"Conservative Co-operative" - a confidence trick?
at 04:05
Just as we are trying to get to grips with whether the Liberal Conspiracy is actually Liberal, so now we have Dave the Chameleon saying the the Conservatives and the Co-operative Movement have always been natural bed-buddies:
The co-op movement has generally been associated with the political left. I think that's a shame. First, because there have always been people on the centre-right concerned about the effects of capitalism on the social fabric. Men like Carlyle and Disraeli, following the tradition of Edmund Burke and Adam Smith himself, who recognised at the outset of the industrial revolution that profit was not the only organising principle of a healthy society. And second, because the co-operative principle reflects an important part of the vision of social progress that we on the centre-right believe in: the role of strong independent institutions, run by and for local people. That's why Conservatives have always argued that free enterprise and the co-operative principle are partners, not adversaries.
It is true that, faced with an alternative between co-operative localism and central state organization, the Conservatives have occasionally championed the mutual. Notably in 1908 when the Old Age Pensions Act was passed the Conservatives tried to promote the use of Friendly Societies and Mutuals instead of a state pension system. And it may be that there have been well-meaning Tories worried about the "effects of capitalism on the social fabric". And yes, co-operatives operate in the same markets as capitalists often and compete, often successfully with them.
However, the International Co-operative Alliance provides the ground rules for bona fide co-operative enterprises. And the Co-operative Values they promote are indeed motherhood and apple pie stuff: "Co-operatives are based on the values of self-help, self-responsibility, democracy, equality, equity and solidarity."
But the Co-operative Principles, developed from this vision and building on the rules of the Rochdale Pioneers, set bona fide co-operatives at odds with the traditional capitalism that the Tory party has long championed. "Democratic Member Control" for example means that every member, regardless of their financial stake, has an equal say in the running of the business. Capitalism is based on the exact opposite - that he with the most shares has the greatest say.
"Voluntary Open Membership" was a challenge to the "Church and State" party - with many mutuals founded precisely because their non-conformist members were barred from services and facilities because of their religious associations.
The Co-operative Movement, at least in Britain, was basically founded to empower the lower classes against the Tory ruling class and its economic hold over them. Its principles can be and are used to democratise and devolve services from an overbearing state as with Cameron's regurgitation of the liberal Milton Friedman's idea for co-operative schooling. But it is an extra-ordinary claim that the principles of the Co-op Movement are compatible with the protectionist capitalism embodied in the Conservative party.
Dave incidentally perpetuated the popular story that the co-operative movement started in Rochdale - they codified the idea of course, but it was proto-socialist Robert Owen who opened the first co-op store for his workers in New Lanark, and, to take it to its logical origins, Gerrard Winstanley's Diggers in 1649 who set the scene for the long battle between co-operation and collectivism on the one hand and enclosure and privatisation of our common birthright on the other. I doubt the Conservative Co-operative Movement will be agitating any day soon for wholesale equitable redistribution of the common wealth.
Incidentally Guido - I believe you are quite wrong in this respect - a hedge fund partnership cannot by definition be a bona fide co-operative since one of the other obligations of a bona fide co-operaive is to promote and educate about the co-operative principles. The hedge fund exploits to the max the capitalist principles of shareholder power - might is right. I don't have a principled objection to hedge funds and private equity - they have their place in this broken world, but they cannot be counted as members of the co-operative movement by any stretch of the imagination.
Trackback URL for this post:
Comments
This is messy politics and a
This is messy politics and a big risk for cameron.
Dissolving the constitutional link between the cooperative party and the labour party would be a boon for democracy in the uk and it would undermine one of the moral foundations of the labour party, so it is a tactically adept move, however philosophically and practically unsound it is. It also follows his policy of trying to move the conservatives towards Blair's promised land of the 'centre-ground', wherever that may be.
We shall see by the results whether it is successful, but I doubt he will simultaneously be able to split the labour and co-ops (either in parliament or in the land) whilst maintaining continuing support from the core of the conservative benefactors.
It would all seem to be part of the overall gambit (or give the appearance of being able to) to get enough LibDem voters in enough marginal seats to give him a chance so that he can take enough seats to take power.
But will be his undoing as it is all based on the incedibly tenuous link between what he says and reality - his statement is fatuous and he is indulging in wishful thinking. When he fails the conservative party will dump him and expose its real colours to take a hard right turn.
If cameron is leading anything, he is leading attempts to defraud the public.
The problem I have with your argument is that you're starting from a different set of assumptions about what the Conservative Party stands for, to the one the party itself is starting from. You're assuming that Conservatives are for capitalism, and that's it. In one sense, you're correct - most conservatives, including myself, do believe that the free market must form the bedrock of a dynamic and successful economy, and what you term the 'capitalist' corporate structure is evidently the mechanism by which the most successful companies to date have arisen.
We aren't, however, wedded to the corporate structure for its own sake: what matters to us is the free market, and the two are not the same. We believe in the free market both because of its success, and on principle: we don't think it's the job of government to regulate the minutiae of human behaviour, in social or economic terms, and so we oppose state control of industry.
Co-operatives are not state-run; they are, as you point out, voluntary entities that nobody is ever forced to join or trade with. Their origins, as a reaction to a society supported by a Tory Party that is profoundly different from the Conservative Party of today, are irrelevant to the current discussion; co-operatives are of the free market just as private corporations are. Moreover, the good that they do for society is also voluntary and benevolent: members freely choose to use part of the co-operative surplus (often, in my view erroneously in the case, described as 'profit') to benefit others, and are not forced to do so on pain of imprisonment as taxpayers are. Lastly they're structured so as to allow decisionmaking to be taken on a local level by the people with the greatest knowledge of the circumstances they are facing.
So when you have an essential difference between the political left and the right that is between statism and the free market, centralisation and local control, enforced collectivism and individuals freely choosing to work together for their mutual betterment and that of society, it seems pretty clear to me which ideology co-operation is more in tune with.
That's why I'm both an avid co-operator, and a member of the Conservative Party. I'm proud that the leader of my party understands this in a way that his predecessors seemingly did not; I do appreciate where you're coming from. Apart from being an activist and candidate here in Manchester, I've already been in contact and started working with both Mr Cameron and Jesse Norman, who's heading the CCM, and I can assure you that there is no insincerity here. We really do believe and mean what we say, and I hope you'll be prepared to concede at least that our intentions are good.
Add comment































Coops are independent entities
Who cares what the International Co-op Bureaucrats think. My old fund very definitely worked on a co-operative basis. I'd rather my daughters went to a co-op school than a state school. A conservative co-op school would be even better. After becoming a father of two daughters I can now comprehend all to vividly the old conservative charge that there is no such thing as a libertarian father of teenage girls.