I absolutely agree that the most efficient and ethical way to structure an organization with the well being of the many, rather than the few, in mind would be worker-owned and directed. However, this does not necessarily exclude them from making decisions that would benefit themselves contrary to the well being of society. One obvious example would be a company in the oil and gas industry making decisions that further the effects of climate change. This, then, would seem to be a political question left to a participatory democracy (a real one!). I think that is perfectly reasonable, but I am curious if you believe this scenario is one of any real concern. Are most decisions made by capitalist owners of such a nature which would never happen under a worker-directed structure? Or, would it be reasonable to assume some of those decisions will still be made, but could be addressed (maybe solely) legislatively.
Prof. Wolff responds to your question in this video message. Please click here: https://youtu.be/8QrviWNhk78
Showing 2 reactions