Site pages
Current course
Participants
General
Self-Management As Simultaneous Goal and Means
This sub-page and its discussion part is dedicated to preparation, conducting, post conference commenting, further research and publishing planning of the RC10 Participation, Organizational Democracy and Self-Management (host committee) session Self-Management as Simultaneous Goal and Means of Overcoming Systemic Accumulation of Capital Crisis
at the Third ISA Forum 2016, Thursday, 14 July 2016: 09:00 AM - 10:30 AM, NIG, Seminarraum 5C G
Session Description:
The main aim of this session is to initiate longitudinal, multidisciplinary and multi-perspective comparative research of self-management theory and practice, focusing what is common and what is specifically different between concepts and practices of self management, participation and organizational democracy, all three contained in the official name of RC10.
This session calls for face to face and virtual dialogue (at http://isarc10internetforum.wikispaces.com/ISA+2016 and discussion part of http://isarc10internetforum.wikispaces.com/Self-Management+As+Simultaneous+Goal+and+Means) on theoretical and empirical, quantitative and qualitative social relations’ transformation oriented research of historical, socially structured and individual sources of undesirable present state of social inequality, oppression, re-colonization war and ecological disaster, on the one hand, and diverse visions of attainment of desirable alternative futures of equality, freedom, solidarity and ecological sustainability on the other, focusing participation in substantially democratic and self-managing overcoming of class division of alienated labor on managing and executing work functions as simultaneous goal and means of desirable future attainment.
Format: Oral
Language:
English; Spanish; Franch. All effort will be exerted to enable dialoguing on a common theme of participants speaking different languages, mostly with help of google translate program, dictionaries and mutual help : ).
Session OrganizerVera VRATUSAProf.Dr. (retired):Belgrade UniversitySerbia
Email: vvratusa@sezampro.rs
esociologyvera
author publisher 978-86-88347, creator and organizer of ISA RC 10 forum wiki and other esociology wikis under the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0 Licens
Chair:
Abstracts submitted to this session:
Abstract ID# 76274
Title: Europe One Hundred Years from Now: Towards Democratic Control of the Economy
Keywords:
economic democracy and social ownership
Gerard KESTER, retired, Netherlands
Abstract:
The core values liberte, egalite, fraternite were proclaimed in the 19th century but did not result in durable institutions that gave flesh and blood to these principles. When by the end of the 21st century Europe was 're-invented' in a second Enlightenment which led to the United States of Europe (see twin paper for RC 07) these values were re-examined and broadly debated. Also democratie was re-examined and now intrinsically linked to freedom, equality and solidarity, as an ideology on its own - replacing the 'invisible hand' of neoliberalism by the visible citizen, in an economy that was democratically controlled.
For long private ownership had been the foundation of the economy. This was engrained in national constitutions of EU member states as well as in the officious Constitution of the EU. This relationship between democracy and capitalism was now revised as democracy is incompatible with the full primacy of private ownership - especially in as much as it yields owner power over other people's life. Social ownership was the new perspective: whereas private ownership remained respected in the private domain - in the public domain the production of goods and services came under democratic control.
The European Constitution was changed (in 2100) and stipulated the primacy of social ownership. It also elaborated principles of economic redistribution as well as direct and indirect forms of democratic control of the production process. Moreover, a generous welfare state ensured the realisation of equivalence and solidarity.
Ownership could still yield capital income to investing private owners but the running of the enterprise and the distribution of accumulated wealth were subject to democratic procedure. The concepts capitalism, communism, liberalism and socialism were thrown in the trash. Production relations were no longer a permanent conflict between capital and labour but a partnership of capital, labor and other stakeholders.
Abstract ID# 73678
Title: Comparative Analysis of Workers' Self-Management in Yugoslavia and Argentina
Keywords:
Argentina, Workers’ self-management and Yugoslavia
Irena PETROVIC, The University of Belgrade Faculty of Philosophy, Serbia, Alberto Leonard BIALAKOWSKY, Instituto de Investigaciones Gino Germani, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina and Maria IGNACIA COSTA, Instituto de Investigaciones Gino Germani, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Buenos Aires., Argentina
Abstract:
Throughout history, on the level of particular historical societies, workers’ self-management has emerged in specific phenomenal forms. One ideological and organizational experiment of exceptional originality has definitely been the system of workers’ self-management in Yugoslavia. It represented, at least on the plane of imagination, an unprecedented democratic as well as civilizational progress in general in the process of achieving a strong influence of employees on all aspects of their working life
On the other hand, deepening of the economic crisis in Argentina in the late 1990s and early 2000 was followed by the emergence of enterprises that had been occupied (recovered) by their employees (Spanish - Empresas recuperadas por sus trabajadores – ERT). Recovered enterprises in Argentina have been operating in the form of worker cooperatives and represent a new model of collective action of a part of the working class, in response to the crisis of primitive accumulation of capital. In addition, the emergence of such enterprises in Argentina has reiterated the historical and cognitive importance of studying workers’ self-management.
