Enjoy your visit here!
As cringe as political blogposts may be, I already am cringe and I feel whoever might stumble upon this might find it worthwile. Because currently I don't think lot of people are happy with what is happening. be it the rise of spyware being so advanced that you will be categorized by the cameras on every street, to the total inability of handling climate change, to the rising inequality in every nation, it might be worth to come up something better than what he have today. For that I'm going to rant about syndicalism.
To give an elevator pitch on syndicalism: Companies that are run democratically.
Sadly I'm not as great of a writer as I wish to be, so it will have to do. I hope what my message loses by my dry (and possibly badly spelled) writing, I can make up in it's ease of access.
So how do things work in here? While I don't think you can ever determine how everything will work without actually testing it in real life, we can make estimations. So here they are:
Imagine we all throw the bag of coin at the end of the month at the table and determine how that will be spend. What do we do? A few percent of it (3-7%) will go to the state to fund public goods. then what we have left of the pie is split in 3 parts. One to pay for the fixed cost like licenses, rent, equipment and R&D, a slice for basic payments and lastly a slice for bonuses.
Extra payments are given to those we all consider important and give much to the company. At the end of a period, be it 3 months or a year, we make a vote by giving a point to someone else on the team. The thing being we can't vote for ourseles. Then every point you will recieve allows you to take a slice of the bonus. By using blockchain for the voting mechanism, ensuring that all transactions are stored but also displayed openly on a screen, we can sleep at night knowing that while some on the team can try to rig the game, they can't rig it that much in their favour or it will be visible from space. This in turn makes it so that pay can be gifted on merit or as close as we are to measuring it, while at the same time ensuring that massive inequality stops. Can someone who is talented and hard working buy himself a mansion and a yacht? Yes. Is he ever able to amass a fortune that gives him enough power to pribe every politican he wants? No. This goes to other way around too, no longer are you left with sweatshop workers being paid pennies while their pay might as well have went up 10 times without the sweatshop owner noticing a change in his life.
For this I have a two anwsers. One is economic, one is political.
The issue with modern politics is that it essentially is about picking a face who will pass laws that, to be honest, neither you or me actually know what are. The only feedback we can give is after 'x' years when next elections happen. Frequently we might even agree with multiple party policies, yet are unable to pick the actual policies but instead are stuck with the parties. As a solution to this we can try sortition. We randomly pick a group from the population of a country and let them (with the help of experts) pass and make laws. This blind sortition could allow the voices to be heard not just from every profesion, age and sex, it would also lead away from the binary thinking about "us" or "them" that plagues modern politics. Actually if you want in depth read about this, I suggest picking up 'Against Elections: The Case for Democracy'. Don't be turned off by the mug of Trump on the 2016 edition. If historical context and actual tests can't presuade you at least a little bit, I don't know what will.
Companies are also graded on their social index, which the exact value of is debated locally, and action is taken against them if they score low on it. This allows for a pushback against any company doing huge environmental damage, censorship or mistreatment of the workforce. I would even argue that some industries should priotize this over profit, since the way economy works can be seen as a algorithm that uses profit as a heuristic, we can change that heuristic for some industries like the medical one, since I don't believe human live and wellbeing should depend on whenever he is profitable or not.
Economically your stock options would be tied to your workplace. You hold a stock in a company so long you reside in there, you can't trade it, and it leaves you once you leave the company. This not only produces motivation for everyone on the team to succeed, it also doesn't allow other corporations to eat up the smaller ones by devouring their shares, thereby killing any semblence of competition. It stops from corpo goliaths forming that are few yet have immense power over the many. I also believe this would shrink companies and make them more local, thereby stimulating local culture by keeping the local coffeehouse truly local instead of starbucks #4526, but also make them more adaptable to change and more modular, cause everything what a big company is needed for, a few smaller modular ones can replace it.
Furthermore, we can collect by the taxation from corporations money that will be given to everyone as social payment. This passive income allows people both young and old, poor and rich, to expect a basis of care. No longer would anyone be afraid to not have a roof under his head. artist, social workers and other people which a market could never show the value of wouldn’t worry about not being able to continue their livelihood. To some extent even people interested in plain laziness should have the right to it. And how much some despise them, I doubt that these people won't regret not having more time to spend on their hobby, family or friends. The worry that people wouldn't want to work is I think unfounded too. People who actually don't work for long periods of time report not being satisfied with their life, and I'm sure that the average man in, let's say, south of USA would shiver by the thought of recieving pay while not being employed, and under syndicalism he would have a good reason to work since his pay could grow much more than if he just remained idle.
No, because it doesn't happen even now in large part, and would be eliminated under syndicalism completely. Take note that only corporations pay tax under syndicalism, you as a consumer won't pay a thing beyond that. Secondly money in the modern world already rarely is a problem. Just think about how in the last decades whole banks and firms were saved by bailouts. Somehow I only see money being critiqued only if it doesn't reach the hands of the wealthy, even though this essentially is nothing more than money, in modern times completely digital too since only around 20% of the money supply is in cash, being given away for free. And so far money is considered, under syndicalism it's much more conservatie about where money comes from that what we currently have to bankroll the wealthy.
It's not. It's a better world in my view, but it's not like it doesn't have drawbacks and no issues will come from it. There will be, but in the same way it should be crazy to be worried about a famine in the developed world or worrying about not being able to even criticize whatever you want, I think we should start seeing lot of modern issues in the same light. Because technology exists for a better world, what needs to change is how the world is structured and to what goals the technology is being used.RETURN TO INDEX!