>>96 2019-04-30 08:05:43 🏴
Hey guys, officecuck anon here

In our day to day lives of wage-slavery under capitalism, we get up each day and go to work for a capitalist boss making him money. While left(ish) thinkers from Proudhon to Carson to Wolff to even Cockshott (albeit as a transitionary phase to cybernetic planning) have promoted workers coops, there has been no concerted effort to promote this idea.

Advantages:

1. We get to quit being wagecucks for a capitalist and work for ourselves. Although we are still cucked by a greater capitalistic economy competing with our coops, we at least are free of an immediate capitalistic boss, CEO or manager.

2. It takes away profits from the bourgeois. One of the greatest ideas of a coop-economy is that every dollar of profit made by the alternative coop economy is one dollar less made by huge capitalist corporations. It is an immediately practical form of building dual power.

3. It leverages one of the few actual freedoms we have under capitalism: consumer choice.

Objections: Now I know some of you have objections to this on the basis that its too similar to the old utopian socialists who tried to make coops. Its still market based and still capitalist. The difference is that this is not the end all be all, just a stopgap. In the same way universal healthcare etc does equal socialism but does make the lives of workers better.

Cooperatives will not bring the revolution but they will make the experience of work better right now. Yes there is the danger that it will instill a petit bourgeois mentality in the workers in more successful cooperatives, or in industries with higher profit margins such as tech. However this is cancelled by the fact that there should be a NETWORK of cooperatives which offer discounted rates to each other. There should be a leftist search engine/portal, a cooperative ‘amazon.com’ where the workers coops can all list their goods, services, and job listings and buy from/cross promote each other. Similar to how black nationalists say ‘buy black’, we would say ‘buy counter-economy’. Basically any time a left person or other workers coop goes online to buy something including services they would check that site first, in order to see if it has it. This would circle money back into the counter- economy, growing it and conversely shrinking the economy of the bourgeois.

Now as a cockshottist myself I forsee that once socialists seize power (whether through election or other means) we will basically forcibly mutualize the remainder of the economy from the bourgeois, institute direct e-democracy voting, and start building an electronic planning/labor voucher system which will eventually transition the network of cooperatives to a cybernetically planned economy. But I digress. The point is almost every leftist can agree (except leftcoms who will just sit around doing nothing like usual and accelerationists obv) that building dual power is the way to go. Unionizing simply leads to compromise with the bourgeois for better benefits. Coops give works control of their immediate enterprise NOW, as opposed to waiting for the revolution which might not happen for years.

What do you guys say, is this the new praxis?
>>99 2019-04-30 10:11:16
Yes, worker coops are something we can work on NOW, but they are hard to get started. How do you get capital to get started? Most workers don't have much in savings and they don't want to risk it on one business. You also can't get a loan from a bank. If you go to a venture capitalist, they will want shares in your business, which makes it no longer a coop.

I think "Venture Communism" is the way forward. The venture commune will spurn off many worker run enterprises.
~Venture Capitalists are not interested in extending loans to start-ups. What they want is equity – they want shared ownership of the firm. And ideally they want a controlling stake in the firm. The problem with a loan, from their point-of-view, is that it can be paid off. At which point, the firm is entirely ours, and they have no further claim on the profits that our labour creates.

~Equity capital is essentially exploitative. And this is why Venture Capitalists want it. And since they have a monopoly on the supply of Capital they demand it, and get it.

~Venture Communism is a type of voluntary workers association, which supports the collective accumulation of Land and Capital. It has 2 key institutions: worker co-ops and the commune itself.

~My feeling is that finding commercial success is the least difficult condition to meet. You eventually find commercial success if you fund a sufficient number of business start-ups. So really this is a numbers game. It will eventually happen given enough attempts.

Blue text and image copied from https://ianwrightsite.wordpress.com/2018/08/02/venture-capitalism-versus-venture-communism/

I think there is an easy way to get the commune going: we could just take over a credit union! The benefits of taking over an existing institution are that we have instant access to capital and all of the systems are in place (IT, HR, accounting etc.)

1. Find a large credit union that has open membership, but not many members vote
2. Get all your radical friends to sign up
3. Get all the radicals to vote commies onto the board of directors

That's it! Now the credit union can extend loans to buy up the means of production. These assets are then rented to newly formed worker coops.