Basic difference between the models of workers’ self-management in these two societies, apart from a different temporal and contextual framework in which they emerged, is that the model of workers’ self-management in Yugoslavia has been introduced ‟top-down” by the ruling stratum, while Argentina’s model born ‟bottom-up”. In addition, the difference between the two models is also reflected in the fact that this system failed to survive in Yugoslavia, despite a highly developed institutional structure. In Argentina the phenomenon keeps going on despite the economic growth and the increasing of employment.
With this in mind, we are trying to determine here major factors in the failure of the model of workers’ self-management in Yugoslavia, as well as the possibility that such a model would work out in Argentina.
Abstract ID# 78992
Title: Is the Self-Management Possible? a Study on the Recovered Factories in Brazil
Keywords:
cooperativism, recovered factories, self-management and work
Aline PIRES, Universidade Federal de Sao Carlos, Brazil
Abstract:
The context generated by the productive restructuring associated with financial crises and changes in the Brazilian economy in the late 1990s led to the collapse of many companies and resulted in increased unemployment and increasing instability and insecurity of labor relations. Thus, workers sought other forms of livelihood, including the associated work. ANTEAG (Associação Nacional de Trabalhadores em Empresas de Autogestão e Participação Acionária) [National Association of Self-Management Companies’ Workers] emerged in this context, with the goal of supporting groups of workers to unite and take control of bankrupt factories in which they worked, preserving their jobs. So, the first “recovered factories” emerged. At this time, the movement of the Solidarity Economy also begins to grow, and Unisol Brazil (Central de Cooperativas e Empreendimentos Solidários) [Central of Cooperatives and Solidary Enterprises] arises to support various types of solidary economic enterprises, including the recovered factories. Thus, our purpose is to make a general analysis of the current situation of recovered factories in Brazil. To do this, we return to some of the pioneering experiments of recovered companies. Our goal here is to discuss if and how cooperative and self-managed values are present in these enterprises today. So, we performed a literature review of case studies about recovered factories and visited several experiences of this type, where we conducted observations and interviewed leaders and workers, using semi-structured scripts. In addition, we seek to look at our subject from an international perspective, so we visited Argentina and France. In general, we note that, although the ideals of cooperatives and self-management remain in the speeches of many workers, their enforcement encounters many obstacles in practice. In other words, to be viable, recuperated factories face many pressures in the market, which eventually modify some of your initial goals.
https://isarc10internetforum.wikispaces.com/file/detail/Aline+Suelen+Pires+%28paper%29.pdf
New paper version:
Abstract ID# 75916
Title: Quel Futur Pour L'industrie Kibboutzique?
Keywords:
changement social , industrie and kibboutz
Yuval ACHOUCH, Western Galilee College, Israel; The Institution for the research of the kibbutz and the cooperative idea, Israel
Abstract:
Quel futur pour l'industrie kibboutzique?
Jusqu' a la fin des 90, prés de 270 kibboutzim fonctionnaient comme des communautés de production et consommation sous un régime de propriété collective des moyens de production. Déjà durant les années 60, l'industrie était devenue la première source de revenus des kibboutzim, devançant ainsi l'agriculture. Malgré le succès de son industrie durant plusieurs décennies, et suite a la crise des années 1985-2005, le kibboutz a largement renonce a ses principes d'autogestion, de participation et de démocratie au travail. Suite a la crise, la gestion technocratique et la hiérarchie ont été renforce, et un vent de privatisation a souffle sur le kibboutz (celle des revenus avec l'introduction du salaire, puis celle des logements, et des moyens de production avec un système d'actionnariat.)
Les conséquences de ces changements se manifestent aujourd'hui:
- Si le taux de croissance annuel des ventes de l'industrie kibboutzique entre les années 2000-2008 était de 8,4% (de 19 a 37 milliard de shekels), il est passe a -2,1% (35milliard en 2013) dans les années 2009-2013.
- 346 entreprises étaient affiliées à l'association de l'industrie kibboutzique en l'an 2000. En 2014 il n'en restait plus que 224.
