Workplace Democracy Implies Economic Democracy

Vrousalis, Nicholas

doi:10.1111/josp.12275

Cited by 30 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar argument regarding the suspension of the market mechanism has recently been made by Nicholas Vrousalis, arguing that the two most common normative justifications for workplace democracy also demand economic democracy (Vrousalis 2019). My argument proceeds from a different angle and also urges the extension of the workplace democracy debate to further constituencies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

The Boundary Problem in Workplace Democracy: Who Constitutes the Corporate Demos?

Stehr

2022

Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article brings to bear findings from the debate on the boundary problem in democratic theory on discussions of workplace democracy to argue that workplace democrats’ focus on workers is unjustified and that more constituencies will have to be included in any prospective scheme of workplace democracy. It thereby provides a valuable and underdiscussed perspective on workplace democracy that goes beyond the debate’s usual focus on the clarification and justification of workplace democrats’ core claim. It also goes beyond approaches like stakeholder theory in law and economics that determine decision-making rights without taking into account genuinely democratic considerations. My discussion proceeds by considering three principles for inclusion from democratic theory for the specific case of the corporation. I submit that two of them, the all-coerced and the all-subjected principle, are not appropriate for this specific case, because they cannot capture the distinguishing features of the corporation. The all-affected principle however is appropriate but has a very wide range. I further argue that this is not as big of a problem as it first might seem and that this principle is still the most appropriate for defining the demos of the democratic corporation. The article closes by pointing out the consequences of this result for the workplace democracy debate and for the legitimacy of the market as a coordination mechanism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

The Boundary Problem in Workplace Democracy: Who Constitutes the Corporate Demos?

Stehr

2022

Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…26 On the question of socialization, Kautsky, heading the socialization committee of the SPD, was already confronted with two significant problems of bureaucratic autocracy and labor aristocracy; the first one arising when private capitalists are replaced by an undemocratic bureaucracy, and the second when all authority is transferred to a privileged group of workers managing different corporations. 27 As part of his plan, Kautsky argued for dual power, whereby Parliament would control the state and councils would control the factories, dealing with investment and socializations. Korsch also had similar views and believed that socialists must guard against these two sources of oppression.…”

Section: Evolving Theories and Councilism And Council Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

The (In)conceivability of Real “Workers’ Control” Under Capitalism

Rahnema

2023

Inter. Labor Working-Class Hist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Market competition dilutes the power of bosses, for ‘no one would depend on any particular master and so no one would be at the mercy of a master: he or she could move on to employment elsewhere in the event of suffering arbitrary interference’ (Pettit, 2007: 142). Critics of republicanism have contested that assertion by pointing out that workers as a class are structurally dominated in the free market, which shows either that freedom as non-domination makes no sense for it leads to the seemingly absurd conclusion that we are now all unfree (Sagar, 2019), or that republicanism should lead to socialism (Vrousalis, 2019).…”

Section: Domination In the Free Market?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is freedom as non-domination a right-wing idea?

Richard

2020

European Journal of Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sean Irving’s book Hayek’s Market Republicanism: The Limits of Liberty shows that the commonly accepted reading of Hayek as a liberal thinker is mistaken, and that his political writings are best understood as belonging to the broader tradition of republicanism. The distinction is important for understanding many aspects of Hayek’s thought, and especially his rejection of social justice and majoritarian democracy. In that sense, one of the book’s more general merits is its implicit contribution to ongoing debates between republican ‘freedom as non-domination’ and liberal ‘freedom as non-interference’. Irving focuses on what he sees as a contradiction between Hayek’s chief concerns about the state as the main source of domination and his disregard for private forms of power, and especially within the capitalist firm. I argue, however, that the example of Hayek should lead us to consider a more prosaic conclusion: freedom as non-domination is a concept less useful for criticising the free market than Irving and left-leaning Republicans seem to assume.

show abstract

Workplace Democracy Implies Economic Democracy

Cited by 30 publications

References 38 publications

The Boundary Problem in Workplace Democracy: Who Constitutes the Corporate Demos?

The Boundary Problem in Workplace Democracy: Who Constitutes the Corporate Demos?

The (In)conceivability of Real “Workers’ Control” Under Capitalism

Is freedom as non-domination a right-wing idea?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About