We must Occupy the economy

The roller coaster ride of the world economic crisis continues. Elections in Greece and France have shifted the political ground slightly to the left, with a Socialist majority in France, and the spectacular result obtained by SYRIZA in coming second in Greece with about 27% of the vote. But the Eurozone crisis stumbles on and the 'free' market fundamentalists, the architects of the broken economic system, are still in the driving seat. Banks are bust and, under the current system, there is nothing to look forward to apart from years of economic stagnation at best. Meanwhile in the UK, millions are being pushed below the breadline by the governments cuts in benefits, tax credits, and increases in rents.

In 1966, the Marxist economist Paul Sweezy wrote a book, with Paul Baran, called Monopoly Capital, in which he said that the natural tendency of monopoly capitalism was economic stagnation, as capitalists struggled to use the surpluses of capital accumulation, and that they could only achieve this by increases in spend on marketing and defence spending, and increasing debt. Was Sweezy right? Its certainly true that US defence spending in WWII ended the Great Depression, and that a mountain of debt has been used to keep capitalism going in the past 30 years or so.

So what do we do? The market fundamentalists have no answer. They are like the mad person who repeats the same actions over again in Einsteins famous quote:

"Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results"

Einstein: described the madness of market fundamentalists

 
So we need an economic alternative. But what is that alternative? Neoliberalism, over the past 30 years has put commercial interests above democratic sovereignty. This has happened globally through organisations like the WTO and the European Union. We need to reverse this process and re-assert democratic control of our economy. This economic change must put governments in charge, actively planning and managing economic development, allow local decision making and create a mixed economy based on  genuine sustainable development to deal with ecological crises and halt endless growth. In the longer term the only answer to the domination of private commercial interests is to put the economy in the hands of the 99%. How can we do all that?

Firstly, we need to nationalise the bust banks that are hoovering up resources which need to be spent on creating jobs. Its a scandal that the UK's bust banks have been bailed out but are still in private hands. This must end, some banks must fold, and we need banks to be broken up to provide finance to small businesses, and local and regional banks which can focus on reviving local economies;

Secondly, we need to take the creation of credit out of private hands and put it under democratic control. Debt creation is too great a power to be left in the hands of private enterprise - this is what caused the current crash;

Thirdly, we need to take control of the big utilities such the energy and water companies, and sectors which rely on massive public subsidy to continue such as the railways;

Fourth, we must institute a programme of investment in our economy to create jobs through green quantitative easing and a Green New Deal;

Finally, and most importantly, we must break the power of the corporations by mutualising the economy, providing the finance to set up co-operatives and giving employees the power to buy-out the companies they work for and control them. This latter measure is crucial in putting economic power into the hands of ordinary people. We need to create a new culture of doing business in which people work together to create successful mutuals which are focused on local communities. Co-operatives have a better success rate than companies and they don't outsource downsize, or export jobs overseas.

Its a little known fact but there was an expansion of mutuals in the USA during the last Great Depression and there are many successful co-operatives both in the USA and here. It is a sector that is already growing. 130 million (yes that is million) people in the USA are now involved in mutuals and if you want to find out more detail read this previous post. You should also take a look at Gar Alperovitz's excellent book 'America beyond Capitalism' which gives practical examples of how the 99% in America are taking control of their economy from the bottom up by creating co-operatives. This is economic democracy in action and something we should celebrate.

Think it can't happen? Well, we have to make it happen. Its likely that the failure of the global banking system is going to mean that states are going to have to take a much bigger role in managing the economy now that the failures of the market have been exposed, and that people are going to be much more willing to trust democratic control and planning after they have experienced the privations of neoliberal austerity. If we want to really cure the malaise of neoliberalism and avoid the stagnation of monopoly capitalism we need to participate in the most important occupation of all, we need to Occupy the economy.

Police brutality is being used in an attempt to crush `OccupyUSA

Pepper spray, tear gas and good old fashioned beatings are being dished out by the police in America in an attempt to crush the occupy movement. The past week or so has seen the eviction of the occupywallst camp in Zuccotti park, and attacks on protestors have resulted in serious injuries, including a ruptured spleen suffered by army veteran Kayvan Sabehgi when he was beaten by police officers at occupy Oakland. Some of the most shocking footage I've seen this week is of police using pepper spray against peacefully protesting students at occupy UC Davis - see below.



There is also evidence that the evictions of occupy camps across America were co-ordinated, and that the local authorities were 'advised' and supported by the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI. The former organisation is part of the repressive apparatus put in place by the Bush administration in the wake of 9/11. All this should surprise nobody because the occupy movement is becoming an increasing embarrassment to the capitalist class and their tame politicians, because it is providing a focus for social justice and radical reform, something the ruling class can't contemplate.

