this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2023
483 points (78.0% liked)

Memes

45894 readers
1439 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
483
quick reminder (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by hairinmybellybutt to c/[email protected]
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Common ownership" as in the workers collectively own the means of production. You, individually, don't get to own it, but a union of workers, a local collective, or the state might own it and decisions would be made, ostensibly, by the workers who make up those entities.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

or the state might own it

In other words... the workers don't own squat.

[–] Asafum 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There would generally be mandatory meetings for workers to attend that would allow for debates on the trajectory of the company. The state would "own" it but the workers would still direct it.

In a very very small way, it is like what Germany does with large corporations. They require a percentage of the board of directors be actual workers so it's not just a bunch of capitalist parasites making decisions that would hurt workers just to boost their own portfolios/profits.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The word 'union' kind of brings more ring to the "workers' ownership" in that case. 'State' sounds spooky.

Your example is unheard to me tho. Kinda interesting how it works out.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Depends to what extent the state can be said to truly represent the workers.