:
>
>>Supose co-ops like the (Winpeg) Mondragon Co-op were everywhere -
>>resteraunts, food stores - not some gigantic percentage of the
>>economy, but enough so that everyone came into the contact with them.
>
>
> Co-ops are everywhere in Japan -- not that it is any closer to an
> anarchist utopia, though.
And in Italy too. I specifcally said "Winipeg Mondragon" style co-ops - that is democractically owned and run by their workers and openly anti-capitalist in ideology. If you just specify co-ops without modifer, there are a significant number even in the U.S.. Italy has a bigger and more succesful co-op movement than Japan - partly because the co-op movement in Italy is tied to labor unions and political parties. My point is not that Winipeg style co-ops would lead to some sort of paradise, but that they would be a really useful form of propaganda. Suppose a majority of the population, or even a huge minority did even a tiny percent of their shopping at co-ops where there were signs over the door saying "boss free zone" and pamplets explaining that the co-op was worker owned and run - no bosses, no separate managers. I just think it would be a tremendous help in breaking down the prejudcie against the idea of workers owning and controlling the means of production. If they were networked, it would also be a nice supplementary means of communication. I don't think such a network could arise in absence of a powerful left movement. My view of a radical co-op movmenet is the opposite of the anarchist view - as an arm of a left movment rather than the driving force.
In the particular case you are replying to my phrasing was not sloppy. The modifying phrase you ignored was right in the paragraph you quoted.
Careful reading of what you are commenting on is something you uusally do better than most on this list; in this case I thought it was worth noting that you fell below your normal standard.