|
|
|
|
|
by lifeisstillgood
1296 days ago
|
|
And that's the argument put forward in 1700s and 1800s for not extending the vote beyond those with land. Maybe employees will make intelligent informed decisions about who is actually capable as an executive. Maybe they will make more effective decisions themselves if they have a greater say and commitment to the company. Maybe not. Maybe we shall fall into totalitarian dystopias and the dream of universal suffrage will enter myth. maybe |
|
> Maybe employees will make intelligent informed decisions about who is actually capable as an executive. Maybe they will make more effective decisions themselves if they have a greater say and commitment to the company.
Yes, intelligent decisions. Such a red herring. For what is an “intelligent decision” in the market economy? Maximizing profits. So either the workers work within the bourgeoisie logic of maximizing profits—creating the same problems for themselves as they had under command economy rule—or they make “unintelligent decisions” by proritizing their collective selves. With the former they “fail the test” of this red herring scenario because intelligent decisions according to the workers are not the same as intelligent decisions according to the bourgeoisie.