Capitalism for several centuries has not delivered the goods or minimum necessities to all peoples. This is a ridiculously and agonising time period for which people have had to suffer. The superstitious economists' reliance on the 'invisible hand' is such an irrational and nonsense proposition that no serious or rational person can surely believe in it now. It is the equivalent of religious hype. It shows the superficiality of thought of the conservative capitalist thinkers. Now, new concepts are developing that will finally show people that economics cannot be based on superstitions and wild ideas that have no practical basis in terms of human welfare. The new model is the co-operative economy. This is an underlying urge for true libertarianism and for social action in the world. It also relates to ecological harmony and deep sustainability. The below articles testify to this. Deep Sustainability: A Vision For The Global Villager In Us All How to Curtail Globalization - By Localization - The Solution Is Cooperatives --- Deep Sustainability: A Vision For The Global Villager In Us All by Roar Bjonnes One of the most important sustainability criteria, and one that is often overlooked, is that products should be locally produced. The closer to home the better. But a symbol of a disturbing trend is the gradual takeover of the sustainability movement by corporate agribusiness. What a confusing world we live in. You buy a jar of organic strawberry jam at the local coop, visualizing you are supporting an original dream. In reality you are buying a corporate showcase. Take the selling of organic Dole bananas, and you may think the world has changed overnight. But has it? Dole is still a US$5.1 billion company, and the world's largest producer and marketer of conventional fruit and vegetables. Just imagine how many tons of pesticides and chemical fertilizers this company consumes every year! But if you talk to Sharon Hayes, director of environmental affairs for Dole Food Co, she will simply tell you that Dole has a "commitment to environmental leadership and consumer choice". So, is Dole going completely pastoral, or is it just marketing and business as usual? When shopping for sustainability, we must therefore look beyond the wholesome brands and the organic labels. We must ask deeper questions. We must distinguish between shallow sustainability and deep sustainability. So, how can we better support a sustainable economy, culture, and worldview? How can we cultivate sustainability in our own lives? Below are some suggestions: Sustainable Vision: What should the underlying values of a sustainable economy be based upon? Author David C. Korten claims that "a sustainable society needs a spiritual foundation". Why? Because spirituality, not materialism, is the ultimate foundation of life. The late British economist E. F. Schumacher concurs. "No system or machinery or economic doctrine or theory", Schumacher wrote, "stands on its own two feet: it is variably built on a metaphysical foundation, that is to say, upon our basic outlook on life, its meaning and its purpose". What we can do: Open our inner vision through study of both spirituality and science. Learn how the world of matter and spirit complement each other. Embrace the alchemical truth: As above, so below. Sustainable Spiritual Practice: Philosopher Ken Wilber believes that we cannot achieve a sustainable society without leaders and activists rooted in sustainable spiritual practice. Our mutual agreement on how to solve our environmental and economic problems, he says, "depends absolutely upon individuals who can transcend their egoic and selfish perspectives and rise to a more worldcentric, global consciousness". And the best way to achieve this, he thinks, is through an inner process of spiritual transformation. To truly be able to understand and serve Gaia, we must also understand and serve our higher Self. What we can do: Start a daily meditation practice. Combine that with a more body-oriented practice such as yoga and tai chi. As within, so without. Local Economics: From sustainable development theorists to environmental activists, from bio-regionalists to natural capitalists, from Thomas Jefferson to Gandhi, economic decentralization is seen as the only panacea for the economic exploitation caused by centralized economies. Paul Hawken's natural capitalism speaks of the need to "replace nationally and internationally produced items with products created locally and regionally". What we can do: Vote with our dollars by supporting local enterprises, especially small businesses, artisans, cooperatives, and their products. The more local, the better. Boycott multinational franchises such as McDonald's who cause innumerable health problems in the community through their foods. Production for consumption, not profit: A consumption economy is an integral aspect of a decentralized economy and should not be confused with a profit-oriented consumer economy. A consumption economy is an economy where goods are produced as per people's needs. A consumer economy is an economy where goods are produced and sold solely for profit. Since, the consumption economy's main goal is to satisfy basic human needs, it also provides the economic security needed for people' s non-material sources of fulfillment - family, community, culture, and spirituality. What you can do: Reduce your material consumption. Support local businesses that produce basic human needs, such as bakeries, farms, agricultural coops, community gardens, farmer's markets, etc. Cooperative enterprises: The Darwinian notion that competition promoted the evolutionary survival of the fittest individual is outdated. New research reveals that