said nothing about the managerial class. Even Worker's Cooperatives have a management - but these are normally on a rotating elective principle. I do not see any problem with electing our bosses in industry in the same way we do with politicians. That way the whole society becomes democratic, and not just the political sphere. I have no problem with limited short term hierarchies which are based only on the project in hand as long as they do not carry over into everyday life. With rotating roles in society eg. my boss in the factory becomes my inferior on the field - I can live with this. Unfortunately hierarchies involving whole classes do not develop in one generation only - and here I would ban all inheritance to prevent the development of classes. You will tell me, no doubt, that there are people who can do nothing other than unskilled work and who need a leader - I don't believe this. Every person has a talent, and the job of this utopia is to find it. In many big Western countries we tolerate the idea of human wastage, yet in smaller ones they don't - countries like Finland and Switzerland need to harness the talents of their populations much more successfully than we do, and they normally succeed in this. With regard to personal possessions, you can keep your car (if you must) - you can also own your house, your piece of ground, and anything else which you need to live. I have no wish to thieve the coat off anyone's back. But the possession of a second house would not be possible, as long as there are homeless people around. Also ownership of land would take the form of stewardship - ie. you should leave the land in the same environmental condition in which you found it, so that the next generations can also enjoy it. The principle is - take from the World what you need, but a penny more is theft ! With regard to your vegetables it is easy. You give your excess vegetables to the common store, and you take the fruit that you need from it. There is no barter involved. The whole thing is orientated around need not comparative value. I admit I am doubtfull about the idea of abolishing money - maybe at some stage but not initially. Kropotkin was in favour of this, but I am prepared to postpone it. When you get onto the World picture you lose my little World. I have said that my frame of reference is different. As you would expect I do not begin with the focus of the nation state, or with the need to solve the whole World's problems - but rather from my back door. The question of what such a hypothetical state would do with dissenters doesn't arise because it is likely to be so small that they can easily leave it. I have indicated that a certain amount of private enterprise would be allowed in industries which are not classified as key industries which are absolutely essential for the community. Ref. competition vs. cooperation - both have a role in nature but those species which have cooperated best with each other have been far better at surviving, and rearing offspring than those where the principle 'dog eats dog' rules. You ask if this is a utopia which I have described - of course ! It is possible on a small scale, and is perhaps more likely in some other countries than in Britain. But there are experiments Worldwide in forming the type of community which I have described. As to what influence it has on my political activities - probably not so much. Like many people I dream idealistically but act pragmatically. I support de centralization of powers to the base of society, and strengthened regionalism, because I believe people's laws should be made as close to them as possible. I would also support community ownership schemes and also the Worker's cooperative movement. I would also engage in all local activities which help to free my community from a dependence on global financial, or energy systems which can collapse at any time. Anything which leads to more self sufficiency for my region is ok. for me - this leaves lots of scope for political activity.
ps. I know the last text was too long - but one short adaptation to it. I know the sentence on inheritance appears hard - it does not apply to personal possessions eg. memories of dead relatives, and I have no intention of turning people out of the houses they were brought up in. This applies only to inheritance which could be used as a means of production. An interesting thread but we need more posters and more varied ideas.
