[Politics_Observer]

@noemon

Yeah, American servicemen who fought in the Korean War had a very favorable opinion of the Greek soldiers. They said they fought very well. I had an elderly friend who fought in the Korean War and would tell me war stories about fighting the Chinese. He was one of the reasons why I joined the Army. He was a successful business man and a great leader in the community too.

[Politics_Observer]

@noemon

Here is a video where American veterans of the Korean War discuss serving with the Greeks in Korea.

The Chinese tended to avoid the Greeks in Korea .

[Tainari88]

@noemon wrote:

In theory it does. It also works in the Great Monasteries of Mt Athos among the monks and it also works in reality as long as you have willing people doing work for free and covering other people's work for free. In practise as soon as 1 single individual feels left out or exploited, the whole chain collapses.

Well, I think the part of the video I posted clearly illustrates that Mondragon has competed head-to-head with capitalist businesses since its founding in 1956. That is a long time Noemon. Francisco Franco the fascist dictator did not squash it because it is based on and was founded by a Roman Catholic priest. It was the church and in Spain? Francisco Franco respected the church's decisions. Mondragon though as stated by Richard Wolff (do you need me to cue up the part he explains that the chain doesn't collapse? In fact Mondragon has over 100,000 worker cooperates among its membership and when a competing pro capitalist hierarchical model implodes and can't survive and it lets those workers go they then can be absorbed by the coop model. They have a university, they have and continue to expand all the time Noemon. It functions extremely well and they invite people to go and study the model to replicate it. It encompasses agriculture, industry, and many parts of economic activity. No one works for free.

It does require investment of your time and efforts. But once you are in and a part of the decision making process it works. It beats the model of management and CEOs getting multi-million dollar bonuses and even though the business closes down to move to China the CEO gets a golden ticket of millions or billions for his bad and undemocratic exploitation time at the company. That never happens with cooperatives.

If you expand all the most lucrative and important industries and make them all worker-owned and managed and built? You democratize the relationship. The power lies in the group. Not individuals. It is also the way evolutionary theory works in science too. The group evolves and the individuals don't evolve. They get their value from the group dynamic and group wealth generation.

It is an excellent model. It is the biggest and most successful cooperative model in the world Noemon.

In the end Noemon we are products of what our communities give and allow. And if you have a strong community? You have great strength. It works Noemon. After all, pooling all labor and work and out of the many efforts of the many comes the mass wealth all these billionaires feel exclusively entitled to play with and waste in these wars, these polluting industries and in production that in the end doesn't benefit the vast majority. It only leaves despair, unemployment, uncertainty and scarcity, and despondency.

The reality is with climate change, and the big problems coming our way? The only way out of the hole Noemon is going to be cooperating with each other, cleaning up each other's messes, preventing our land, air, and water from becoming a desert of contaminated uselessness.

It is time to criticize the system that so many people think is the end-all of life. Capitalism. It is time to give other models a space to flourish. And not be stomped out of fear of losing control. It has to allow the ability of humans to cooperate and share to be the center of economic engines and not competing and exploiting.

[noemon]

It is an excellent model. It is the biggest and most successful cooperative model in the world Noemon.

It is indeed an excellent model. I have been to the Basque country and have a particular thing for co-operatives. I actively support 2 co-ops in Cambridge with free labour. The Co-op model has been attempted several times and it has failed even more.

It takes a lot of ingredients to run a succesful co-op and the values required are conservative family values, not the values that leftists and communists stand for. Communists have called these co-ops 'fascist' and Mondragon and its Catholic founder has most probably been called that by local & international communists.