evolutionary success had more to do with the survival of the fittest community through interwoven cooperation. Thus cooperation, not competition, must be the cornerstone of a more equitable and sustainable economy. What we can do: Support our local food coop, farmer's coop, etc. Purchase products made by coops rather than by corporations. Small-scale private enterprises: Proponents of today's free market capitalism seem to have forgotten that their mentor, Adam Smith, proposed a market structure in which there were no corporate businesses with monopolistic powers. Similarly, other economists claim that excessive inequities can best be avoided if private enterprises consists mainly of small businesses such as restaurants, stores, artisan shops, service and cottage industries with only a few employees. Small-scale, private capitalism stimulates the entrepreneurial spirit and purchasing power of individuals and families, yet avoids the gross disparity and poverty so often caused by unbridled concentration of wealth in the hands of corporate monopolies. Large corporations can in turn be transformed into cooperatives. What we can do: Support your local bookstore, clothing store, artisan, and other local merchants. If possible, boycott large corporations. Eco-villages: While most eco-villages, such as Findhorn, are located in the affluent countries of the North, some also focus on helping poor, rural communities in the South achieve self-sufficiency. One such project is the Future Vision Ecological Park in the interior of Sao Paulo state, Brazil. According to its founder, Dr. Susan Andrews, the goal of this project is "to provide a practical model for social and economic life that can be replicated in communities, especially rural communities, anywhere." (www.sustainablevillages.org) What we can do: Start an eco-village, a co-housing project, a community garden, or simply visit such a project for learning and inspiration. Create community by starting or joining a discussion group. Economic democracy: Concentration of wealth and economic power corrupts the political process. In Third World countries, especially, money buys votes outright, and the moguls of capital maintain the ultimate veto power of capital flight. Money must not be allowed to rule politics, and power must be extended beyond the political sphere and into the economic sphere. What we can do: Support living wage initiatives as well as measures that redistribute wealth from the top down. Self-sufficient, regional economies: People can best collaborate in social and economic development if they work together within regional socio-economic units that are defined on the basis of common economic potentials, common economic problems, similar geographic features, ethnic similarity, and common sentimental legacy. Regional economies need to control their resources and capital and be totally free from any kind of domination by outside economic forces. What we can do: Seek out and support local, organic farmers and other businesses that utilize local resources. Dig up your lawn and grow your own food. Support indigenous peoples causes. Boycott "foreign companies" that exploit local resources and labour. Deep ecological ethic: The ultimate solution to all environmental problems lies in a deep spiritual understanding of what nature is and how it operates. From this deep understanding of human psychology and spirituality, on the one hand, and the natural world, on the other, humanity can develop a genuine environmental ethics. In other words, develop a balanced socio-economic philosophy based on the dynamic interrelationship between the fields of ecology, economy and spirituality. At this point in history, this is one of humanity's most urgent tasks. What we can do: Meditate and study. Learn from science, from nature, from local elders, and from indigenous cultures. Free and fair trade: The giant globalisation efforts by the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank is promoting "free trade" and "free markets" as a panacea for creating prosperity and sustainability. Yet, today's so-called free trade between rich and poor nations, between the North and the South, is neither free nor fair. It favours large corporations over small scale enterprises, it has widened the gap between the rich and the poor, and it has increased environmental degradation. What we can do: Shop locally, think globally. But if you can't shop locally, support "fair trade" businesses. Cultural vitality: The irony of material development is that it has created what author Paul Wactel calls "the poverty of affluence." While consumerism has enticed people in the Western world into gorging on material things, it has failed to provide a sense of inner fulfillment. Restoring a community's non-material treasures and cultural roots is an integral part of overcoming the inner poverty of affluence. What we can do: Support local music, arts, theatre and crafts. Support your local spiritual centre. Sustainable globalism: Decentralization, self-sufficiency, and smaller scale industries does not mean neglecting a global agenda. We need a global movement with at least three, separate, yet integrated goals: 1) a strengthening of the global polity through the UN, combined with a gradual movement toward a global federation, or world-government that can safeguard the needs and rights of people and the environment; 2) the formation of self-sufficient, socio-economic regions of free and fair trade zones - that is, a global grid of sustainable and self-sufficient trading partners; 3) the development of a global movement rooted in a life-affirming vision of spirituality and oneness with all of creation. What we can do: Protest