Coop or not coop… This is’nt the question. Why it’s!

A few days ago Evgeny Morozov wrote a nice article about the relationship between the political left and the new watchwords of capitalism: innovation, start-ups, co-working , makers, creative class… and many other  are treated by the left as solutions to the economic crisis.
The left, like a teenager , fell in love with a few concepts that identifies as a solution to unemployment, economic stagnation, the decreasing demand. My point of view, however , what is missing to the left is the analysis of the causes of this situation. Without this analysis, how do we know if the solutions are really the right ones? There is nothing wrong with trial and error method… but if we can adopt a critical approach we could spare us a few tries.
We depart from Italy. Two days ago, ISTAT published data on the labor market: Unemployment at 13% , a record since 1977, +8000 in a month and +272000 in a year. Young at 42.3% . Really much.
It is impossible to imagine that the increase in labor productivity is’nt one of the causes.
Without looking too far, I think about my job: I can do now in a week the same job that a time I would take a month. I have access to an impressive quantity of data; I use more than 4 instruments at the same time to maintain relationships with colleagues, customers and suppliers; I write and photocopy in three days an impressive number of pages…
If productivity in some sectors has grown so much, also increased its ability to generate
richness. Where is it deposited this wealth? Certainly not in the welfare state if it’s continually cut. The indices on the international distribution of richness give us an answer so simple as shocking. Italy is among the countries with the most unequal distribution of income, after only to the United Kingdom in the European Union and with levels of inequality than the average of OECD countries. The system of the Italian welfare state, as has recently reminded the newspaper pagina99, favors the rich more than the poor. In fact are entirely absent policies of redistribution of richness between generations, between classes, between geographical origins. Leaving the system without any rules redistribution becomes concentration that is extremely functional with the accumulation of capital in a period of economic transformation (relational capitalism).
But without distribution you die! So if we want to support the distribution processes, we cannot limit ourselves to program small one-off interventions. What is needed is a ‘choice of sides’, built in a critical and timely way.
The social enterprise may be the main actor in this process. The system of values​​, orientation, impact and democratic  are perfect for combining production and redistribution. When social enterprises will be able to get out of the public-private bias and to include new actors and new products in the welfare state system all their work will be even more oriented to equity.
At this stage, however , the pressures to loosen the bonds of no-distribution of profits and the new love with impact finance are likely to weaken the redistributive vocation of the social enterprises. Really they need it? Their competitive advantage, that is necessary to operate in this capitalist system, is their propensity to develop the economies of knowledge, collaboration and redistribution. It seems to me they already have three good reasons to choose to cooperate!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s