Also:

At Mondragon, there are agreed-upon wage ratios between executive work and field or factory work which earns a minimum wage. These ratios range from 3:1 to 9:1 in different cooperatives and average 5:1. That is, the general manager of an average Mondragon cooperative earns no more than 5 times as much as the theoretical minimum wage paid in their cooperative. For most workers, this ratio is smaller because there are few Mondragon worker-owners that earn minimum wages, because most jobs are somewhat specialized and are classified at higher wage levels. The wage ratio of a cooperative is decided periodically by its worker-owners through a democratic vote.[25]

Compared to similar jobs at local industries, Mondragon managers' wages are considerably lower (as some companies pay their best paid managers hundreds of times more than the lowest-paid employee of the company)[26] and equivalent for middle management, technical and professional levels. Lower wage levels are on average 13% higher than similar jobs at local businesses. Spain's progressive tax rate further reduces any disparity in pay.[25] These low wages can make it very difficult to recruit managers from investor-owned firms.[27]

[noemon]

@noemon

Here is a video where American veterans of the Korean War discuss serving with the Greeks in Korea.

The Chinese tended to avoid the Greeks in Korea .

Thanks for this video mate. I am already sharing it with my mates.

Also check this out.

Greece is the only country outside the Big-3(US, UK & Russia) credited for the defeat of the Nazis.

[Politics_Observer]

@noemon

I like this quote below.

Winston Churchill said, “Hence, we will not say that Greeks fight like heroes, but that heroes fight like Greeks.”

Heroes fight like a Spartan .

From what I read, several times in history, because Greece is not a super power or major power and is a small country, people have under-estimated how much of a fight Greece will actually put up .

[Saeko]

Many CEOs are great managers. In any even I am with you, I despise crony capitalism.

However, capitalism due to innovation and creativity is the best system we have.

Lastly, you guys always compare the status of the disenfranchised and minorities to CEOs and billionaires. Do you realize that those people are just a tiny tiny tint minority in the planet. Most white people are average. You need a better point of reference.

I wasn't talking about "crony" capitalism or minorities. I was asking you to find one example of a fortune 500 (I'll take something a bit smaller too) where the inventor of some gadget is also the CEO or owner or major stockholder in the company, so we can see this supposed talent and innovation promotion in action.

[Julian658]

I wasn't talking about "crony" capitalism or minorities. I was asking you to find one example of a fortune 500 (I'll take something a bit smaller too) where the inventor of some gadget is also the CEO or owner or major stockholder in the company, so we can see this supposed talent and innovation promotion in action.

The inventor or creator eventually retires and a CEO type takes over as the business becomes gigantic and inefficient. That is how American cars lost ground to foreign cars in the 60s and 70s. What do you propose we do with those people? The Apple computer creators Jobs and Wozniak are out of the picture. What should we do about Apple? Is Apple a good thing or a bad thing?

[Julian658]

It is indeed an excellent model. I have been to the Basque country and have a particular thing for co-operatives. I actively support 2 co-ops in Cambridge with free labour. The Co-op model has been attempted several times and it has failed even more.

It takes a lot of ingredients to run a succesful co-op and the values required are conservative family values, not the values that leftists and communists stand for. Communists have called these co-ops 'fascist' and Mondragon and its Catholic founder has most probably been called that by local & international communists.

Also:

No one is preventing all the socialist in the world to pool their resources and start a Coop business. However, most socialist simply want the wealth created by others, it is that simple. They are also idealist that think with the heart instead of the brain.

BTW, everyday in the world small groups of men and women start a coop business where they are the owners. Most of these are very small companies.

[Unthinking Majority]

Socialism works. You get workers to own the means of production and it survives hard economic times. Despite conventional capitalist models that hate democratic economic models that make workers equal partners and equal investors in their own labor enterprises.

Richard Wolff points out this corporation owned by a cooperative of workers in Spain as a model you can replicate all over the world and it is happening now. It won't collapse because the workers are not exploited and are an integral part of all decision making in a democratic format.

It will work. It just gives rid of top-heavy management and it makes the worker the power figure and it is about democracy in the workplace. That is what will work. Not pies in the sky. Or Mafia-style oligarchs from a collapsed Soviet model.

How are you so sure "it will work" though? Based on what evidence? Economies are extremely complex, there's a billion variables and nobody can fully account for all of them, it's like predicting the weather a month from now, so the only way to know if anything will work is trial and error. Try something on a small scale, then a bigger scale etc.