against the current globalisation efforts by the IMF and the World Bank. Donate money or your labour to activist groups. Cultivate a global, sustainable vision of oneness with Spirit and of cooperation with Gaia. Roar Bjonnes has a degree in agronomy from Vinterlandbruksakademiet in Oslo, Norway; he is a freelance writer and co-founder of Center for Sustainable Villages www.sustainablevillages.org Copyright The Author 2002 --- How to Curtail Globalization - By Localization - The Solution Is Cooperatives by Garda Boeninger (edited by Dharmadeva) Economic propaganda in textbooks tells you there are only two forms - capitalism and socialism/communism. However, this is blind thinking. All major political parties have succumbed to this blind thinking as well and even many progressive parties fail to recognise, as yet, the co-operative economy. This failure merely supports the globalisation trend. Indeed such a failure falsely confirms that democracy is only political in nature and ignores the notion of economic democracy as the real democracy. Political democracy has become a farce - mobocracy. Democracy is defined as "government of the people, by the people and for the people" But in fact it is the rule of the majority. Today's democracy means "mobocracy" because the government in a democratic structure is guided by mob psychology. The majority of the society are fooled and succumb to fear tactics and insecurity; wise people are in a minority. There is no self-empowerment. Democracy falls into "foolocracy". In all walks of present-day life, the dark shadows of immorality are hampering human progress. The annals of human civilization say that the downfall of a particular government becomes inevitable if it goes against the collective interests of the middle-class people. Globalization goes against the collective interest. Is there any solution to globalisation? Is there any alternative? Is there any way to stop its growth? The key point is that we need to replace globalisation with localization . We need to re/build an economic system whose hallmark is regional self-sufficiency created by co-operative industries in which people are owners. It will no longer be one employer and under him the employees - kept subordinate and subservient. Based on localization, on localized economies, new international labour laws can be created for the benefit of all people. In co-operatives people will be able to work for living wages, and they will get their equal and fair share of surplus funds at the end of every year or relevant period. They will no longer be slaves to a wealthy man. They will themselves be owners. That is the definition of cooperative. All members are also the owners of the business. All members share in the work and the labour, and all members share in the profits. They together decide how much of surplus funds to return to the members and how much to invest in expanding the business. Cooperatives work very simply, and they can help women to escape from poverty. Cooperatives mean humane democratic production. We need to "encourage the spontaneous development of democratic coops and create 'productive space' in which to start to build a democratic economy. The Internet can be used to help facilitate the democratic market."1 While strong management is essential for the success of cooperatives, at the same time members must take care to avoid class-based divisions in order to have equitable democracy work. This can be done by keeping wages within a reasonable range and an efficient economy would make this gradually come close together. One has to be very careful that the managerial class in a coop does not begin to take it over - thus nullifying it as a democratic economic entity. As far as possible, cooperatives need to interact and do business with other cooperatives, and continually minimize business interactions with capitalist corporations. The work of starting cooperatives, of starting grassroots economies, of unions - it is all related. The three groups should form a coalition and join the global anti-capitalist movement, to realize egalitarian and participatory values, and to move in the direction of cooperatives, realizing that escaping capitalism is the key to physical and financial liberation. History of Cooperatives In the book We Own It, the authors tell us on p. 15 that in 1844 weavers in Rochdale, England came together and wrote up the "Principles of Cooperation".2 These principles later became known as the "Principles of the International Cooperative Alliance",3 and they form the guidelines of cooperatives even today. However, it is sure that 'cooperatives' existed long before the weavers of Rochdale, England. In the book Race, Gender and Work by Amott and Matthaei, it states clearly that the native American Indians used a cooperative agricultural system until the white men came and introduced capitalism, factories and subsistence wages.4 During the last Great Depression of the 1920s and 1930s, cooperatives sprang up all over America and Europe. However, after the Second World War was over, cooperatives diminished. It was related to the new economic affluence - the new boom economy. Then came the sixties and the seventies - those were the decades of the famous American civil rights movement and the anti-war movement. Quietly, behind the scenes, the same people with the same idealism were building alternative institutions: food cooperatives, housing cooperatives, communes, and so forth. The spirit of the sixties lived on through those coops. Volunteers abounded and worked their hearts out to create new cooperatives. In the year 2002, poverty returned and is rising. Today western countries are once again faced with rising