10 ms·
Less successful than the Nordic model but still much better than Soviet Russia, was Tito's Yugoslavia. I'm not an expert on it, but I believe it was big on coop
by mcv 5y ago
Less successful than the Nordic model but still much better than Soviet Russia, was Tito's Yugoslavia. I'm not an expert on it, but I believe it was big on cooperative ownership by the workers, rather than the state.
But I don't think there's ever been a country where everybody was either self-employed or co-owner of their workplace. And maybe it's not even feasible to get there, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea to try to move at least somewhat in that direction. Everybody being completely dependent on massive corporations certainly isn't great either.
- mschuster91 5y ago> Less successful than the Nordic model but still much better than Soviet Russia, was Tito's Yugoslavia. It was a brutal dictatorship, and while indeed better than Soviet Russia (which was not that hard given that Soviet leadership mostly was a bunch of incompetent drunkards), it didn't even come close in success to Germany, much less the Nordic states. > And maybe it's not even feasible to get there There is a feasible way - cooperatives ("Genossenschaft" in German). Almost everything can be organized that way, with the notable exception of public infrastructure like trains, roads and electricity/phone/gas/water grids. These best belong in government hands.
- mcv 5y agoI didn't mean to claim Tito was a great guy, but from what little I know, his approach to economy was more effective than that of Lenin/Stalin (not to mention Mao). Coops of some form in a democratic system would of course be vastly preferable.