It's like the $15 minimum wage. Sounds like a good idea, but since the economy is complex nobody knows how it will affect small businesses, or wages for other workers, or prices/inflation etc until it's put into practice. That's also why you can't predict the stock market, because economists usually don't know shit, there's too many moving parts.

Cooperatives have been around for a long time, anyone can form one. I think the reason they haven't taken off on a mass scale is that most people who would take the time to create an organization/business would rather get profit from it and make a lot of money than simply be one owner of many for the benefit of all. People are more selfish than you're giving credit for.

I'm not anti-socialist, i would love a better system, my message for socialists is just: "put up for shut-up". We've been waiting 150+ years for this wonderful alternative to capitalism and many have tried but we're still waiting. The Nordic countries have at least figured out something that works pretty well in real practice.

[Tainari88]

@Unthinking Majority Mondragon is not the only one that exists in the world. One good example and there are others in many other nations of successful worker owned businesses Unthinking. One I can put in here that is in the USA and has been growing from a small group to about a business with 116 worker members? Alvarado Street Bakery in California. They even carry their products in chain supermarkets in California.

Here is the link:
https://www.alvaradostreetbakery.com/bread/coop

Read the model they have. Again the workers own the entire enterprise.

The market with the dumping of capitalist price. They do it to profit. They have to do it to make a profit. It is ghastly waste.

Most businesses in the vast majority of developing nations are small businesses even in the USA. You have 50-150 employees or less you are a small business.

If all of these smaller businesses had health care by the state and also were completely fair with the wage distributions with the profits done by the workers labor? You come out winning a lot in the small businesses. For example many bakers in commercial industries make not very competitive wages and can be fired easily. The bakers make a very good living in Alvarado Street Bakery. And they have tremendous job security. The kind that union factory jobs provided in Michigan and Indiana and Ohio in the good ole days of Chrysler/GM etc in the sixties and fifties in the USA.

Unthinking the problem you have is that the corporate media never emphasizes these models of socialism. They don't.

If it did catch on and grew? It is an enormous threat to those huge industries that are owned by stockholders that never baked a loaf of whole wheat bread in their lives. And who don't give a shit about the product. They want the return in the alienated greedy way that only benefits people who believe in the model of those with more get more....and those who work....get exploited.

I think you need to study better economic alternatives. Too many people have no idea what socialism truly is. It was attacked and dismantled because the ones in charge can't allow a challenge.

But unless people start looking for a way out of the gig economy and flat wages and low quality of life, and three jobs and exhaustion, debt and misery as the only way to live in the world?

There is not going to be much to do...I happen to think it is going to have to be inevitable. Once the resources just aren't there anymore? You either cooperate and work sharing the gains or the waste is not going to be tolerated. It is simply more efficient. Logical, and streamlined.

Gallons of milk thrown away, mountains of tomatoes left to rot, etc. All because of the boom and bust model of capitalism. Is this good for humanity? I don't think so.

[Politics_Observer]

@noemon

Yes, listening to the American Korean War veterans speak of Greek soldiers that fought in the Korean War, I think the reason why these Greek soldiers fought so well is because they probably had actual combat experience prior to going to Korea. Do you know the history of some of these Greek soldiers prior to going to Korea?

Green (soldiers who lack combat experience) soldiers usually don't fight so well and with such fearlessness as the Greeks did in Korea and I suspect the reason they fought so well is they had plenty of combat experience prior to deploying to Korea. More battle hardened soldiers tend to fight with more fearlessness because they have become more combat hardened and used to the conditions of combat.

At the time I deployed to Afghanistan, we had soldiers who had already served multiple combat deployments and had already seen combat and so they were pretty much our leaders. I think the fact we had some soldiers in my unit that had actual combat experience prior to my deployment is one reason why we did well in some of our engagements. During the recent Iraq and Afghanistan wars it was very common for American soldiers to have served many combat deployments given we had an all volunteer force and people didn't want to join the army because wars were being fought at the time. Experience certainly matters.

[Paddy14]

Why do young people become socialists?

Well I'm still in school, so I guess I qualify as 'young people', and while I don't know as much as most people here - my guess is that we are all so sick of what capitalism does in all our societies, that we want to try something else - something human, that doesn't have the 'bottom line' as its first priority.