unemployment. In 2001 more than one million people in America lost their jobs. Europe is following fast on American heels. Hence, many governments are actively supporting the cooperative venture as a way to lessen unemployment. But unless there is a wholesale change in the notion of structuring the economy, such support will not be long lasting. Perhaps the most famous cooperative outside of America is Mondragon, in the Basque area of Spain. It began in the 1940s and by 1990 it employed 60% of the area's workforce. It is also fascinating to note that the large NGO (non-governmental organization) in the world is the International Cooperative Alliance (ICA). It represents 237 national and international organizations. Furthermore, the United Nations recently passed a resolution making the first Saturday of July as the International Day of Cooperatives. Cooperatives Working Today The subject of cooperatives is a vast topic. There are hundreds of thousands in existence worldwide, and each with their own particular structure, as described by their Articles, Constitution or By-Laws. There are presently more than 50,000 cooperatives in America. The most visible are food and other retail cooperatives, housing cooperatives and day care centers. In addition there are agricultural cooperatives. Some of the largest businesses in America are cooperatives. Three examples are Sunkist, Ocean Spray and Land O'Lakes. A fourth example is Yellow Cab Company. Little Professor Book Centers are a chain of over 100 bookstores also run as a cooperative. The Solar Center in San Francisco is still another successful cooperative in existence since the seventies. According to Bruce Dyer of Proutist Universal in New Zealand, "co-ops control 99% of Sweden's dairy production, 95% of Japan's rice harvest, 75% of western Canada's grain and oil seed output and 60% of Italy's wine production. Some of the major commercial banks in Europe are cooperatively owned or organized, including such giants as Germany's DG Bank, Holland's Rabobank and France's Credit Agricole. Almost 100% of Japan' s fishermen are organized in cooperatives."5 However, these co-operatives must function in a capitalist world. So what we witness is economically efficient co-operatives amidst economically inefficient capitalist firms (many of whom survive under the corporate dole which includes subsidies, etc). This makes it even more difficult for co-operatives to survive. The cooperative spirit is defined in 'We Own It' as "a spirit of cooperation, of sharing, of working with and being open to other people".6 This spirit is very much alive and growing. But, cooperatives are also much more than that. All cooperatives are businesses. They are economic enterprises. The coops likely to be the most successful are those that acknowledge this fact, that set up a formal business structure, that put in writing a list of by-laws for the cooperative/company, whose members educate themselves regarding management, economics and laws in relation to different business set-ups, and follow good business management and marketing procedures used by all successful businesses. People who start up a cooperative in a very idealistic manner without putting due emphasis on the practicalities of solid business operations, knowledge of laws, etc are setting themselves up for difficulties if not failure. These aspects are just as important for a cooperative as they are for any other business to be financially successful or at least viable. The ways in which cooperatives can be set up are innumerable. Sometimes one person may start up their own businesses. Then, as s/he hires employees, they may find that it is preferable to work as a collective or with cooperative effort and system. The business changes from a sole proprietorship over to a cooperative. One of the Principles of the International Cooperative Alliance states that "the economic results arising out of the operations of a society belong to the members of the society and should be distributed [such that no one member gains at the expense of others.] This may be done by: (a) provision for development of the business of a cooperative; (b) provision of common services; or (c) distribution among members in proportion to their transactions with the society". A cooperative is owned and controlled by its members. It can be anything then that its members want it to be. A coop can be set up to serve its members only, or it can serve the entire community (with cheap food, for example). In Proutist literature, there are various types of cooperatives: eg consumer coops, banking coops, producer coops and worker coops. In many cases, the last two are intertwined. The word owner is equivalent to member. Profit in a co-operative is really "surplus" or "net margin" or "savings". This can be distributed back to the members. It can also be put back into the expansion of the cooperative. We may start a food-buying club. People can get together each week and give their orders. The next week their orders arrive. It can be cheaper than purchasing in stores, because the overhead is far less. Sometimes, this kind of food-buying club or baby cooperative seems so successful that the members/organizers decide to expand it to a live store. These stores may sell to members only or they may sell to the entire public. There are many examples like this. A food coop is a consumer coop. Consumer coops generally will return any "profits" to their members, since their aim is to reduce prices for all members. An arts and craft coop can also be something like this: members individually create arts and crafts and market them through the coop. This would be a producer's co-op. However, the coop can also