Rasheed, Muhammad. "Basic Math." Cartoon. The Official Website of Cartoonist M. Rasheed
25 Nov 2019. Pen & ink w/Adobe Photoshop color.
- Here me out, what if businesses were collectively owned by all the employees and any authority positions were decided democratically by those workers and not by fiat from whoever did the best job of taking the value of other’s work.
- Considering the nature of the angle you're supposed to be pushing, why have an "authority position" at all? It's best to use a Scrum Master figure, whose only job is to guide the team to the correct policies/procedures when they stray off, but holds zero authority.
- Anyway, in a protected free open market, what would keep you from having that kind of structure in your company if that's what you wanted? If it worked, other companies would follow that model to stay competitive.
- In answer to question 1, because not all businesses work in a loosely directed iterative process that Agile is meant for. Sometimes there is a justifiable need for a person who makes group or cross group calls on the spot. But in those cases I'd argue that the best decision of who that should be would be made by the people doing the work, not some distant person profiting from the work.
In answer to the second question, under the capitalist system where access to means of production are gated behind private ownership by capital, collective ownership may produce better working environments, better results for labor, and better products. But within that system, collective ownership objectively does a worse job of accumulating profit into the hands of capitalists, meaning that it objectively is not more competitive. Exploitative, top down organization where a smaller group of private owners own the value of all labor performed by their employees objectively results in those private owners having more access to capital with which to acquire more means of production, which grants them more ownership of labor, which means more acquisition of capital, which means more access to the means of productions... on and on until critical wealth inequality occurs and we have conservatives arguing that we just need to adopt an oligarchy because democracy keeps trying to take power from capital and liberals arguing that we just need to have a more different welfare state to keep labor in line.
- Brian wrote: “In answer to question 1, because not all businesses work in a loosely directed iterative process that Agile is meant for.”
I’m not talking about the iterative part, but the role of the Scrum Master and how the position functions. He keeps everyone on track as far as best practice procedures, but he isn’t an authority figure.
Brian wrote: “Sometimes there is a justifiable need for a person who makes group or cross group calls on the spot.”
That’s giving the bad guy you argue against more power to eventually corrupt him.
Brian wrote: “But in those cases I'd argue that the best decision of who that should be would be made by the people doing the work, not some distant person profiting from the work.”
That’s how it functions in the Agile model which is my point. You can cherry-pick best practice pieces from various business practices until you get the perfect version. You’re still walking around holding Karl Marx’s nonsense up on a pedestal and threatening to get blocked. lol
- Brian wrote: “In answer to the second question
[…] on and on until critical wealth inequality occurs…”
This is what it sounds like when the free open markets are not protected by the strict and proper enforcement of antitrust law and the crony corporatists have monopolized industry. You’re describing (as usual) the natural enemy of capitalism.
- Sorry, but I don't share your faith that an authoritarian state will ever actually enforce laws that restrict the accumulation of power.
You might get an outwardly diverse group of authoritarian oppressors (which you seem to acknowledge happens in liberal administrations with some of your art). Your idea that "good capitalism" means that "capitalists will accumulate wealth by exploiting labor and profiting off of state-enforced private ownership up to a certain limit, and then the state will step in and tell them they have to give someone else a chance to do that" is the same kind of bandage liberalism has been trying to slap over the conflict between capitalism and democracy since the British Enclosure. It's thinking that you can just Ship of Theseus the participants in the capitalist class until capitalism no longer works like capitalism and starts democratizing power rather than slowly ramping that power into the hands of those best able to exploit labor.
- Brian wrote: "...which you seem to acknowledge happens in liberal administrations..."
It happens in all institutions/organizations/administrations run by white people... liberal AND conservative. The crony corporatism model I fight against -- the very one that usurped capitalism and people like you can't tell the difference between -- is anti-Black systemic racism.
- Do you have some alternative to private ownership that would allow a more democratic access to the means of production? As it stands now, the police and military (the state's monopoly on violence) enforces private ownership of basically all arable land, housing, existing material production facilities, and the property upon which new facilities could be placed. The very ability to make something and survive are held by a select few for the purpose of extracting profits and that is backed up by the guns of modern capitalist governments.
Given our history, yes, that has resulted in capitalist power falling solely in the hands of a white majority. Yes, maintaining that power necessarily requires white supremacy. But if all you do is somehow remove the white supremacy and ethnic homogeneity of the capitalist class you still have the state enforcement of private ownership of the means of production so that the few can profit off of the basic survival of the many.
- Brian wrote: “Do you have some alternative to private ownership…”
No. I don’t need one. I’m under no illusions. What I do
need is for the people get off their easily placated asses and fight to keep the diabolical 1% grifter class from usurping their open free markets and take their systems back from the plutocrats.
Brian wrote: “…it stands now, the police and military (the state's monopoly on violence) enforces private ownership…”
The police/military don’t “enforce private ownership”; they protect & serve the interests of the top 1% of the populace and enforce their crony corporatist laws and edicts.
Brian wrote: “The very ability to make something and survive…”
…has been usurped by the 1% grifter class and the other 99% allow them to get away with it.
Brian wrote: “Given our history, yes, that has resulted in capitalist power falling solely in the hands of a white majority.”
Here you sound conspicuously reluctant to boldly call a spade a spade. lol
Brian wrote: “Yes, maintaining that power necessarily requires white supremacy.”
The maintainers of that very anti-Black power structure are the white supremacists.
Brian wrote: “But if all you do is somehow remove the white supremacy and ethnic homogeneity of the capitalist class…”
You may as well have said that “if all you do is somehow remove the smell from off of rancid feces...” It has the same level of seriousness attached. You have a natural penchant for protecting/coddling white supremacy. That's how you always come across in these discussions.
- And somehow we're back to my desire to get rid of the system that got us here AND the people that did the best job of exploiting that system being "a natural penchant for protecting/coddling white supremacy". I'm trying to figure out how? I don't approve of the majority of all wealth being in the hands of a small group of people who became experts in exploiting the labor of everyone else at the expense of their ability to even live. The same group of people that regularly exports the violence of the system to non-white majority nations so that things can look pretty and clean here. But I also believe that if you leave that system in place, no matter how much you try to dress it up behind anti-trust and state welfare legislation, you're just going to get another group of those same kinds of people because in capitalism the accumulation of wealth leads to more power than the people's vote.
But again I came back to argue with a person who is here to generate content for their own profit motive and clout-chasing rather than someone who is actually trying to communicate with or understand a person they disagree with. Not sure why I thought that was going to be anything but a waste of my damn time again.Muhammad Rasheed
- Brian wrote: “But I also believe that if you leave that system in place, no matter how much you try to dress it up behind anti-trust and state welfare legislation, you're just going to get another group of those same kinds of people…”
The greedy criminal class will always be among us no matter what type of system is in place. That’s why human civilization has laws. The laws mean nothing if the people aren’t diligent in keeping them enforced.
Brian wrote: “But again I came back to argue with a person who is here to…”
“Again” I’m 100% not interested in whatever your opinion is about me, my art or my business.
Brian wrote: "...who is actually trying to communicate with or understand a person they disagree with..."
I've heard your shtick before, remember? You're the one who insists upon typing under my posts after I told you I'm not interested in your interpreted version of these concepts I've long ago rejected as schemes of my enemy. Will you finally take the hint? You hold nothing of value to offer me.
: Scanned pen & ink cartoon drawing w/Adobe Photoshop color.