Adam
I'm thinking about a book a read a few months back, called Fired Up About Capitalism (which is actually a kinda anti-capitalist book). The article below is by the author and presents a very simplified version of the book's argument.
Although it isn't platonic ideal of a political and economic structure, I think it is a worth goal.
Adam
It's radical enough to significantly improve the lives of almost everyone, but still similar enough to our current systems that it wouldn't be relatively easy to get people to buy-in (easier than true socialism or full communism, at least). It's basically the Nordic social democratic model on steroids, but with way more worker co-ops, to allow for more democracy in the workplace.
Adam
In theory, it could be achieved through electoral politics.
I think there is an appetite for some of the ideas proposed, but more people need to be exposed to the ideas. I don't think enough people realize there are ways of structuring work so it has fewer (or no) hierarchies, even within capitalism.
Adam
The proposed model does still seem to suffer from the problem of social democracy more generally, which is that it still relies heavily on imperialism and exploitation of cheap labour in the developing world, but as a starting point to a more just world, maybe it could work, as long as we don't view it as the end of the journey.
Adam
Now if only there was a political party in Canada that was willing to push the envelope and move in that direction. The NDP is the closest thing among the major parties, but they're still to the right of the ideas in the book.
Adam
That said, if we ever do get meaningful electoral reform in this country, I suspect the NDP establishment will be more willing to be as openly leftist as most of the rank and file members want them to be. And the Green Party would have a greater shot at success, which could also move things in the right direction.
Adam
(or maybe not, since the Green Party of Canada is weird in that it's sometimes quite leftist and other times quite conservative, despite being an environmentalist party)
Bob Jonkman
Bob Jonkman
Adam
@bobjonkmangreen I mean, the PC party (in the places it still exists) describes itself that way, too.
It tends to be one of those terms that sounds good but doesn't really mean much -- or at least is so flexible as to mean whatever you want it to mean.
(It also depends on what you consider "all the good leftist things.")
Adam
@bobjonkmangreen Now, having said that, the Green Party is far more grassroots than the NDP, so ordinary members can have greater influence on policy. I'm not sure how meaningful that is when they only have one MP, and whether they'd maintain that internal democracy if they started gaining more power is anyone's guess since it's purely hypothetical at this point, but it is nice to see a sort of bottom-up party that is at least nominally left of centre.
Bob Jonkman
Bob Jonkman
Adam
@bobjonkmangreen Other parties follow similar methods, but I've noticed the conventions are often organized in such as way as to make it much more likely that certain policies will be voted on and others will be left to lie in limbo for two years until the next convention...when they will also probably not make it to the convention floor.
Adam
@bobjonkmangreen And, of course, parties will frequently ignore their own policies when campaigning, because they don't think they can win. That's pragmatic, I guess, but also deeply cynical.
But, yes, getting involved with a party can be a good tactic. I am frequently cynical about electoral politics -- and almost almost cynical about internal party politics -- but I still get involved because it's one of the main tools available to influence formal policy changes.
Jonkman Microblog is a social network, courtesy of SOBAC Microcomputer Services. It runs on GNU social, version 1.2.0-beta5, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All Jonkman Microblog content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.