purchase art and ceramic supplies in bulk and sell to the members. To answer the question, what is the financial set up of the cooperative and how does it differ from the corporation, the answer is that financial decisions are decided upon by the members. The Solar Center in San Francisco has been successful for perhaps 40 years now, and attributes its success to the following factors: (1) hard work; (2) moderate pay/wages to members for work done; (3) careful monitoring of capital (buying used trucks, for example and keeping a low inventory in stock); (4) friendly investors; (5) satisfied customers; (6) idealism; and (7) "the togetherness that comes from shared ownership, equal pay, collective decision-making, and mutual concern for everyone's growth and job satisfaction." The last factor was considered to be the most important.7 According to Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar: "cooperatives evolve out of the collective labour and wisdom of a community. The community must develop an integrated economic environment, common economic needs and a ready market for its cooperatively produced goods. Unless these three factors work together, an enterprise cannot be called a cooperative."8 Saheg Avedisian, a member of the Cheeseboard Collective in Berkeley, California, made the following statement regarding cooperatives: "Being in a collective is a good way to take your political and philosophical beliefs and make them a mainline part of your life. You no longer have to talk about being liberal or doing something that's politically correct because your own workplace frees you personally to pursue your personal interests. If the world were somehow a collective place economically, I think art would blossom. All the energy that goes into our survival would be freed."9 Advantages of Cooperatives In society, human beings must work together with others so that everyone can move forward collectively. Women can start small-scale and medium-scale cooperative enterprises. All they need to have is similar interests, similar material needs, morality, and mutual respect. Cooperatives are businesses that are owned and controlled by the members, who generally also work in the business. There is democratic control at all levels of the business. One member, one vote. Workers share in the surplus revenue (called "profit" when run as a regular business). Members will mutually agree to put some of the surplus funds back into the business and also towards more education of the worker members. Worker members have much greater morale, since they also are part owners in the business, and because each member is getting a share of the profits - not a minimum wage salary doled out by the one owner of a capitalist business. Members of cooperatives participate in all levels of decision-making, they have greater self-expression and dignity, and of course equality/equity amongst each other. This is unique to cooperatives and certainly not to corporations. In a cooperative, everybody can know (and it is preferred that they know) what the daily break-even is, what yesterday 's sales were, how far above or below the projected sales it is for the month and what the budget is. It means, everyone is equally concerned about and involved with the profit-and loss of the cooperative. In a cooperative, members will do their own job but will also get the opportunity to learn every job if they desire, and become completely rounded and fully knowledgeable in the business. Steve Hargraves, who works for the Bookpeople, a publishing company, sums up the advantages of working in a cooperative as follows: "My personal feeling is that running a company this way is a political statement to the rest of the country. If you want to go to the heart of the beast, the heart of the beast is economics. This is an economic entity that we're dealing with, this culture, this society. We're trying to develop a new way of looking at how to run a business. Employee ownership is dependent on the fact that this company must survive in this capitalist, profit-oriented system. If you can find a different way of approaching those economics, in some ways you're making a political move. That's the justification for me personally. I feel that it's worth it."10 What is the most important ingredient in the success of a cooperative? It is the people. It is the people coming into your cooperative that will make the difference - people with all kinds of different ideas, backgrounds, education, with different levels of energy, dedication and skills. People will respond to kindness and compassion far more than to rules and regulations. It is the team spirit, communication skills and interpersonal skills that are going to go a long way to make or break a new cooperative. "There is a great pleasure, a real joy in going out and doing your own work on your own terms when you know that nobody is taking any more than their share. That's wonderful and people are going to keep that. To be working with other people on common ideas, goals, you share in the control of it all. Looking forward to doing a task together is one of the finest experiences I know of. To be able to carry that feeling of working together for yourselves in a collective way is one of the finest things."11 Cooperatives are truly the best means of organizing people in an independent manner. Cooperatives are based on coordinated cooperation, and not subordinated cooperation. There will not be any 'boss' in a cooperative. All members are the bosses because they are all equal owners. Managers are there to assist others. Capitalism has created individualism, self-centeredness and selfishness. Cooperatives will create a feeling of cooperation, a