- Alors que 122 entreprises ont été vendues a des investisseurs prives depuis l'année 2000, dans la même période seulement deux nouvelles entreprises kibboutziques ont vu le jour (site internet de l'association de l'industrie kibboutzique: www.kia.co.il ).
Ces quelques faits soulèvent de nombreuses questions concernant l'avenir.
Les buts de cette intervention seront:
- Une présentation plus détaillée de la situation actuelle a partir des données fournies par l'association de l'industrie kibboutzique et celles disponibles dans la presse spécialisée.
- Repérer plus précisément les causes de l'évolution de l'industrie kibboutzique de ces 10 dernières années.
- Tracer les différents scénarii possibles pour l'avenir de l'industrie kibboutzique.
Follows corrected translation of the abstract from Franch to English, done with the help of https://translate.google.com/
- please improve further:
Until the end of the 1990s, nearly 270 kibbutzim functioned as production and consumption communities under collective ownership regime of means of production. Already in the 1960s, the industry became the main source of kibbutzim income, surpassing thus agriculture. Despite the success of its industry for decades, and following in the crisis years of 1985-2005, the kibbutz has largely renounced its self-management principles, participation and democracy at work. Following the crisis, the technocratic management and hierarchy have been strengthened, and a privatization wind began to blow on the kibbutz (privatization of the revenue with the introduction of salary, then ptivatization of the housing and the means of production through a system of shareholding.)
The consequences of these changes manifest themselves today:
- If the annual growth rate in sales of kibbutz industry between the years 2000-2008 was 8.4% (19 to 37 billion shekels), it went down to -2.1% (35milliard in 2013) in the years 2009-2013.
- 346 firms were affiliated to the association of the kibbutz industry in 2000. In 2014 there remained only 224.
- While 122 companies were sold to the private investors since 2000, in the same period only two new kibbutz enterprises have emerged (website of the Association of the kibbutz :www.kia.co.il).
These few facts raise many questions about the future.
The goals of this intervention will be:
- A more detailed presentation of the current situation based on data provided by the association of the kibbutz industry and those available in the trade press.
- To identify more precisely the causes of changes in the kibbutz industry in the last 10 years.
- Charting the different possible scenarios for the future of the kibbutz industry.
Abstract ID# 76425 Title: Autogestión y Recuperación De Empresas Por Trabajadores En La América Latina: Estudios Comparativos, Reflexiones Metodológicas y Políticas.Keywords: América Latina, Empresas recuperadas, autogestión and trabajo
Comments to Organizers: Dear organizers, I send the abstract in spanish, but I can also try to prepare the presentation in english, if necessary.Thank you for your attention.
Vanessa SIGOLO, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brazil
Abstract:
El artículo presenta un estudio sobre experiencias contemporáneas de autogestión en la América Latina, a partir del análisis de casos de recuperación de empresas por trabajadores en Brasil, Argentina y Uruguay, especialmente. Este fenómeno emergió en el contexto de redemocratización de la región y grave crisis económica en las décadas de 1980 y 1990, y sigue con nuevos casos en la actualidad. Primeramente, se expone la trayectoria de la investigación llevada a cabo por investigadores y militantes en los diferentes contextos y condiciones en los países. También se presenta la articulación e intercambio entre los centros universitarios, el histórico de encuentros y seminarios internacionales y sus principales resultados. Finalmente, se expone el cuadro general de las experiencias, indicando análisis comparativos acerca de sus características singulares en los países y también sus proximidades y semejanzas. El trabajo comparativo fue desarrollado con datos de los relevamientos nacionales realizados desde 2003, en Argentina, y en 2012 y 2013, en Brasil y Uruguay. Después de la presentación y análisis del cuadro actual de las experiencias, se propone un debate acerca del significado político del fenómeno en el capitalismo contemporáneo. Para el enfrentamiento de la pobreza, desigualdad social y extrema explotación del trabajo que caracteriza secularmente la historia de los países latinoamericanos (y sigue marcando sus sociedades en el mundo contemporáneo), las experiencias de autogestión indican caminos importantes, en la lucha por trabajo digno, la democratización de la economía, la política y la sociedad. En esta región del planeta, pero también delante los desafíos globales de la humanidad en el siglo XXI, las experiencias de creación de nuevas relaciones sociales de producción, con base en relaciones asociativas y democráticas de trabajo y de propiedad, indican cambios importantes en las condiciones de trabajo y de vida, que necesitan de investigación sociológica y de grande atención.
