Acceso usuarios
John Willoughby
Recently, David Laibman presented a comparative framework to analyze how different models of socialism might empower workers. In the Marxist tradition, popular control over the material conditions of life requires the ability to determine the rate of investment, plan the production of use values, and create an egalitarian system of distribution. In addition, both Marxist and market socialist advocates argue that workers should have the ability to manage the operations of the enterprises in which they work. These goals are not unproblematically compatible since workers within the enterprise must always operate under constraints. The Bolshevik experience with worker's control of enterprises clearly demonstrates this tension. Despite this proviso, the three models of socialism we consider which place popular planning at the center of the socialist project could, in principle, meet all four criteria of worker empowerment. On the other hand, the market socialist alternative permits planning but not the detailed form of democratic planning traditionally advocated by Marxists. In addition, a market socialist model will have difficulty creating an egalitarian distribution system. Despite these drawbacks, the paper concludes by arguing that the market socialist model provides the best framework for empowering workers during a period of transition to a more robust planning regime.