feeling of sharing, and a sense of societal oneness. And most of all, they will enable the financial self-sufficiency of women - which is the crying need of the hour. The Grassroots Globalization Network (GGN) is a new project of the Earth Island Institute.12 It promotes democratic ways for people to create healthier local economies, safer communities and a cleaner environment. The Network hence concentrates on networking to help solve problems caused by globalisation, helping people to regain democratic control of their communities and to become regionally self-sufficient or self-sustaining. GGN is highlighting the great successes of cooperatives everywhere - credit unions, land tenure reforms, participatory budgeting, full-cost economic policies, community currencies and other grassroots activities.13 PROUT Cooperatives "The sweetest unifying factors are love and sympathy for humanity. The wonts of the human heart are joy, pleasure and beatitude. In the physical realm the best expression of this human sweetness is the cooperative system. The cooperative system is the best representation of the sweet nectar of humanity." - Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar The PROUT (PROgressive Utilisation Theory) model of cooperatives have been developed by the philosopher and economist, Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar. According to Sarkar, cooperatives are essential in order for the community and then the society to move forward in a collective manner. Cooperatives "combine the wealth and resources of many individuals and harness them in a united way. To ... achieve this cooperatives should be structured so that individual interest does not dominate collective interest."14 Sarkar states clearly that the commune system cannot work because it is made up of master and servant relationships, or supervisor and supervised. In this interpersonal setup, progress will not be forthcoming. In communes there is no personal ownership. It means the people will not work hard, as morale will be low. What is the incentive to work hard? In the capitalist system, a large part of the end profit is grabbed by middlemen. In a cooperative system, the owners/members will make decisions regarding when and to whom to sell, and at what price. People of all and varying skills will be utilized with the expansion of cooperatives. During times of economic recession or depression, all members' labour and contribution will be accordingly reduced, so that no one suffers from the stigma of being without a job. This will also help the economy to pick up to a healthy level of activity. Here is a clear example of the humaneness of the cooperative system as compared to the capitalist economic system where thousands or millions of people are laid off with the snap of a finger. PROUT cooperatives may comprise of: (1) shareholders, who receive salaries for their work plus a return on their shares; (2) non-shareholders or labourers, who will enjoy stable employment and living wages at the least. Labourers can be further categorized as: (1) permanent labourers who receive a percentage of the surplus revenue in addition to their wages; (2) non-permanent labourers, who receive wages only. Thus, the more permanent a coop member and the greater his/her contribution, the greater also will be the rewards. All human beings can benefit from the cooperative system. Elderly single women through owning shares can have a steady income provided to them. In the same manner disabled people can be taken care of. Impoverished women by their labour can also receive steady income plus a percentage of the surplus revenues, so they no longer are impoverished. PROUT cooperatives would elect a Board of Directors, and it would be required that those Directors as a minimum qualification be known as fearless moralists in their communities. In the developed stage of PROUT cooperatives, at least three types of cooperatives - producer, worker and consumer - would all be interacting with and buying from each other and supplying each other with goods. Let us take a brief look at a comparison of five types of enterprises: Traditional, Capitalist, Socialist (as we find in Europe), Communist and PROUTist.15 This can reveal at a glance some startling and wonderful distinctions between PROUT cooperatives and cooperatives that have existed up to the present time. See: http://www.proutworld.org/features/coopschart.htm Five types of Cooperatives: Traditional; Capitalist; Socialist; Communist; Proutist Traditional: Ownership Right to private ownership Cooperation Somewhat subordinated Profit Profit oriented Morality Objective morality based on laws Minimum necessities of life No assurance of minimum necessities Economic evolution Bottom to top but in an economically isolated way Wages According to work Democratic values Democratic Economic competition Must compete with capitalist ruthlessness Employment Encourage employment Values of life Economic prosperity Capitalist: Ownership Right to private ownership Cooperation Definitely subordinated Profit Profit is everything Morality No concept of morality as innate to human beings Minimum necessities of life No concept of minimum necessities Economic evolution Towards individual/corporate monopoly system Wages According to whims of capitalists Democratic values Undemocratic - no concept of economic democracy Economic competition Amoral, diabolic economic competition Employment Seek to employ with smallest possible wage; decreasing employment Values of life Economics or money is everything Socialist: Ownership State ownership Cooperation Subordinated Profit Profit motivation Morality Objective morality and materialistic orientation Minimum