Does anyone think this system, with its huge inequality, its violence, and its selfish pursuit of wealth (at the expense of others) is ideal? Capitalism, in the form of private ownership of the means of production, is fine as long as it is regulated - but it isn't. A balance of regulated capitalism and socialism is the best system, but is only really practised (to some extent) in the Scandinavian societies.

But as to why we want something closer to socialism - a healthy society is not one where 1% of the society live like Roman emperors and the rest eke out an existence or starve.

[noemon]

@noemon

Yes, listening to the American Korean War veterans speak of Greek soldiers that fought in the Korean War, I think the reason why these Greek soldiers fought so well is because they probably had actual combat experience prior to going to Korea. Do you know the history of some of these Greek soldiers prior to going to Korea?

Green (soldiers who lack combat experience) soldiers usually don't fight so well and with such fearlessness as the Greeks did in Korea and I suspect the reason they fought so well is they had plenty of combat experience prior to deploying to Korea. More battle hardened soldiers tend to fight with more fearlessness because they have become more combat hardened and used to the conditions of combat.

At the time I deployed to Afghanistan, we had soldiers who had already served multiple combat deployments and had already seen combat and so they were pretty much our leaders. I think the fact we had some soldiers in my unit that had actual combat experience prior to my deployment is one reason why we did well in some of our engagements. During the recent Iraq and Afghanistan wars it was very common for American soldiers to have served many combat deployments given we had an all volunteer force and people didn't want to join the army because wars were being fought at the time. Experience certainly matters.

Indeed mate, that's what it is really, they did have prior combat experience and a lot of it. I have met a few of them that served in Korea as my village has 3 war heroes from the Korean war. The 2 of them were alive for most of my childhood and their wives functioned like extended grandmothers to me.

Modern Greeks have been at perpetual war since 1687.

From 1687 until 2021, the generations in the Morea(Peloponnese) have seen on average more war & devastation than they have seen peace. And there is also the history mate, a Greek person has a historical weight bearing down their shoulders, when you have several people like Leonidas, Pericles, Achilles, Hercules, Alexander, Justinian, Constantine, Paleologos, Basil, Kolokotronis, Bouboulina looking down on you, you do not really have much of a choice than simply do your ultimate best and try to stand tall as they did.

[Julian658]

Why do young people become socialists?

Well I'm still in school, so I guess I qualify as 'young people', and while I don't know as much as most people here - my guess is that we are all so sick of what capitalism does in all our societies, that we want to try something else - something human, that doesn't have the 'bottom line' as its first priority.

Does anyone think this system, with its huge inequality, its violence, and its selfish pursuit of wealth (at the expense of others) is ideal? Capitalism, in the form of private ownership of the means of production, is fine as long as it is regulated - but it isn't. A balance of regulated capitalism and socialism is the best system, but is only really practised (to some extent) in the Scandinavian societies.

But as to why we want something closer to socialism - a healthy society is not one where 1% of the society live like Roman emperors and the rest eke out an existence or starve.

All you have done is regurgitate worn out phrases form the left. This is the most prosperous time in world history thanks to capitalism. Is it perfect? No it is not. Capitalism cannot bring equality because equality does not exist. The young people of this era are idealistic and compare capitalism to a Utopia that has never existed and never will.

Sweden tried to do socialism and promptly discovered that capitalism was needed to support the social programs; the so called Nordic model. Sweden is privatizing their social security system. For your info in America that is considered extreme right wing. As of 2019 Cuba is leaning to a free market and now allow private property.

I understand why the young people in every era fall in love with socialism, however, it does not work because some people are entrepreneurial and they would be forbidden to create and innovate in a socialist nation. By definition a socialist nation has to be authoritarian.

[Drlee]

Re: Why Are So Many Young People Becoming Socialists?

Well. More affluent ones are. The young people in the fly over states, not so much.

Socialism is an indulgence of the educated. The relatively uneducated are too busy trying to make a living to think much about politics at all other than democrat or republican in the case of the US.

