Mixed economy??? - Was: Gintis:TINA

[Trond Andresen <Trond.Andresen@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Now what IS a "mixed economy"??

As I see it this term is used for two different purposes:

1) To describe a non-bureaucratic humane and grassroots-controlled
   market economy (more on this below). That is Gintis' purpose, no?

2) As a positive-sounding whitewash term for modern capitalism,
   frequently used by right-wing social democrats to pacify voters alarmed
   by the steady march to the right of the party leadership.

2) is relevant to Norway, and I believe in Sweden, Spain
(Gonzales), France (Mitterand), Germany and the U.K. In the non-Scandinavian
parties the SD parties are even more right-wing and market liberalist.

The leadership of the Norwegian SD party, "Det Norske Arbeiderparti"
(Abbr. "DNA") has for the last 40 years been in the hands of a
group belonging to the inner circles of the ruling capitalist class in
Norway. Of course they constitute a FACTION in this ruling class,
fighting with the classical bourgeois faction, but they are still part
of the ruling class.

How can I say this?

- a lot of general managers and board members in key Norwegian corporations
  are - or have been - DNA members: Statoil, Norsk Hydro, The Norwegian
  Central Bank, The Norwegian Telephone Company. This is still on the increase.

- top-notch bureaucrats in the state apparatus are to a great degree DNA
  members

- Since after WW2 there has been an intimate, secret and illegal
  cooperation between the Norwegian military Intelligence, the DNA
  secretariat and persons in the central union bureaucracy. Key
  personnnel in MI have themselves been - and still are - DNA members
  They have mapped and black-listed opposition in Norway since WW2, also
  non-communist opposition in the unions.

- Since 1949, when Norway joined NATO against strong popular protests,
  the leadership of DNA has been a steadfast supporter of U.S. "foreign
  policy" anywhere in the world. Also of Israel. Some weak
  critism during the Indochina wars has come forth, but only because of
  strong pressure from public opinion. The most recent news here is that
  the DNA party organization in the 1950's distributed leaflets among
  the Norwegian  public on the
  Korean war, and on "Nuclear Energy in War and Peace", leaflets
  written by the  American embassy in Oslo(!).

- Since 1960, the DNA leadership has been doing their utmost to get
  Norway to join the EC -  what is now the EU (European
  Union). They lost in 1972, when a plebiscite said no with 53.5% of
  the votes, but has never given up since. they are allied in this
  with the conservative party and the the reactionary "progress(!)
  party" which is a Thatcher-like party. They are also allied in this with
  the employers federation, and all big business in Norway. On the other
  side are the union grass-roots (and also medium-level bureaucracy), the
  socialist and reformist parties, the two parties "Senterpartiet" (district
  profile, farming interests) and "Kristelig Folkeparti" (Christian but
  fairly non-conservative party), the whole of the environment movement (which
  is quite important in Norway).

- On top of all this, we have a steady series of policy measures taken by
  the DNA gvt. which are indistinguishable from similar measures taken by
  traditional conservative parties: Greater wage differences, increasing
  the value added tax from 20% to 22% , cuts in public spending for
  kindergartens, schools, the disabled etc.
  They also implement solid wage increases
  for themselves in top positions, while they ask ordinary people to
  accept a fall in living standards "to enhance the competetiveness" of
  Norwegian industry.

And this is - in a European context - a "radical" SD party. Their "mixed
economy" is just modern streamlined capitalism with the "optimal"
amount of state intervention and ownership.

IMO we have to divide SD parties into two fundamentally
different categories:

1) "Classical" well-meaning SD parties trying to reform capitalism slowly
   in a
   socialist direction, and willing to make compromises with the
   capitalists to realize this. Their leadership is not part of the
   ruling class. The Norwegian "Sosialistisk venstreparti" (11% in
   the polls) is such a party. DNA  WAS such a party sometimes before
   WW2. No such SD party is in power in Europe.

2) Ruling-class SD parties which are neccessary for modern capitalism
   to function. They have no long-range vision for an alternative society
   (and I am not talking socialism here, but ANY qualitatively better
   society for the majority) but are just
   maneuvering for power and privilege in capitalist society.
   They only use some weak socialist rhetoric when it is neccessary to
   calm down frustrated voters. The leadership has a jet-set life-style,
   living standards way beyond ordinary citizens, and personal friends in
   the traditional bourgeoisie. They have important managing positions
   in industry and finance.

Now to what we SHOULD mean by the term "mixed economy", if it is intended
as a positive term. I believe the following points should be important
for such a society:

-	Goods and services distributed mainly via the market, but

-	Publicly financed health, education, pensions etc.

-	Employee ownership/control of plants and businesses (the Mondragon
	model?). Cooperative agreements between businesses encouraged, large
	scale corporations discouraged. Small is beautiful.

-	Direct democracy to a large extent (here we have something to learn
	from the Swiss). Extensive use of computer networks here. Education
	for active participation in society paramount.
	
-	Where direct democracy is not practicable, privileges and high wages to
	representatives should be banned.

-	Ordinary wages to persons wielding power. High wages (if required) only 	allowed to persons being "expert", but not in power positions
	in buraucracy and business.

-	Non-commercial mass media, controlled by the public, not by the
	advertisers.

-       Strong consumer, anti-monopolist and environmental protection
	in the form of NGOs but also state-sponsored agencies.

-	Strong restrictions on cross-border capital flows. Some restrictions
	on free trade. Democracy without control over cross-border capital
	flows is simply impossible.

We haven't seen such a society anywhere yet.

Cheers,


 ----------------------------------------------
| Trond Andresen (Trond.Andresen@xxxxxxxxxxx) |
| Department of Engineering Cybernetics       |
| The Norwegian Institute of Technology       |
| N-7034 Trondheim, NORWAY                    |
|                                             |
| phone (work)  +47 73 59 43 58               |
| fax   (work)  +47 73 59 43 99               |
| private phone +47 73 53 08 23               |
-----------------------------------------------