necessities of life State is custodian, promising minimum necessities Economic evolution State monopoly system (State capitalism) Wages According to ability and need (no concept of proper distribution of surplus) Democratic values Undemocratic Economic competition No incentive of economic initiatives Employment Scope for employment but no growth as economy stagnant Values of life Economics is everything Communist: Ownership State ownership Cooperation Subordinated Profit Profit motivation for benefit of party members Morality No morality (sees humans as economic beings) Minimum necessities of life State is custodian, falsely promising minimum necessities Economic evolution State monopoly system (benefits party members) Wages According to whims of bureaucrats Democratic values Dictatorship (non-benevolent) Economic competition Competition between corrupt bureaucrats Employment Scope for employment at whim of bureaucrat Values of life Everything, even people, are for political / economic manipulation Proutist Ownership Worker / Member ownership Cooperation Coordinated Profit Consumption motivation (most efficient economically) Morality Morality based on cardinal human values and spiritual values Minimum necessities of life Minimum necessities via constitutionally guaranteed purchasing power Economic evolution Bottom to top with a program for fundamental economic change Wages First living wages with rational distribution of special amenities, then gradually higher standard of living Democratic values Democratically based socio-economic awareness, education and morality without which democracy is a foolocracy, economic democracy superior to political democracy Economic competition Economic efficiency via incentives / coordination ensuring physical existence, mental expansion and spiritual development Employment People will not seek employment - jobs will seek the people Values of life Material prosperity so as to enable more time for mental development and spiritual liberation The quintessential evil of capitalism is that: (1) it denies the poor people any economic participation; (2) it is based on self-interest, selfishness and profit alone; (3) money is everything, human beings count for nothing; (4) competition is everything, the collective good has no value; (5) it has no notion of ecological harmony and based on outdated utilitarian views; (6) it is undemocratic at the economic level and uses political democracy for its own ends. On the other hand, the cooperative system: (1) helps the weak and impoverished persons to grow, to become strong and self-sufficient; (2) is based on the collective interest and collective good, and not on profit; (3) allows for the rendering of social service to become prominent in the community; (4) human beings have more value than money and profit; (5) provides economic stability because there is no hoarding of wealth (eg stockpiling of unconsumed goods), and no profit motive (profits are rational only) (6) it is democratic - one person, one vote. Democracy means 'Economy of the people, for the people and by the people!' Prabhat Sarkar in his development of PROUT economics has indicated that there should be a two-phase plan to introduce cooperative land management. First, all uneconomic land holdings should join the cooperative system so as to convert them to economic holdings.16 In the second phase, all persons should be encouraged to join the cooperative system. Third, there should be rational distribution and redetermination of ownership of the land. In the fourth phase, a congenial atmosphere will be created due to mental/psychic expansion and a deep study of morality, where people will learn to think for the collective welfare rather than for their own petty self-interests. This will be a gradual change in the community. The people themselves will be persuaded to develop this kind of altruistic mindset. The efficiency of an economic system surpasses that of the goal of competition policy in capitalist economies (which is the marginalisation of profit) but which is contradicted by the capitalist quest for profits. Efficiency in a co-operative economy means that profits are rational and arise due to the need to distribute to workers / shareholders so as to provide purchasing capacity for the minimum necessities of life and after that amenities to render services to the society. Sarkar further says that cooperatives, to be successful, require three factors: morality, strong supervision, and the wholehearted acceptance of the masses. Wherever these factors are present, the cooperatives have been reasonably successful.17 The poor people need to be educated regarding the benefits of cooperatives to their lives. They need to understand that it will bring them out of poverty and will provide them enough purchasing capacity to lead a dignified life. Sarkar wants that modern technological equipment be used for farming, as this will free up many hours for the farmers and particularly for the women and children, giving them the glorious opportunity to develop themselves. He also wants no intermediaries in cooperatives. They are the leeches who suck the blood and sweat of the labourers and grab all profits in their greedy paws. It is also a critical point that cooperatives remain controlled by local people. Tea plantations, coal mines and all other natural resources such as minerals under the ground must not be given to outsiders to control. Local people must get first chance for employment. If jobs remain, then transient labour can be used. As an interim measure, where the landowners have remained the owners, and they hire labourers for reaping the harvest, then 50% of the profits will go to the landowner and