Free Market Economics = Cooperatives

Posted on Tuesday, July 11 at 10:34 by Anonymous
In May I spent five days in Emilia Romagna, a region of four million people in northern central Italy. There, over the last 150 years, a network of consumer, farmer and worker-driven cooperatives has come to generate 30 percent to 40 percent of the region’s GDP. Two of every three people in Emilia Romagna are members of co-ops. The region, whose hub city is Bologna, is home to 8,000 co-ops, producing everything from ceramics to fashion to specialty cheese. Their industriousness is woven into networks based on what cooperative leaders like to call “reciprocity.” All co-ops return 3 percent of profits to a national fund for cooperative development, and the movement supports centers providing help in finance, marketing, research and technical expertise." The fact is that these counter economic experiments in Italy began in the Hot Autumn of the early seventies. They also gave rise to the autonomist movement of the working class in the cities who took part in rent strikes and food strikes, where they decided the price of the products they would buy. A different kind of wage and price control regime than that of the State which was also embracing this during the economic crisis of the time. http://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2006/07/free-market-economicscooperatives.html [Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on July 11, 2006]

Note: http://plawiuk.blogspot...

Contributed By


Topic


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:23 am
    Exactly! Exactly! Exactly! Capitalism is NOT about free markets, free enterprise etc. It is about the restriction of these. Pull the plug on the corporations and people will create their own enterprises both individually and cooperatively owned. We don't need the greed heads!

  2. by shagya
    Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:36 pm
    I concur. But I also have doubts the idea of anarchist-socialism will light too many bulbs on this forum. The range of opinions here seems to be between social democracy AND "strong governemnt" to neo-liberalism ( AND also strong government). Perhaps some of the regulars would like to prove me wrong?

  3. Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:33 pm
    Your opinions can't be proven wrong. Logical impossibility.

    But, I for one believe in a totally free market, and smaller government. Not nessecarally 'weaker' government. Just completely removing business backed lobbiests from the equation.

    ---
    "I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden

  4. Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:40 pm
    To Shagya <br />
    <br />
    What I do get is you are a pawn in another mans game.<br />
    Your opinion has been shaped from birth and like a good little automaton you freak at anything that attacks those instilled beliefs.<br />
    Now there is a possibility that my assessment based on your offerings here are out of whack. I will give you the benefit of doubt that you may have an open mind after all and will know by your response to that which I now include.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <a href="http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewvideo.php?vid=cen_of_self1">http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewvideo.php?vid=cen_of_self1</a> <br />
    <br />
    I concur. But I also have doubts the idea of anarchist-socialism will light too many bulbs on this forum. The range of opinions here seems to be between social democracy AND "strong governemnt" to neo-liberalism ( AND also strong government). Perhaps some of the regulars would like to prove me wrong?<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    That you and many others have doubts comes as no surprise due to the fact emotionally charged labels and their definitions have been programmed into mass consciousness.<br />
    In order to actually see what is going on one must divest themselves from well over half a century of state sanctioned mind control.<br />
    The very foundations of thought have been deliberately constructed so&#8217;s that there will be predictable outcomes.<br />
    I invite any who would challenge this to view the video series to be found at the included address.<br />
    <br />
    <a href="http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewvideo.php?vid=cen_of_self2">http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewvideo.php?vid=cen_of_self2</a> <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    for more on the &#8220;Engineering of Consent&#8221; select any from this address<br />
    <br />
    <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2006-17%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=engineering+consent+%2B+Edward+Bernaise">http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2006-17%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=engineering+consent+%2B+Edward+Bernaise</a> <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <p>---<br>The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.... : Albert Einstein

  5. by shagya
    Thu Jul 13, 2006 5:44 am
    If I knew for certain what you are talking about I could perhaps give a more inclusive answer. As for my beliefs these have changed a number of times over the course of a lifetime and I'm in my middle fifties. At one time I was quite conservative in the general sense of the word although I tended towards social democracy as a teenager. Marxism didn't really turn my crank even during the sixties and seventies, the heyday of the "new left", since I never really considered the "marketplace" to be the major source of social evil. However I do think control over one's life including the economic areas is just part of being an adult AND a responsible citizen. The impression I have received is that the range of opinions on this forum seem to run between social democracy and neo-liberalism and I will continue to stand by this. I'll assume this point is now sufficiently clear.

  6. by shagya
    Thu Jul 13, 2006 10:40 am
    And just in case it isn't I will state for the record that I am in general sympathy ( although not always in complete agreement ) with the "left" side of things. This does not mean "comradely" criticism is not sometimes justified. What I have noticed is an occasional tendency for arguments to be unduely confined. Leftists will accuse conservatives of being little else than "greedheads" while some rightists will complain their opposite numbers are "merely" anti-American. This gets repeated too many times for my taste. The kindest, or at least, the most polite manner of description for this state of affairs would be a double bind; or perhaps it is just people everywhere seem to have a tendency to talk around each other rather than dealing with any issues at hand. Likewise accusing me of somehow following someone else's "line ",or whatever this might be called, is a bit weird or maybe this is just a reflection of the internet habit which sees rudeness to strangers as a "fair cop".



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news