Most people are not socialist, they are what I call "situational socialists". They like individual programs like social security or raising the minimum wage but will curse you for calling them socialist.

Most people who are called "socialist" in the US are just capitalists who want to more equitably divide the pie. The label comes hurling from the right and is intended as a curse.

Capitalism broke the rules and more educated people can see that. For capitalism to truly work it has to put its arms around most people. There was a time when the lives of the wealthy were seen as somewhat of a motivator for everyone who has aspirations of wealth accumulation. Not any more. They are isolating themselves and taking the concept of capitalism with them.

Finally. The people who are embracing socialism in the US do not really call for social ownership of the means of production. They really are just trying to find the political will to provide what people need, such as health care and decent working conditions. They are not championing unionism for example. They are not calling for the dissolution of mega-companies or requiring such companies to share ownership (or even management) with the workers.

The Nordic counties, with their robust social safety nets and worker protections are the goal and most of them are far from socialist in the classical sense. Republicans like to call this "socialism" or even "communism" but really what it is, is the natural result of individual movements revolving around single issues banding together and exercising political power. This will never happen in the US because we are locked into a two party system specifically designed to stop it. There could be reforms and some more bread and circuses but unless the US sees the emergence of robust third, fourth and fifth party strength it will not amount to much here. I see absolutely not evidence that this is even a possibility.

[Paddy14]

All you have done is regurgitate worn out phrases form the left. This is the most prosperous time in world history thanks to capitalism. Is it perfect? No it is not. Capitalism cannot bring equality because equality does not exist. The young people of this era are idealistic and compare capitalism to a Utopia that has never existed and never will.

Sweden tried to do socialism and promptly discovered that capitalism was needed to support the social programs; the so called Nordic model. Sweden is privatizing their social security system. For your info in America that is considered extreme right wing. As of 2019 Cuba is leaning to a free market and now allow private property.

I understand why the young people in every era fall in love with socialism, however, it does not work because some people are entrepreneurial and they would be forbidden to create and innovate in a socialist nation. By definition a socialist nation has to be authoritarian.

And with respect, you are parroting the mantra of the extreme right.

I think there are many degrees of Socialism, just as there are many degrees of Capitalism. The Nordic model is probably the most successful system we have developed so far, and it is not confined to Sweden.

All our countries (including the USA) use a balance of socialism and free enterprise, but the most successful societies as such (which does not include the USA) provide essential safety nets in their efforts to maintain equity (not necessarily equality). And equity is much more important to society than equality. Treating and providing for everyone exactly the same does little to look after those who are disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

A society should be judged - not by the number of billionaires it produces - but by how it treats the least of its citizens.

I am not what I consider to be a Socialist (in the classical sense of the word,) but I certainly want to see much more social justice in all our societies.

[Tainari88]

Well. More affluent ones are. The young people in the fly over states, not so much.

Socialism is an indulgence of the educated. The relatively uneducated are too busy trying to make a living to think much about politics at all other than democrat or republican in the case of the US.

Most people are not socialist, they are what I call "situational socialists". They like individual programs like social security or raising the minimum wage but will curse you for calling them socialist.

Most people who are called "socialist" in the US are just capitalists who want to more equitably divide the pie. The label comes hurling from the right and is intended as a curse.

Capitalism broke the rules and more educated people can see that. For capitalism to truly work it has to put its arms around most people. There was a time when the lives of the wealthy were seen as somewhat of a motivator for everyone who has aspirations of wealth accumulation. Not any more. They are isolating themselves and taking the concept of capitalism with them.

Finally. The people who are embracing socialism in the US do not really call for social ownership of the means of production. They really are just trying to find the political will to provide what people need, such as health care and decent working conditions. They are not championing unionism for example. They are not calling for the dissolution of mega-companies or requiring such companies to share ownership (or even management) with the workers.

The Nordic counties, with their robust social safety nets and worker protections are the goal and most of them are far from socialist in the classical sense. Republicans like to call this "socialism" or even "communism" but really what it is, is the natural result of individual movements revolving around single issues banding together and exercising political power. This will never happen in the US because we are locked into a two party system specifically designed to stop it. There could be reforms and some more bread and circuses but unless the US sees the emergence of robust third, fourth and fifth party strength it will not amount to much here. I see absolutely not evidence that this is even a possibility.