the other 50% will go to the labourers. This is in the first phase, mentioned above. In the second phase, the landowners will get 25% of the profit and the labourers will get 75%. In the third phase, there will be rational distribution of land and redetermination of ownership. All owners will be encouraged to join the cooperative system at this point (the fourth phase). Sarkar then states: "This time period from the first phase to the fourth phase of the implementation of the cooperative system can be called the transitional period for the implementation of PROUT".18 Prabhat Sarkar also explains that only a certain percentage of the population should be involved in agricultural work. He gives the figure of the maximum of 40-45%. The remaining population should be engaged in setting up and running industrial cooperatives or service industries. This is very important, for it will allow people to remain in their towns and villages and not have to migrate to cities for work. He further explains the terms coordinated cooperation and subordinated cooperation. "Operation" means to get something done through any medium. If an operation is done collectively, then it is cooperation. Cooperation means something that is done with equal rights, equal human prestige and equal locus standi (ie legal and social rights). He says that if this cooperation is between human beings who have equal rights and mutual respect for each other and all participants are working for the collective welfare, then this working relationship is called 'coordinated cooperation'. If people work together but if some of those people are keeping themselves under other people's supervision or domination, then it is called subordinated. This subordinated cooperation has been the cause of society's moral degeneration, including racism (as seen by the dispossession of indigenous cultures). For this very reason, Sarkar is advocating cooperatives as the way towards a new and truly democratic economic system, because in a properly structured cooperative, all people are working collectively in coordinated cooperation. Subordination is a thing of the past. 1 GEO - Grassroots Economic Organizing, Issue 41, Mar-Apr 2002. 2 Peter Honigsberg, Bernard Kamoroff and Jim Beatty, 'We Own It: Starting and Managing Cooperatives & Employee Owned Ventures', Bell Springs Publishing, 1991. 3 The six Principles of the International Cooperative Alliance are as follows: (1) Membership of a cooperative society should be voluntary and without artificial restriction or any social, political, racial or religious discrimination, to all persons who can make use of its services and are willing to accept the responsibilities of membership. (2) Cooperative societies are democratic organizations. Their affairs should be administered by persons elected or appointed in a manner agreed upon by the members and accountable to them. Members of primary societies should enjoy equal rights of voting (one member, one vote) and participation in decisions affecting their societies. In other than primary societies the administration should be conducted on a democratic basis in a suitable form. (3) Share capital should only receive a strictly limited rate of interest. (4) The economic results arising out of the operations of a society belong to the members of that society and should be distributed in such a manner as would avoid one member gaining at the expense of others. This may be done by decision of the members as follows: (a) by provision for development of the business of cooperative; (b) by provision of common services; or, (c) by distribution among members in proportion to their transactions with the society. (5) All cooperative societies should make provision for the education of their members, officers and employees and of the general public in the principles and techniques of cooperation, both economic and democratic. (6) All cooperative organizations, in order to best serve the interest of their members and their communities, should actively cooperate in every practical way with other cooperatives at local, national and international levels. 4 Theresa Amott and Julie Matthaei, 'Race, Gender and Work: A Multicultural Economic History of Women in the United States', South End Press, Boston, 1996. 5 Bruce Dyer, 'Why Cooperatives: The New Zealand Context' http://www.proutworld.org/features/whycoop.htm 6 Peter Honigsberg, 'We Own It', Bell Springs Publishing, 1991. 7 Ibid, p. 35. 8 Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar, 'Proutist Economics: Discourses on Economic Liberation', Ananda Marga Publications, Calcutta, p. 113. 9 'We Own It', p. 114. 10 Ibid, p. 94. 11 We Own It, p. 121. 12 GEO Newsletter, Issue 51, Mar-Apr 2002, p. 11. 13 Ibid. 14 Dieter Dambiec (referring to works of P. R. Sarkar) in 'Cooperatives: Alternative Economic Structures and Business Enterprises', http://www.proutworld.org/features/coops.htm 15 This chart is taken almost verbatim, with only slight changes made by this author, from the book 'A Look at Decentralized Economy and the Cooperative System', by Ac. Tadbhavananda Avt., PROUT Research Institute, Copenhagen. Published by Proutist Universal, Copenhagen, 1993. 16 On p. 122 of Proutist Economics, Sarkar defines 'economic holdings' as those where the market price of the produce will exceed the cost of production including capital, labour and machinery. Lands which produce economically viable agricultural wealth - where output exceeds input - are called 'economic holdings.' 'Uneconomic holdings' Sarkar defines as those lands where the market price of the produce is less than the cost of production after including the costs of all the inputs. 17 Ibid, p. 115. 18 Ibid, p. 128. ---