Follows corrected translation of the abstract from Spanish to English done with the help of https://translate.google.com/ - please improve further:
The article presents a study on contemporary experiences of self-management in Latin America, starting from the analysis of cases of recovery of companies by workers in Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay, in particular. This phenomenon emerged in the context of democratization of the region and serious economic crisis in the 1980s and 1990s, and continues with new cases today. Firstly, the course of the investigation conducted by researchers and activists in different contexts and conditions in the countries is discussed. The coordination and exchange among international universities, historical meetings and seminars and their main results are also presented. Finally, the overall picture of the experiences, indicating comparative analysis of their unique characteristics in the countries and also their proximity and similarities are exposed. The comparative study was developed with data from national surveys conducted since 2003 in Argentina and in 2012 and 2013, in Brazil and Uruguay. After the presentation and analysis of the current frame of experiences, a discussion on the political significance of the phenomenon in contemporary capitalism is proposed. To cope with poverty, social inequality and extreme exploitation of labor that characterizes secular history of Latin American countries (and continues to mark their societies in the contemporary world), the experiences of self management indicate major roads in the struggle for decent work, the democratization of the economy, politics and society. In this region of the planet, but also before the global challenges facing humanity in the twenty-first century, the experience of creating new social relations of production, based on associative and democratic labor relations and property, indicate significant changes in conditions of work and life, they need sociological research and great attention.
Abstract #82240The Concepts and Practices of Participation, Organizational Democracy and Self-Management in the Futures We Want
Vera VRATUSA, Sociology, Belgrade University, Belgrade, Serbia- retired
Paper investigates changing meaning and popularity of the main concepts constituting the name of ISA RC 10 on participation, organizational democracy and self-management, judged by the content analysis and frequency of their use in relevant sociological research, in the socio-historical context of a contradictory process of transition from proto-socialist state capitalism to full legal restoration of hierarchical and crisis ridden system of world capitalist economy, albeit dominated by emerging new hegemonic strong nation state(s) of the center, on the one hand, and contestation of this restoration in former Third, Second and First Worlds, through perpetual reemergence of social movements attempting to transcend production of exchange values for private profit by social production of use values for development of human capacities of each individual as condition for simultaneously economic, political, social and cultural freedom, equality and solidarity of all in humanized nature and naturalized humanity.
The main thesis of the paper is that the main difference between concepts and practices of participation of stakeholders in decision making and profits and integral self-management of producers at the work place and consumers in the community from local to global levels of social self-organization, presents orientation on conservation, reform or overcoming of class division of labor on rulers and ruled and its legal expression, private property.
Paper calls sociologists to self-reflection while answering the questions implied by the title of the 3rd ISA Forum: Who are “we”? What is “better future”? How does our socially structured value orientations on conservation, reform or radical transformation of class division of labor influence all phases of our research and practice of participation, organizational democracy and self-management, bringing about realization of self-fulfilling prophecies?Keywords: overcoming class division of labor, participation, self-management and sociologists' self-reflection.
Session Selection: The Role of Participation, Organizational Democracy and Self-Management in the Futures We Want
(further elaboration and application of mentioned concepts is contained as well in presentation Questions on the Work and the Sociology of Work from the Global South Perspective - the Experience of Former “Second World” )
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Summary of unstructured but relevant emails sent to ISA RC10 members and friends and this session participants from February 1915 to present (last editing 02.07. 2016)
Dear colleagues
sharing common interest in longitudinal, multidisciplinary and multi-perspective comparative research of self-management theory and practice in general, focusing what is common and what is specifically different between concepts and practices of self management, participation and organizational democracy, all three contained in the official name of RC10, as well as in Self-Management as Simultaneous Goal and Means of Overcoming Systemic Accumulation of Capital Crisis in particular, during and after the Third ISA Forum 2016.
I thank very much to all those who registered by April 5 at On-line conference registration and thus enabled leaving a trace of reappearance of the concept and practice of self-management in sociological research in the ISA official program and book of abstracts after quite a long time : ).
Session organizers are according to ISA rules allowed to present a paper in sessions they are organizing, but not the chairs - for a very good reason, not to monopolize the limited time allotted to each session. Chairs of other similar sessions therefore decide whether the proposal of a given session organizer will be accepted or not. Due to overcrowding in the session of the first choice, The Role of Participation Organizational Democracy and Self-anagement in the Futures We Want, that session organizers transferred my abstract #82240 they originally accepted for oral presentation, to this session.
I would be grateful for all critical comments and suggestions - beside too long and therefore hard to follow through sentences, of which I am painfully aware of : ) Would you agree that mutual help in improvement of our research thinking, writing and communication capacities is fully consonant with the spirit of self-management?
