On Small Scale Production

I think it is important for Socialist Nationalists to advocate for the restoration of small scale production. One of the main wrongs of Capitalism has been the fact that it has practically destroyed small scale production. The primary wrong this has caused is the practical elimination of the small scale producer of goods. There were times ( in the past) when a good number of people owned a means of production ( such as a small craftshop) and produced goods at the place they owned. Since the advent of Capitalism this state of affairs has vanished. There are very few small scale producers of goods ( in this day and age) and their numbers seem to be shrinking day by day. Back in time there were a good number of farmers who owned and worked the land they grew crops on ( for example). There were also a good number of artisans who owned the shop where they made goods. Capitalism destroyed the livelihood of many such people and caused mass production of goods to predominate. Now instead of many farmers owning the land they till, you have many wage laborers tilling the land they do not own. Instead of many people owning a small workshop which they use to produce goods you have many people who work in factories for the benefit of their owners ( who play no part in the production that goes on at the factory).

The vanishing of small scale production has caused many people to lose their independence. Instead of being their own bosses they now have to accept the terms of others. Automatization ( and therefore simplification) of labor has also contributed to what many call alienation of the worker. Far too many workers can no longer appreciate the fruit of their own special and unique efforts. They must look at the same drab and dry mass produced goods ( that require no special effort to create). Not to mention the fact that local, indigenous, and national cultures have taken a toll due to the predominance of mass production. Ancient national handicrafts have become a rarity partly due to the fact that there are no longer as many small scale producers that produce them.

I could go on listing reasons as to why small scale production needs to be restored but I believe I have gotten my point across. The restoration of small production would result in many people becoming economically free and not dependent on others for their livelihood. Now of course when I say small scale production should be restored I do not mean that small scale production should replace ( or even predominate over) mass production. On the contrary I mean that small scale and mass production should co exist side by side. The means of mass production should be owned by Worker Cooperatives and the means of small scale production should be owned by Individuals. Some may argue that what I advocate would restore petit bourgeois Capitalism however it would not. A person who owns the land that they work by themselves ( for example) is not a petit bourgeois Capitalist. Neither is the person who owns the smithy which they use to make horseshoes. Therefore I state that it is important for us Socialist Nationalists to advocate the restoration of small scale production along with the formation of Worker Cooperatives. Because by doing so we would make many members of the Nations we belong to economically free.

I completely agree, small scale production should definitely be encouraged for many of the reasons you just outlined.

As it turns out, the abolition of the capitalist mode of production would actually encourage the development of smaller businesses and self-employment. Since finance would essentially become a nationalized/non-profit public service, anyone with a promising business idea could be approved for a grant—which would obviously be beneficial for asset-poor individuals seeking self-employment in some capacity. Furthermore, labor-managed firms themselves would ensure that the current model of corporate chain stores observed throughout the capitalist West would be transcended and replaced with more localized production:

"We know from our earlier analysis that a worker-managed firm lacks an expansionary dynamic. When a capitalist enterprise is successful, the owner can increase her profits by reproducing her organization on a larger scale. She lacks neither the means nor the motivation to expand. Not so with a worker-managed firm. Even if the workers have the means, they lack the incentive, because enterprise growth would bring in new workers with whom the increased proceeds would have to be shared. Cooperatives, even when prosperous, do not spontaneously grow."
Schweickart, David. Against Capitalism, p. 239

Celtiberian wrote:I completely agree, small scale production should definitely be encouraged for many of the reasons you just outlined.

As it turns out, the abolition of the capitalist mode of production would actually encourage the development of smaller businesses and self-employment. Since finance would essentially become a nationalized/non-profit public service, anyone with a promising business idea could be approved for a grant—which would obviously be beneficial for asset-poor individuals seeking self-employment in some capacity. Furthermore, labor-managed firms themselves would ensure that the current model of corporate chain stores observed throughout the capitalist West would be transcended and replaced with more localized production:

"We know from our earlier analysis that a worker-managed firm lacks an expansionary dynamic. When a capitalist enterprise is successful, the owner can increase her profits by reproducing her organization on a larger scale. She lacks neither the means nor the motivation to expand. Not so with a worker-managed firm. Even if the workers have the means, they lack the incentive, because enterprise growth would bring in new workers with whom the increased proceeds would have to be shared. Cooperatives, even when prosperous, do not spontaneously grow."
Schweickart, David. Against Capitalism, p. 239

Indeed. I never thought that Worker Cooperatives could fulfill that purpose but evidently they can. I will have to read Against Capitalism. Land reform and laws prohibiting chain and department stores ( as well as supermarkets and centers) could also help restore small scale production. Then again that is a topic deserving a thread of its own.

I am also in full agreement. The type of syndicalism that we endorse is in essence modest in scope due to its focus upon the self-managed workers' firm, which has no incentive to expand in the grotesque capacity that capitalist enterprises do. My vision is of a strong, communally based economy that is concentric in nature, stemming from the firm itself to its local community, then to the local province, then to the state, then the region, and finally the nation.

This would entail many positive consequences: for one, the system would ensure that those most closely affected by the daily functioning of the firms would also be the greatest beneficiaries; it would allow for efficient regulation of businesses in accordance with community needs and desires (gone would be the days when local ecosystems are devastated for financial gain by those who have no vested interest in a particular living space); it would foster regional development in unique directions, as each region, filled with its many communities, would grow in specialization, methodology, and style; it would unite people living in a particular area by instilling the spirit of community through its transparent bonds of collective effort.

Rather than have a multitude of generic brands, why not discard such bloated and insipid materialism in favor of creative and regionally important product? I am reminded of the many different cheeses produced by local farms in France and Italian regional salamis.

I have several organizational questions regarding small-scale labor forces:

1. How will regional collectives organize with others to form a nation? Who will finance the public banks and how will these also be organized?
2. How will land and people be protected from exploitation in the long term? Will people be organized for national issues such as invasion or civil conflict?
3. How will people maintain motivation to remain socialist and not fall into bloodlust and repressing others when times get tough?

godlessnorth wrote:1. How will regional collectives organize with others to form a nation?

I'm not quite sure if I understand your question correctly, but (most) nation-states would be preserved following a socialist revolution.

Who will finance the public banks and how will these also be organized?

I favor the implementation of a flat capital asset tax being levied on all cooperative enterprises—which would essentially serve as a leasing fee workers pay for access to society's means of production. The collected funds would then be channeled into regional public banks on a per capita basis, and used to finance the construction of new cooperative firms, existing cooperatives in need of funds, and local public services.

2. How will land and people be protected from exploitation in the long term? Will people be organized for national issues such as invasion or civil conflict?

I believe that military service should be a shared responsibility, as opposed to a job for the poor in society (as it currently is). Therefore, I think every able-bodied person should have a obligation to serve in the armed forces for a certain period of time.

3. How will people maintain motivation to remain socialist and not fall into bloodlust and repressing others when times get tough?

Socialism, like any mode of production, ultimately rests on the consent of the masses. The law would ensure that the capitalist social relations could not reassert themselves, lest some sort of popular uprising occurs wherein the people demand the restoration of capitalism.

Celtiberian wrote:Socialism, like any mode of production, ultimately rests on the consent of the masses. The law would ensure that the capitalist social relations could not reassert themselves, lest some sort of popular uprising occurs wherein the people demand the restoration of capitalism.

That would suck.