This kind of brutality is nothing new. Police were used to crush the student protest movement in the US in the late 1960s, and were used to break the miner's strike in the UK in 1984. I know about the latter because I was there and witnessed it. The USA has a history of brutality and violence used by the capitalist class against popular protest and organised labour. One of the most infamous incidents was the Battle of Blair Mountain in 1921 in which 15,000 armed miners battled with the police for five days, as a result of the brutality of the mine owners' attempts to crush the union, until the army intervened . In the UK we have seen recent moves by the police to intimidate protesters with heavy handed police tactics and plain clothes snatch squads reminiscent of the Stasi in the German Democratic Republic. Before the recent student demo on 9 November the police announced they were to deploy rubber bullets. All this is beginning to look like a police state. Just compare these two videos; the first is of plainclothes police arresting a student in Iran; and the second is plainclothes police arresting a student in London on the 9 November. Spot the difference? There isn't one.

Of course, as the occupiers have pointed out - 'you can't evict an idea'. In the UK Occupy London have responded to an attempt to evict the camp at St Pauls by taking over an empty building owned by bankers USB. They have called this event the "Bank of Ideas", this is a brilliant coup, and one which keeps them one step ahead of the capitalists class's attempts to close them down. That is what the occupy movement will have to do; stay peaceful, stay leaderless, think on its feet and continue to outwit the police and the so-called 'free' press.

What the crackdowns on protest in America have shown us is that there is really very little difference between the ruling class in the USA and in Egypt. The former may prefer to use lawyers and wear suits but they are just as determined to deny people their rights, criminalise protest and use brute force to hang on to power. Teargas and brutality are being used on peaceful protestors by both regimes as I type this. Again, spot the difference.

Hierarchy is bullshit

Ever thought about why we need bosses? I have, and I've never been able to understand why we need them. What are bosses for other than to earn more than us and tell us what to do? But we don't need anyone to tell us what to do, and we certainly don't need them to earn more than we do!

So why do we have them? Because it's a great way of maintaining control and a great way of making us accept that we are worth less than we actually are. Now I guess some of us have worked for an inspirational boss at one time or another. But for every good boss, there must be a least a dozen poor ones. They tend to range from the ones who just aren't up to it to those who are careerists, desperate to climb the greasy pole, who see each job as a stepping stone to the top, and of course, some are just downright bullies.

So why do we put up with them? I'm not a psychologist but it's not too difficult to see why. We are socialised into it. As children we look up to our parents - the 'grown-ups' who comfort and protect us. Then we go to school and are trained to accept the authority of another grown up - the teacher.

When we finish education we are usually starting on the bottom rung of the ladder in a large organisation. We accept that those who've been there longer than us and have more experience and prestige. So it seems natural that we defer to them. But is it? Respect should be earned - not taken for granted.

The system works well for those at the top as we have seen recently in the banking debacle. These top bods claim they are special people. Without them businesses and organisations wouldn't be run properly - but ...er were the banks run properly? More recently we have seen Mark Thompson, Director General of the BBC, floundering over the Ross and Brand debacle. Do we seriously think that no one could have handled it better? I doubt it.

So why do we tolerate these people? - especially when there is plenty of evidence that we just don't need them. Let's go back to the start of this century when there was an economic crisis in Argentina. Years of corruption and privatisation lead to a run on the banks. While the rich took their money and ran, ordinary Argentinians were left in the lurch, unable to access their bank accounts. Businesses went bust, and in many cases bosses just abandoned their businesses, making the workers jobless.

But many of the jobless refused to give up - they took over the abandoned businesses and kept them going. Many are still successful today and still owned as worker co-operatives. Not all successful co-operative businesses start in this way though. The US company W L Gore and Associates is very successful, and it doesn't have any bosses. Don't believe me? Then read this article. You'll probably know the company because it makes Gore-Tex. In fact the company topped the UK Sunday Times "100 Best Companies to Work For" list for 4 consecutive years, 2004–2007.

The hierarchy that surrounds us is manufactured bullshit. There is nothing natural or desirable about it. It is maintained because it suits the purposes of those at the top who cream off the wealth from society and require us to accept less as a consequence. Attacks on this system are described as sour grapes or envy - but they would be wouldn't they? It's not envy to want social and economic justice and to rid ourselves of a 'class' of people who add no value to our lives but benefit from our labour and acquiescence to their authority.

Postscript: I don't usually add anything to a posting but there is an interesting article on the front page of Guardian Work today by Don Tapscott about inter-generational attitudes to hierarchy that is worth reading. I searched the website but couldn't find it so I can't make a link. here is a brief quote:

"Too many organisations are still stuck in the old unproductive hierarchy, which divides worlds into the governors and the governed. Most people above the age of 40 accept this..... The goal in a hierarchy is to move up, and have more people reporting to you"

Don believes that the 'net generation' have a different attitude to hierarchy - let's hope he is right.