Since 30. April 2016, we have found with the help of RC10 Program coordinators among registered participants of ISA RC10 program a knowledgeable chair for our session - colleague Azril Bacal.
Under the free commons share alike licence, however, all members of ISA RC10 Internet forum are welcome to post their abstracts and participate in discussion on the title theme on specifics of self-management if they wish to do so on this sub-page. In this spirit, I am posting here my proposed contribution to the affiliated session with a necessarily "catch all title" organised by our RC10 President on the main ISA Forum 2016 theme. The authors of abstracts ID# 73678, 78992 and 75916 originallly have done the same and I hope that they will be happy with this transfer from the session jammed with 30+ abstracts, at the least as much as I am happy to warmly welcome them in this more focused session.
It seams that colleague Vanessa Sigollo, author of the Abstract ID# 76425, as well as colleagues Irena PETROVIC, The University of Belgrade Faculty of Philosophy, Serbia and Maria IGNACIA COSTA, Instituto de Investigaciones Gino Germani, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina, co-authors of the Abstract ID# 73678 did not register by April 5 2016, since Isaconf.confex.com system has withdrawn these two abstracts from the Program of this session. Alas, Alberto Leonard BIALAKOWSKY, the third co-author of the Abstract ID# 73678 did register, but has two other appearances in the official program (one of them being presentation of the paper The (re)Invention of Labour, the Worker, and Social Domination related to the theme of this session when it focuses the possibilities for a transition from a mode of production centered on the use of forced labour to one based on reciprocity between freely associated producers).
I hope that I am expressing the feelings of other registered session participants as well, that we are looking forward to read Vanessa's, Irena's, Maria's and Alberto's contributions in the form of extended abstracts or drafts of full papers, and in the discussion part of our virtual meeting point at https://isarc10internetforum.wikispaces.com/Self-Management+As+Simultaneous+Goal+and+Means.
On the bases of the content of all abstracts of papers accepted for oral presentation and incoming drafts of full papers, which should be uploaded below respective abstracts as soon as possible if they are not uploaded already, several themes/ questions/ relationships appear to merit conducting a threaded multilogue also before and during the Third ISA Forum 2016 in the discussion part of our virtual meeting place, to avoid reduction of our session to a successive monologues of paper presenters and isolated dialogues scattered in unstructured emails. Common themes/problems mentioned by submitted abstracts' and drafts of full papers' authors are:
- self-management as a cooperative tool for keeping workplace for the employed or management technique raising workers' productivity for the owners at the enterprise level within existing dominant mode of production vs self-management as collectively co-created emergence of a new mode of production at all levels of society
- relationship between class division of labor, private ownership and social ownership through time
- socially and ecologically destructive dominant capitalist competitive market allocation of scarce resources and investment funds versus self-managing solidary planning of coopertive production of use value by freely asciated producers and consumers from the local to global levels
- spontaneity, self-organization, egalitarianism and direct democracy from below versus professionalization, differentiation, hierarchical organization from above and representative democracy
- formal legal institutionalization of proclaimed social relationships versus real state of distribution of social power and influence;
- importance of participatory and emancipating collective and individual self-education for self-management, moral and material motivation for taking over both rights and responsibilities and overcoming wage-worker mentality
- three generations dynamics of participation and self-management processes
- starting reform or revolutionary transformation value orientation of researcher towards idea and practice of self-management
After the Forum, we should gather our human resources to continue systematic structural and longitudinal research of participation, organizational democracy and self-management, that is, alternatives for the future we want. Panelists, members and friends of RC10, namely, are affiliated to numerous educational and research institutions all over the world like
- CLS, The Centre for Labour Studies, www.um.edu.mt/cls
- Chuô University Fuda, Tokyo, Japan, http://global.chuo-u.ac.jp/english/
- DUT , Durban Univeristy of Technology, http://www.dut.ac.za/
- Flinders University - Adelaide, South Australia, http://www.flinders.edu.au/
- Instituto de Investigaciones Gino Germani, Facultad de Ciencias sociales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, http://www.sociales.uba.ar/?page_id=64
- Institute for Sociological Research, Belgrade University, Faculty of Philosophy, http://www.f.bg.ac.rs/en2/research/institute_of_sociology_and_social_research
- Institute of Sociology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia, http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/rlms-hse/team/isrosan
- ISS -EUR.nl - International Institute of Social Studies, http://www.iss.nl/
- KIA, Kibbutz Industry Association,http://www.kia.co.il/infoeng/kibbutz.htm
- KILA,Kerala Institute of Local Administration, India, http://www.kilaonline.org/?q=node/1
- University of Kwa-zulu Natal, South Africa,http://www.ukzn.ac.za/
- University, Peking, China, http://english.pku.edu.cn/index.htm
- Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brazil, http://www5.usp.br/english/?lang=en
- Western Galilee College, Israel,http://www.wgalil.ac.il/category/English
... please, members and friends of RC10, expand this list...
