DMNC and populism

Our DMNC model, while it shouldn’t be distracted by trying to solve a nineteenth century problem allows a three sector/three way balance of social outcomes: a socialist equivalent of large corporations, in a market field mediated by a planning sector. A third sector can allow for a degree of independent producers and disparate entities that are relatively autonomous as long as their size is within range.
Our idea of a Commons preempts the issue of state capitalism as the whole mix is buffered with the equivalent of unions, ecological courts, complex economic rights and a balanced multi-party democratic/parliamentary state. The point is to solve the case before some putative revolution/evolution to a new system: one needs at this point to solve the problems of ‘communist’ system as neo-communist in advance…

————————-

American populists are largely reactive and somewhat confused. They don’t know what hit them. And they don’t know their own, often forgotten, history. Nineteenth-century American populists were not socialists, but small-scale capitalists. They were farmers, artisans, and professionals. Private enterprise was central to their values, and they wanted to preserve it for ordinary citizens like themselves. The ideal was to own your own business, not to work for a corporation.

Source: Understanding Populism

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s