Justin:
>If the conclusion is right, then I'm procapitalist. Pure planning is a
>washout. However, Yoshie does not answer the reasons I gave to think that
>market socialism would be better than capitalism: it would provide material
>adequecy, greater democracy, lack of exploitation, and better working
>conditions than capitalism.
Market socialism looks better than capitalism _on paper_ (and so do
many other things, like participatory economy, planning of various
kinds, anarcho-syndicalism, etc.), I agree, but who among leftists
wouldn't? If you really feel that a "realistic model" has to be
presented to people in order to persuade them that socialism is
viable, the model in question can't be an abstract model but a
concrete one that takes into account each country's natural
resources, infrastructure, demographics, existing needs & desires,
etc. while also considering that the country in question would be
subject to attacks (economic, military, & cultural) from inside and
outside. Maybe you can persuade me by taking, say, Japan as an
example. Suppose the Japanese are to opt for market socialism. How
is its economy supposed to work?
>The Soviet elite also never gave seroious
>consideration to worker self management as a form of market socialism.
Why should they? Worker self-management and market discipline are
antithetical, especially _if_ we assume _selfishness_ as the main
motive force on which various "incentives" are supposed to work. The
ethos of market discipline is no pain no gain, and which worker, _if_
given a chance to truly self-manage, would want to subordinate
himself to such an imperative? And seen from the point of view of
managers, democracy makes for inefficiency, as you noted yourself.
Yoshie