We should use this human resources wealth and comparative advantage for planning and conducting joint research projects with the comparable common core instruments for data collection (see an earlier similar proposal here).
Organizational possibility for such continuous research work could become already existing Participation RN which initiated colleague Garibaldo, after we all agree to expand the title of this research network by adding words "and self'-management".
.
I am using this opportunity as well to kindly invite one more time all interested in research of participation and self-management, to actively participate in existing, open new and self-manage relevant virtual threaded discussions on themes mentioned above, after following the link "join" in the upper right hand corner at http://www.wikispaces.com/user/join?goto=http%3A%2F%2Fisarc10internetforum.wikispaces.com%2Fspace%2Fjoin , filling out the form (user name, password, email) and pressing link "join", if you have not joined ISA RC10 Internet Forum already in the past.
Best regards and wishes,
Prof. Dr. Vera Vratuša, Belgrade University Faculty of Philosophy, Department of Sociology, retired
https://www.wikispaces.com/user/view/vvratusa
Abstract #82240
Add Discussion
commenting drafts and synergically finalizing full papers
vvratusa Feb 4, 2016
This thematic thread should help all presenters in our session to prepare drafts of complete papers through pre – Forum virtual discussion with co-panelists of common issues and main points of convergence and divergence already visible in submitted abstracts of papers accepted for oral presentation (relationship of selfmanagement processes and in/formal institutions to dominant property relations, state and market regulation mechanisms, social class interests and power structure, socio-psichlogical motivational aspects). I hope you agree that we should all find some place in our presentations beside for the respective paper’s specific content, also for common aspects of the exploration of Self-Management as Simultaneous Goal and Means of the Futeres We Want.
Let me propose that as soon as you have made a draft of your full paper, to upload it below your abstract at http://isarc10internetforum.wikispaces.com/Self-Management+As+Simultaneous+Goal+and+Means. As the deadline for submitting draft of full paper to the session organizer and all participants I propose May 15th 2012. Please do not wait for the last day.
What concerns the standard format for the drafts of complete papers I propose that we follow the requirements spelled out to potential contributors to ISA journal "International sociology" that can be seen at https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/journal/international-sociology#submission-guidelines .
If we succeed to gather mutually complementing papers on the exploration of past, present and future relevance of self-management theory and practice in the historical circumstances of global accumulation of capital systemic crisis and search for “Futures we want”, we might propose to editors of this journal to publish them in eventual special number.
Proposed prior to-Forum virtual discussion will enable us to realize “minimum of monologues maximum of dialogues” session format on the spot in Vienna, as well as to prepare post-Conference planning of continuation of the research of themes of common interest and eventual common publishing of our findings, without losing ourselves in myriads of heterogeneous emails..
cycles in interest for researching self-management ?
vvratusa Oct 9, 2015
Why has the concept of self-management almost disappeared from contemporary titles and bodies of academic articles, judging from the research engine at http://thomsonreuters.com/en.html in your opinion?
Show more replies (1 hidden)
gerardkester Oct 11, 2015
But the concept is re-emerging. What few people noticed is that for instance Piketty laments that we have lost democratic control of the economy and that we should invest much energy and imagination to find alternative forms of economic production. Apparently Piketty is not quite conversant with labour relations and writes primarily on inequality but he pleads for openings including for self-manegement. I was also surprised that in the discourse between Badiou and Gauchet on the future of democracy both believed that, among others, self-management should be promoted in a search for democratic control on the economy. Badiou from a marxist perspective, Gauchet from a reformist perspective. Especially the proposition of Gauchet looks promising, he argues that new democratic forms of enterprise should become the third cycle of reformism. No, self management is not knock out, but I agree that one does not find it back in titles of books etc.
vvratusa Oct 11, 2015
Is it not indicative, that neither Piketty, nor Gauchet, searching for reforms within social relations assuming capital as a-historical constant, do not actually use the concept of self-management, but only expressions like "new forms of participation" or " democratic governance"?
