If it's of any help to anyone, I can state my position on markets very simply: Regarding markets I'm an abolitionist but not a fool. By which I mean: (1) Markets play NO part in an economy that I consider desirable. [Desirable can be spelled out at great length but I believe markets are inherently incompatible with economic justice, efficiency, environmental sustainability, and meaningful economic democracy. They also have highly undesirable effects on human development. So, I am for the abolition of markets and their replace- ment by participatory planning just like pre-Civil war abolitionists were for the abolition of slavery and free and equal political rights for African Americans. (2) Leaving some economic decisions to the market place is a hell of a lot more damaging than leaving others to the market place. So, there is a sensible progression in which decisions we should work to take out of the market place and which decisions we can best tolerate leaving to the market place for the time being. In other words, we are not going to eliminate all markets in the near future. Given that (sad) reality, a sensible transition program to a desirable economy must accept the existence of some markets for some period of time. Usually the market relations most sensible to criticize and work to replace, constrain, or reform are the ones that cause the most damage and/or the ones whose consequences people are most upset with. That does amount to tolerating market relations in other areas. But tolerating from a programatic point of view is not the same as praising the performance of markets in these areas, or even sanctioning them. Whether or not market socialism -- and I don't mean Roemeresque, managerial, technocratic, corporatist, coupon market "socialism," I mean Yugoslav style workers self-managed market "socialism" -- is a sensible part of a transition program to a marketless and desirable economy is worth debating. I don't think the answer is clearly yes or no. I see at least two problems, one already mentioned in recent postings. (1) If capitalists have every reason to fight as viciously to oppose market socialism as a truly desirable economy and workers/consumers have less reason to fight as hard to win market socialism than a more desirable replacement for capitalism, why is it such a great transition program? This is a political problem. (3) Since many of the economic ills we must mobilize people in "reform" campaigns to struggle against are the result of market relations, how can effective reform campaigns embrace market socialism as a desirable economic system? These are at least two questions I would like to see compelling answers to before embracing market socialism as a transition strategy to a truly desirable economy.