Happy Easter to you Drlee.

I certainly consider myself a socialist. I also come from a working class background. And I come from a ethnic minority in a USA social framework.

I define my socialist as an Erich Fromm socialist. A socialist humanist.

I agree 100% with this type of socialism. It has a place in today's world. A good one @Drlee .

https://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/ ... uction.htm

Don't include me with the non-socialists. I find them not very courageous. It is time to start dealing with dysfunctionality with the capitalism that is going on in 2021. Whether the ones who keep trying to save this bad system and making excuses for it like that or not.

[Drlee]

@Tainari88 Don't include me with the non-socialists. I find them not very courageous. It is time to start dealing with dysfunctionality with the capitalism that is going on in 2021. Whether the ones who keep trying to save this bad system and making excuses for it like that or not.

I could not agree more and I would never put you in the category I mentioned. I was speaking mostly of college students who flirt with socialist ideas, do nothing than run face first into the working world.

loving on the term "socialist humanist". God only knows the world needs a liberal dose of both these days.

I will have to read up on Fromm. I seem to recall reading something of his about Freud but it has been a long time and I may be completely off-base.

The thing is, there are so few people dedicated to speaking directly to the working people. It seems everyone is angling for access to social media and even mainstream media to some extent but nobody is taking their message directly to the folks. I am not certain why it is thought that this would no longer work. I believe it would.

Right after Trump was elected there was an exhilarating "woman's" movement that brought people to the street. Black lives matter did it at well. Both of these movements have been buried after their initial success largely because they have changed their method if not their message.

One problem with "liberal" movements in the US is their dedication to the 'big tent' form of politics. They let themselves become so diluted that that they lose their messaging. It goes something like this:

I attended a demonstration in Tucson. The purpose was to speak to the issue of the treatment of migrants and undocumented aliens. Pretty good stuff and something about which I have strong feelings. But wait. When I got to the park I was confronted by a crowd of about 3000 people who came out to support fair treatment of migrants. What did we the crowd find? Well there were the organizers, of course. There was a group of LGBTQ activists. There was a separate group of trans rights people. They had an invocation provided by a female Native American shaman. In the Native American contingent there was a tribal delegation of probably 50 people who were interested in water rights. Me Too was there also.... The democratic party was running around trying to register people and the Biden folks were passing out bumper stickers. They had a sign language interpreter but, are you ready for this, not a single speaker who gave remarks in Spanish. There were several people carrying "Close Gitmo" signs. There were a few anti-gun folks and the BLM people were running around like they had no leader because they had no leader but a lot of folks.

So the thing is that there was no real message except some vague, almost 60's sort of counterculture vibe.

We need to reform American capitalism soon. I fear we are heading for a cliff. Now is the time to introduce some basing humanist principles into the discussion. I just wish we could get our groups to stay on message. Once we have the politics worked out we can deal with Native American graveyards and plural marriage.

Do you know what I mean @Tainari88 . It is just so frustrating sometimes.

[Julian658]

And with respect, you are parroting the mantra of the extreme right.

I think there are many degrees of Socialism, just as there are many degrees of Capitalism. The Nordic model is probably the most successful system we have developed so far, and it is not confined to Sweden.

All our countries (including the USA) use a balance of socialism and free enterprise, but the most successful societies as such (which does not include the USA) provide essential safety nets in their efforts to maintain equity (not necessarily equality). And equity is much more important to society than equality. Treating and providing for everyone exactly the same does little to look after those who are disadvantaged through no fault of their own.

A society should be judged - not by the number of billionaires it produces - but by how it treats the least of its citizens.

I am not what I consider to be a Socialist (in the classical sense of the word,) but I certainly want to see much more social justice in all our societies.

For the love of God: Social programs paid with the wealth created by capitalism is not socialism.
Without the capitalists the social justice warriors have nothing.
Why does the left demonize the people that create the wealth and glorify the people that bleed the government dry?