💾 Archived View for bjornwestergard.com › notes › schweickart-after-capitalism.gmi captured on 2024-06-16 at 12:16:59. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2023-07-22)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Schweickart considers three alternative socialisms: comamnd socialism (of the Soviet type), technocratic market socialism (of which Matt Bruenig's proposals are a contemporary example), and marketless participatory socialism.
Schweickart endorses Alec Nove's criticisms of detailed central planning: it is simply too enormous to do well, it generates perverse or inadequate incentives, and it leads to a concentration of power in the provisioning processes that cannot but undermine checks and balances in other areas of life (e.g. a free press).
Schweickart is critical of proposals like John Roemer's and James Yunkers, that aim to distribute the profits of firms competing in the market among the whole population in an essentially egalitarian way. The shares would be held by a "Bureau of Public Ownership" (Yunker) or Soverign Wealth Fund (Bruenig) tasked with ensuring that firms make a healthy return for the public at large. Schweickart concedes that this "pragmatic market socialism" is a viable option, and preferable to capitalism because it can be expected to dramatically reduce income inequality. The major problem with the proposal is that it is difficult to imagine how transition to it could occur. While Economic Democracy is prefigured by movements to limit the mobility of capital, extend worker control, etc. it is difficult to see any real-world movement choosing technocratic market socialism as its horizon.
Parecon's essential flaw is that it requires decisions to be made about aggregates (e.g. tons of food), which inevitably gives planners ("facilitators") tremendous discretionary powers. And this despite obligating all citizens to do a tremenous amount of work developing exhaustive consumption and work plans.