Co-ops, to thrive and continue, need something more than economic motivation. I've had a couple of experiences with them: one, as a child in impoverished Saskatchewan during the 1930s; the other as a consultant to a Costa Rican co-op a few years ago.
The Saskatchewan co-op movement, about keeping mostly rural people from declining into abject poverty, was ideologically fueled by people like J.S. Woodsworth, a Methodist minister and Tommy Douglas, a Baptist Minister. Another Canadian movement of about the same time, the Antigonish Movement, was inspired by Moses Coady, a Catholic priest. In Costa Rica, where I consulted to a electricity distribution co-op in 2004, was much more deeply based on ideology than anything we've had in Canada. In the region in which I worked, there were several different kinds co-ops doing things that were essential to the regional economy, and most had been operating for many years. There seemed to be no other way of carrying on important activities except via co-ops. One had to wonder why. My guess is that it had a lot to do with those very large Catholic churches in the middle of each major town. The churches had deeply instilled the concept that people should love their neighbors as themselves. The co-ops had put the concept into practice. In reading up on co-ops I encountered the Mondragon movement of the Basque country of Spain, described as the most extensive co-op movement anywhere. Its founder was a Catholic priest. So what I'm saying is that co-ops, to thrive and flourish, have to be based on more than the notion that, if you join, you get cheaper groceries. Ed ________________________________ From: Keith Hudson <[email protected]> To: "RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION" <[email protected]>; Sally Lerner <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, June 25, 2010 12:54:39 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] How about cooperatives? Sally, I don't buy basic income (sorry, Sally) nor bit taxes (sorry, Arthur) -- both smack of even more centralism -- but I certainly do buy co-operatives. The onslaught of consumerism has seemingly made individuals of us all but the instinct for community living and working is still strong. The chain of uniquely new consumer products with the power to drive advanced economies further petered out in recent decades so we're either facing governmental exhaustion (fairly obvious already) or something quite new in the way we organize ourselves (perhaps this is something that the young are already anticipating on their mobiles!). Keith At 15:06 24/06/2010 -0400, Sally wrote: Now that Ray has energized the list >(and reminded us that music is often the best solace), what potential do >any/all of you see in re-examining co-operatives (i.e.producer, consumer, >worker, credit unions) as possible roads to better ways of organizing >lives (while we await the advent of basic income and the bit tax, of >course). > >>I've been digging into recent literature and examples (e.g. the Cleveland >Model in the U.S.), finding some useful analysis of why co-ops are good, >especially in crises, why they have trouble starting up and >surviving, what can be done to address the problems, etc. etc. >--good stuff, definitely stimulates hopeful thoughts. > >>Which I need day to day to counter the sick feeling from the BP disaster >- a whole ecosystem and culture -- and way of life -- wiped >out. > >>Check google and amazon for a wealth of material on >co-operatives. Is this a path worth re-visiting? Is Mondragon >still relevant for the future of work? What think all of >you? > >>Cheers, Sally >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Futurework mailing list >>[email protected] >https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework Keith Hudson, Saltford, England
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
