Collective Organizations in Cooperative Markets

The philosophy of Classical Liberalism was established in the early 19^th century following the political and economic collapse of aristocracy and monarchy. Its ethic was a step away from the tyranny of telling people whether their destiny is Nobel or Serf toward individual responsibility for the outcome of life. It speaks to laissez faire or government hands off—no spending of public monies for economic purposes. It’s also heavy on self-reliance, and it defines politicians today who call themselves Libertarians.

Social Liberals, on the other hand, have bastardized the philosophy of Classical Liberalism. They've created government spending programs designed to socially engineer a compassionate society—universal caregiver for all—with government and capitalism as institutional companions. Therefore, these “bastard” values and beliefs (an ideology) contradict Classical Liberalism and are outside the parameters of this early 19th Century philosophy.

Contrast Classical Liberalism with Capitalism and you’ll see that both philosophies stress individual responsibility while people compete with each other to seek their own selfish desires (individualism). Both also assume everybody is better off (the invisible hand) that resources (labor, technology, tools of production) move toward products and services demanded and away from those products or services not demanded, evidence of a free market environment. Therefore, both models of Classical Liberalism and Capitalism omit collective organization and cooperation as values and beliefs that people can work for a common purpose—even though collective cooperation also is compatible with the allocation of resources in free markets.

Look, it’s all about opportunity not equality. Equality is a red herring—a stinky fish designed by Democrats to distract Radicals from ownership opportunity for our effort. Their insatiable pursuit of individualism is what makes both Democrats and Republicans bad for people like you and me. All Radicals are asking for is the ability to choose between these two options: whether we want to continue to produce for individuals and competitively or whether we want to cooperate collectively. Our ideas create opportunity people can then communicate through business plans to interested others—and this is where government can again get out of the way. Therefore, choice will allow people to no longer depend on a government dole.

Radicalism in the labor movement, for American workers, should represent change: the choice between individualistic competition or collective cooperation in their effort to produce goods and services. It will give an option of collective ownership for ability, education and honest work at any position within an industry, trade or profession. It motivates people to produce for greater profit sharing and educate themselves for better pay within their collective enterprise.