gerardkester Nov 10, 2015
sorry I was out of the air for some time. No, you are wrong to say that people like Gauchet assume capitalism as a-historical constant. I know too well how people who do not plead for self-management in its pure form are blamed to be 'reformists'. Yet this does not do justice to their vision - they are not reformist (well many are, but not all) but people who want to change the economy by democratic means. Step by step, much too slow according to the 'purists', but democratic only. The concept of self management (dear to my heart) is the ideal end station. Sometimes it comes 'by surprise' as I saw it myself in Malta in the 1970s and as apparently it occurs in Brasil today and in Argentina. But then it is partial, mostly in factory occupations which unfortunately tend to succomb sooner or later. But at least these events wake up people that one can make the difference. They help to democratise labour relations. But all the noise of the purist who claim self management and nothing else, in a hostile political environment, have not scored much success these last 5 decades. The only weapon we have is the concept of democracy and to apply it to the economy. And to move to the crux of the matter - the prerogatives of private ownership which have to be dismantled. For that a majority has to be mobilised, and the democratic control of the economy to be realised. It is a long way, but the only way as long as we believe in democracy. That is where the concept of social ownership comes in - which is the essence of self management. So, I think yes, if one talks about social ownership and democratic control of the economy - one talks about self management.
gerardkester Nov 10, 2015
sorry I was out of the air for some time. No, you are wrong to say that people like Gauchet assume capitalism as a-historical constant. I know too well how people who do not plead for self-management in its pure form are blamed to be 'reformists'. Yet this does not do justice to their vision - they are not reformist (well many are, but not all) but people who want to change the economy by democratic means. Step by step, much too slow according to the 'purists', but democratic only. The concept of self management (dear to my heart) is the ideal end station. Sometimes it comes 'by surprise' as I saw it myself in Malta in the 1970s and as apparently it occurs in Brasil today and in Argentina. But then it is partial, mostly in factory occupations which unfortunately tend to succomb sooner or later. But at least these events wake up people that one can make the difference. They help to democratise labour relations. But all the noise of the purist who claim self management and nothing else, in a hostile political environment, have not scored much success these last 5 decades. The only weapon we have is the concept of democracy and to apply it to the economy. And to move to the crux of the matter - the prerogatives of private ownership which have to be dismantled. For that a majority has to be mobilised, and the democratic control of the economy to be realised. It is a long way, but the only way as long as we believe in democracy. That is where the concept of social ownership comes in - which is the essence of self management. So, I think yes, if one talks about social ownership and democratic control of the economy - one talks about self management.
vvratusa Nov 12, 2015
Welcome back : ). Important thing is that we seam to agree about essential fact, purist or not: "the concept of social ownership ... is the essence of self management", social fact that distinguishes it from participation in dominant social relations which are in present world still predominantly characterized by big private corporate and banking property. Do we agree also that the route source of private ownership is not primarily seated in political sphere characterized by lack of democracy, but in social life world of class division of labor?
gerardkester Mar 8, 2016
Vera, sorry I was long absent. But I am back with good news. I met with Alberto Bialakowski and Maria Ignacia Costa, in Buenos Aires - they are doing wonderful work on self management in enterprises taken over by workers. They promised to join in the debate in this forum and will do so in Spanish.
Estimados Alberto y Maria, por favor, toman parte en este forum, tambien en castellano. Sera muy importante para la preparacion de la mesa rotanda en Vienna. Ademas, sus experiencas en Argentina darnos esperanza para el futuro que los conpartiremos. Parece que ahora el centro del desarollo de autogestion es in America Latina.
vvratusa Mar 14, 2016
I am looking forward to read in Spanish (with the help of https://translate.google.com/) from our dear friends and colleagues from the actual center of the development of self-management, whether self-management is thought of mainly as the mode of management in cooperatives of employees within the prevalent capitalist mode of production, or there exists as well a strategic vision of co-creation of a qualitatively different mode of societal reproduction? (Estoy deseando leer en español (con la ayuda de https://translate.google.com/) de nuestros queridos amigos y colegas del centro real del desarrollo de la autogestión, si la autogestión se piensa principalmente como el modo de gestión de las cooperativas de empleados dentro del modo capitalista predominante de la producción, o existe así una visión estratégica de la co-creación de un modo cualitativamente distinto de la reproducción de la sociedad?)
vvratusa Mar 14, 2016
In order to encourage communication in all languages, I am copying here the google French translation of my question to Latin American colleagues: Je suis impatient de lire en espagnol (avec l'aide de https://translate.google.com/) de nos chers amis et collègues du centre réel du développement de l'auto-gestion, si l'auto-gestion est pensé principalement que le mode de gestion dans les coopératives de salariés dans le mode capitaliste de la production courante, ou il existe ainsi une vision stratégique de co-création d'un mode qualitativement différent de la reproduction sociale?
gerardkester Apr 29, 2016
Much time has passed, where are our colleagues? Meanwhile I am going to prepare my paper for Vienna and want to sak you several questions, Vera.
