I would think that as well as social ownership and control one requires production on the basis of need rather than on the basis of profit.
Social ownership could be governments of various levels, worker, or co-operative ownership. I don't see why it should be restricted to democratic governments.
Here is an elaboration of social ownership etc. from the Regina Manifesto of the CCF (Co-operative Commonwealth Federation) This was the predecessor of the present NDP and as the government of Saskatchewan brought in the first socialised medicare system in North America.
The Manifesto dates from 1933 and was passed in the city of Regina hence its name. The Emergency programme was meant to deal with the special circumstances of the depression.
http://economics.uwaterloo.ca/needhdata/Regina_Manifesto.html
3. Social Ownership
Socialization (Dominion, Provincial or Municipal) of transportation, communications, electric power and all other industries and services essential to social planning, and their operation under the general direction of the Planning Commission by competent managements freed from day to day political interference.
Public utilities must be operated for the public benefit and, not for the private profit of a small group of owners or financial manipulators. Our natural resources must be developed by the same methods. Such a programme means the continuance and extension of the public ownership enterprises in which most governments in Canada have already gone some distance. Only by such public ownership, operated on a planned economy, can our main industries be saved from the wasteful competition of the ruinous overdevelopment and over-capitalization which are the inevitable outcome of capitalism. Only in a regime of public ownership and operation will the full benefits accruing from centralized control and mass production be passed on to the consuming public.
Transportation, communications and electric power must come first in a list of industries to be socialized. Others, such as mining, pulp and paper and the distribution of milk, bread, coal and gasoline, in which exploitation, waste, or financial malpractices are particularly prominent must next be brought under social ownership and operation.
In restoring to the community its natural resources and in taking over industrial enterprises from private into public control we do not propose any policy of outright confiscation. What we desire is the most stable and equitable transition to the Cooperative Commonwealth. It is impossible to decide the policies to be followed in particular cases in an uncertain future, but we insist upon certain broad principles. The welfare of the community must take supremacy over the claims of private wealth. In times of war, human life has been conscripted. Should economic circumstances call for it, conscription of wealth would be more justifiable. We recognize the need for compensation in the case of individuals and institutions which must receive adequate maintenance during the transitional period before the planned economy becomes fully operative. But a CCF government will not play the role of rescuing bankrupt private concerns for the benefit of promoters and of
stock and bond holders. It will not pile up a deadweight burden of unremunerative debt which represents claims upon the public treasury of a functionless owner class.
The management of publicly owned enterprises will be vested in boards who will be appointed for their competence in the industry and will conduct each particular enterprise on efficient economic lines. The machinery of management may well vary from industry to industry, but the rigidity of Civil Service rules should be avoided and likewise the evils of the patronage system as exemplified in so many departments of the Government today.
Workers in these public industries must be free to organize in trade unions and must be given the right to participate in the management of the industry.
6. Co-Operative Institutions
The encouragement by the public authority of both producers' and consumers' cooperative institutions
In agriculture, as already mentioned, the primary producer can receive a larger net revenue through cooperative organization of purchases and marketing. Similarly in retail distribution of staple commodities such as milk, there is room for development both of public municipal operation and of consumers' cooperatives, and such cooperative organization can be extended into wholesale distribution and into manufacturing. Cooperative enterprises should be assisted by the state through appropriate legislation and through the provision of adequate credit facilities.
14. An Emergency Programme
The assumption by the Dominion Government of direct responsibility for dealing with the present critical unemployment situation and for tendering suitable work or adequate maintenance; the adoption of measures to relieve the extremity of the crisis such as a programme of public spending on housing, and other enterprises that will increase the real wealth of Canada, to be financed by the issue of credit based on the national wealth
The extent of unemployment and the widespread suffering which it has caused, creates a situation with which provincial and municipal governments have long been unable to cope and forces upon the Dominion government direct responsibility for dealing with the crisis as the only authority with financial resources adequate to meet the situation. Unemployed workers must be secured in the tenure of their homes, and the scale and methods of relief, at present altogether inadequate, must be such as to preserve decent human standards of living.
It is recognized that even after a Cooperative Commonwealth Federation Government has come into power, a certain period of time must elapse before the planned economy can be fully worked out. During this brief transitional period, we propose to provide work and purchasing power to those now unemployed by a far-reaching programme of public expenditure on housing, slum clearance, hospitals, libraries, schools, community halls, parks, recreational projects, reforestation, rural electrification, the elimination of grade crossings, and other similar projects in both town and country. This programme, which would be financed by the issuance of credit based on the national wealth, would serve the double purpose of creating employment and meeting recognized social needs. Any steps which the government takes, under this emergency programme, which may assist private business, must include guarantees of adequate wages and reasonable hours of work, and must be
designed to further the advance towards the complete Cooperative Commonwealth.
Emergency measures, however, are of only temporary value, for the present depression is a sign of the mortal sickness of the whole capitalist system, and this sickness cannot be cured by the application of salves. These leave untouched the cancer which is eating at the heart of our society, namely, the economic system in which our natural resources and our principal means of production and distribution are owned, controlled and operated for the private profit of a small proportion of our population.
No C.C.F. Government will rest content until it has eradicated capitalism and put into operation the full programme of socialized planning which will lead to the establishment in Canada of the Cooperative Commonwealth.
Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html
--- On Sun, 2/22/09, Bill Bartlett <billbartlett at aapt.net.au> wrote:
> From: Bill Bartlett <billbartlett at aapt.net.au>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Soros, Volcker, Depression, Nationalization
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Sunday, February 22, 2009, 9:58 PM
> An excellent question. Let's break it down into two
> parts. Firstly, what does it mean - simply that the means of
> production etc would be "owned" by society (and
> thus whole and operated for the benefit of society). As
> opposed to, for example, being owned privately and thus
> operated in the interests of its private owners.
>
> That's the short version of what "ownership"
> means. It means the thing owned is able to be used
> exclusively in the interests of the owner.
>
> By adding that socialism also requires that the means of
> production be socially controlled, the dictionary definition
> would preclude any form of state ownership where the state
> was not democratic, from being defined as socialism. Because
> of course if industry is owned by the state, but the state
> is not itself socially owned/controlled, then there is no
> practical difference between that and private ownership of
> the means of production. As far as the majority are
> concerned.
>
> As for the second part, what it means in practice, that is
> rather a long story and is undoubtedly open to debate. I
> admit being partial to trying to make a long story short,
> but even I'm not game to try in this case.
>
> Bill Bartlett
> Bracknell Tas
>
>
> At 5:59 PM -0800 22/2/09, Chris Doss wrote:
>
> > What the hell does that mean, practically speaking?
> >
> >
> > --- On Sun, 2/22/09, Bill Bartlett
> <billbartlett at aapt.net.au> wrote:
> >>
> >> Socialism is the social ownership and control of
> the means
> >> of production and distribution. That's what
> my
> >> dictionary says. So there's no need to worry
> about
> >> whether "socialists" agree on a
> definition, the
> > > definition is settled.
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk