Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!auvm!BROWNVM!JWS From: JWS@BROWNVM.BITNET (Joseph Sullivan) Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics Subject: Re: Worker-owner corporations Message-ID: <90043.2253.JWS@BROWNVM> Date: 12 Feb 90 22:53:22 GMT Sender: Forum for the Discussion of Politics Reply-To: Forum for the Discussion of Politics Lines: 17 Approved: NETNEWS@AUVM Gateway Replying to Ralph Harris' posting regarding Weirton Steel: I think I've probably answered a lot of these questions in my last posting to Mark. I've read Von Mises and, once again, am more interested in American thinkers in this area, because they're the ones who have dealt with these problems as they occurred in America. European economists have a tendency toward abstractions and semantics that are irrelevant to steel workers, bus drivers and coal miners. As for the term 'syndicalism', I won't argue with you there, though it is, once again, a European term. The closest the US comes to syndicalism is the IWW. Big Bill Haywood, the IWW's leader, never used that term in his writing or speeches. He regarded himself as a Socialist. As to your questions regarding who will run the plant, what to do with new employees, etc., I can only say that the workers, with their infinite common sense and good will, will find a way to organize and manage themselves. Those who think otherwise are in good company--the certain failure of the colonists to govern themselves was good reason for many an American to choose the Tory side.