Any indication for the length of the paper?
In Vienna, how many presenters will there be (4, as I understand from all above info, but is this right?) , and how much time will every one of them get? I hope that contrary to my many earlier RC10 experiences time management will be strict and generous time will be available for debate.
A question: would it be a good idea if the presenters and the chair will have a prior meeting to make a common plan?
And yes, Vera, I will abide by your first request and send a first draft around 15 may.
vvratusa Apr 29, 2016
In the thread "commenting drafts, synergically finalizing full papers" at http://isarc10internetforum.wikispaces.com/share/view/77184279 I proposed among others, "prior to-Forum virtual discussion" in order to enable us to realize “minimum of monologues (5 min per presenter) maximum of dialogues (the rest of available time)” session format on the spot in Vienna. So far, no reaction to this proposal : ). If everybody abided by the 15 May deadline for the first draft of one's presentation to be uploaded below the abstract and thus available for the virtual discussion, proposed format would have a good chance of being realized. I will try again to stimulate all presenters to take the first technical steps needed to participate in virtual discussion - to join this sub-page of ISA RC10 Internet forum at http://www.wikispaces.com/user/join?goto=http%3A%2F%2Fisarc10internetforum.wikispaces.com%2Fspace%2Fjoin.
gerardkester Jun 14, 2016
I just read the draft paper by Aline Pires - it is very informative for persons who do not know the Brazilian experience. Two questions arise, and they do as I put a bit of emphasis on supporting structures in my draft paper. Aline, you mention the National Association of Workers in self managed enterprises, initiated by trade unions. Is it possible to elaborate on this, who initiated, who cooperate, which are the main activities, what constitutes the technical, legal and financial support how are the workers of the self managed enterprises represented, how much use is made of the association?
Same questions for the Union and Solidarity of the Cooperatives of the State of Sao Paolo.
alinepires Jul 10, 2016
Hi, Gerard. Sorry for the delay to answer your questions. ANTEAG was the first supporting institution that helped workers of recovered factories. Unfortunately, it does not exist anymore. It was founded by some leaders of different trade unions of metropolitan region of São Paulo. The initial proposal was helping workers (especially of industry) to keep their jobs in a context of economic crisis in Brazil. In course of time, ANTEAG begun supporting other kinds of cooperatives too. Before its closure last year, ANTEAG was sustained mainly by public projects. However, this kind of project is increasingly rare nowadays, especially because of political and economic changes in Brazil. The role of ANTEAG was to give legal and administrative support to cooperatives and to help in the process of education for cooperativism. These goals are the same as Unisol, but Unisol are in activity and is linked to SMABC (trade union of metallurgic workers of São Paulo). In the beginning of self-management process, these institutions used to be very close to recovered factories. When the factories are more stable, the support activity is more sparse, according to the needs of cooperatives.
Last modified: Friday, 6 July 2018, 12:20 PM
Hi,
I'd like to know if it's defined the duration of each presentation for this session.
Regards,
Aline
If we would want to realize the slogan "“minimum of monologues maximum of dialogues”, we could limit the duration of each presentation to 5 minutes, living the rest to discussion of questions that can be best answered on the spot. If we would completely abandon the slogan, maximum time for each monologuing presentation would be 90min divided by number of presenters who show up in Vienna. Usual standard is to divide 45 minutes to present presenters, living the remaining 45 minutes for discussion. What is your opinion dear Aline and other panelists, how many minutes should each presenter have?
Hi, Vera and other panelists! For me, the main difficulty is the language (I count on your help and understanding about it). Then, I prepared a presentation (Power Point) to try facilitating the communication. I think that this presentation has about 10 minutes. If you think that it is very long, I can take away some slides.
I have a new version of my paper too. I made some corrections and I think that it is better now.
Hello Aline, I must congratulate and thank you on your two drafts of a final paper, irrespective of difficulties we all have with contemporary globalizing language when it is our second language. Important thing is that your paper in a clear way raises many important questions concerning the objective and subjective factors influencing realization of self-management real utopian hope. I call again all panelists to express their views whether 10 minutes per presenter is a golden middle between 5 and 15 minutes. Whatever majority decides, important thing is that oral presentations do not simply repeat the contents of abstracts and the drafts of full papers. Please answer Gerard's questions posed in the threaded discussion below, and pose your own questions to other panelists, freeing thus time for face to face discussion concerning issues not covered at all or not enough during virtual discussion before the ISA Forum 2016.