Since the venture commune is a credit union, it can also have its own payment system. Once we get large enough, we can have our own payment system like Visa, Mastercard of Alipay. This system will give a discount to purchases made from businesses within the commune, encouraging the growth of the commune's businesses.
>>116 2019-05-01 05:30:50
>>99
This seems like something we can start on now, like literally today.

What if we are in different countries? What credit unions should we sign up to?
>>119 2019-05-01 07:58:42
>>99 kindof a brainlet here can you TLDR this for me? So basically we would take over a credit union and use that to do the financing of workers coops?

That way they don't have to rely on bank loans/equity capital to get started?
>>127 2019-05-01 10:06:02
There's nothing stopping you from signing up to multiple credit unions. My original line of thinking was, that if everyone who is interested, all over the world, signs up to a bunch of credit unions, we should be able to take over a couple of them.

>>116
Unfortunately most countries ban banks from opening accounts for non-residents. I'm doing research into this. If you know of a major country that lets non-residents open bank accounts, please let us know! Otherwise we'll have to take over credit unions in our own countries.

>>119
~So basically we would take over a credit union and use that to do the financing of workers coops?

Yes. The venture commune (which, in my opinion, we can start by taking over a credit union) buys the means of production from the rest of the economy. Then, the venture commune rents the means of production to worker coops.

This gets around the issue of worker coops exploiting other worker coops. The venture commune acts as a mediator because it can set the terms under which the worker coops rent the means of production.

Since the venture commune is a credit union, it has access to inter-bank lending. So the venture commune can buy up much more means of production than it has in deposits.
>>130 2019-05-01 17:20:58
I wrote an entire manifesto that is basically this idea. Where do you live?
>>131 2019-05-01 17:40:16
is there a way for example discord we could communicate
>>132 2019-05-01 21:13:49
Idea for financing things: This is basically a tamed and reversed Ponzi scheme. In a Ponzi scheme, early investors make money by getting in more investors, who are then pressured to get more new investors in turn to get their money back and so on, until you run out of new investors and then the system bursts. The later investors are the losers.

Let's turn that upside-down. Here, the first "investor" definitely loses money, so that has to be a donation by somebody enthusiastic for whatever you promise to do. After that, those who made the latest investments make money if/when the system bursts. You got that? The idea here is to help with something that has continuous costs operating. It starts with a fund that is split in two: for paying the running costs for a very short time AND some money is put aside as a reward for those who have made the latest investments when the fund for the continuous costs runs out.

There is still one issue: What if whatever gets financed with it turns out to be much worse than expected or nothing gets done at all, but the money keeps on flowing because of the prize? There could be a voting option to blow up the system and pay out the prize instead. But now we have to consider the opposite case that something good gets done with the funding, but somebody just wants the prize anyway and goes for the nuclear option. To reduce this problem, we link the voting power for the self-destruct option only to investment payments that are TOO OLD to also work as a right to a share of the prize.
>>138 2019-05-02 07:41:09 🐏
>>130
>>131

I'm a burger myself not that poster
>>144 2019-05-02 13:03:06
This is
>>99 and
>>127 writing

>>130
Sounds interesting, got a link?

I am not bound to one country.

>>131
You can send me a message on bitmessage. My address is BM-2cSpkUa8YpYJAZ4shjbC2ycdo2AAz6AEWf

Download bitmessage here https://www.bitmessage.org/wiki/Main_Page It's a pretty cool program with other features, like "chans". They're more like a chatroom than a forum or imageboard. I'm listening on the leftypol chan.

Chan name: leftypol
Chan bitmessage address: BM-2cTDgubcAgHmgW6vnuZZjKAa6hAfuBGP31
>>145 2019-05-02 19:15:40
>>144

why not ricochet as thats has its source code audited by cybersecurity guys wheras bitmessage hasnt yet...
>>146 2019-05-03 01:22:01
>>145
Can you do a group chat with ricochet?
>>147 2019-05-03 06:05:40
>>146 not last time i checked althought that was over a year ago. That and tor im are options worth investigating, meanwhile i will check your thing out
>>149 2019-05-03 07:12:01
>>131 discord is spyware and cancer

Quick Reply
~bluetext +embedYTvidid **spoiler**
Flair:

Image/Video (4MB limit):



By using this website, I agree to the terms and conditions




All content on supremereality.us is user generated and does not necessarily reflect the views of the owner(s) and/or developer(s) of supremereality.us. Report a Bug