The Accidental Societist

Foreword

Often, I walk and notice how a child, independent from a parent in so many ways, walks similarly to that parent, the same gait, stride length and foot fall. As my daughter, son and I wander across fields and paths, I cannot deny that from behind, any casual viewer would see that we share inherited characteristics, walking in the steps of our forebears. More than that, we tread the same footpaths I walked as a boy, part of a heritable environment.

I long for my children to find their own way in life, free from the pre-conceived ideas I may have unintentionally planted in them, to travel their own, unique journey, unencumbered by tradition, and that they find ways of being and living that are relevant to their modern time, and that of their contemporaries; that they challenge the status quo previous generations, mine included, have bequeathed them, to build a better future.

That future is determined largely, as it is for all of us, by our collective inheritance, of an economic and political system underpinned by social and political philosophies that should be just and fair, that strengthen the ties that bind us together as a society with shared values, and allow us to live, however we choose, safely and secure in the provision of the essential elements of our lives, economic, human and environmental.

The legacy we have inherited, systems founded on hierarchy, ownership and control have led to a binary economic system which has a polarising reflection in our politics. This is not how it should be. We are a diverse society, individuals living side by side, with different, often conflicting views on every matter under the sun. For democracy to be fully representative, our politics and economy should be plural too, but neither is. To bequeath a more just economy we need to challenge this economic and political settlement.

Rudimental forces define our collective economic identity, they determine for many of us an experience of economic life disconnected from our personal values, a system whose parameters we unconsciously accept, the reality of which leaves us feeling disempowered.

We can be inspired on our journey of reform by vision. John Lennon's imaginings set us on our path in search of tolerance, civilising values, and justice. We travel the poet John Donne's river, which kisses one bank then does kiss the next, achieving the purest change. We should be moved by Steve McQueen's dramatic retelling of racial discrimination, and make the links of that lived experience, also suffered through gender and social class, to the cause of economic empowerment. At the end of our travel, we must leave the barren landscape which does not nourish and where too many are told they will not grow, to live in a new land that is fertile, where marigolds will bloom, with roots that persevere, and the marginalised and disadvantaged will have "power beyond measure", the vision of the poet Alissa Jacques. This is not then a matter purely of economics, it is about conceptual reformation. It is also of profound relevance to groups we refer to as minorities in this country, who may be global majorities, and to majorities, including women, who are disempowered; one cannot understate the importance of group action in the cause of economic reform.

Humanity faces existential and systemic challenges which can be a catalyst for positive change, encouraging the pursuit of universal values, common interest, sustainability, and sufficiency. Particularly for the global fellowship of reformers, but for the general population too, seeking change, we often face an economy that diminishes our society through unequal shares of wealth, opportunity, and outcome.

Our economy is driven by legacy, not the needs of a modern society. While society has evolved, our economy has not. To build an inclusive, well-being economy, with prosperity shared fairly requires a democratic economic system, one working for the collective good.

There are many positive achievements from commercial endeavour in the private sector, by shareholders seeking private gain: personal and social progress, economic growth, with trading surpluses generated, the tax on which has helped fund social and public expenditure. Through taxation and government's power to redistribute national wealth, a level of fairness ensures social cohesion is maintained. However, market capitalism is not fit, in its exclusivity, for societal purpose. It was never designed to serve social need as its primary function.

There is a distinction to be made between that part of the private sector in which individuals seek to make a living and prosper through a business they are employed in and perhaps own, and that part comprising companies having a wider societal impact, and relevance, owned by shareholders as capital investments, often remote from the day-to-day work of the companies in which they invest. It is that part of the private sector which this book concerns, the one defined as market capitalist. The monopoly which market capitalism enjoys over the free-market, and over the profits consumers generate through their demand, denies the general population a truly mixed and plural economy intrinsically serving their best interests.

The aim of this book is to answer the question, "if not capitalism, what"?

Private sector capitalism, rooted in hierarchy, patriarchy, control, and ownership, developed at a time of no universal franchise, no race or gender equality. Economic rights were held by a male, property-owning minority. Force, military power, and colonisation were the tools of private acquisition overseas. Little wonder Marxism (and the socialism that derived from it) demanded ownership pass to the workers and state.

Perhaps our notion of enterprise and economy would have changed as society evolved but for the trauma of the cold war. The late Dr Naomi Fisher wrote on behavioural genetics and psychology. She observed that our DNA makes us who we are, so attempts at change are limited by our personal experience and genes, and she observed that our genes and environment act in myriad, interconnected, heritable ways. Our economy is no different, as we accept a framework based on beliefs rooted in the past, seemingly unable to adapt as society changes. Meanwhile our daily transactions affect our consciousness and understanding of the economy in a behavioural and systemic loop. Our views become polarised, and we find it hard to imagine a for-profit enterprise economy, other than as a private sector one, shareholder owned, yet a societal economy exists already. We simply do not recognise it, and because we do not identify it, we do not develop its full potential.

A societised free market enterprise economy is one served by companies independent of shareholders or state; trust and societally purposed companies generating sufficient profit to sustain their business and not returning unretained profit to shareholders. Instead, using it for defined societal purposes. It is the embodiment of a sustainable and sufficient economy. A food retailer might increase profits to fund non-profit purposes helping charities eradicate food poverty. Or it might reduce profits to offer consumers in deprived areas lower food prices. Where would you choose to buy your weekly groceries from? Virtue-driven consumerism, with customers purchasing from companies whose purposes they believe in, attached to societally purposed enterprise, funded by social equity, democratises the economy. It passes power to individuals who might otherwise be disempowered or marginalised.

Personal well-being cannot be attained through unrelenting personal consumption, but virtue-consumption linked to societal purpose can advance our personal and societal well-being. This creates a framework for systemic change, building a a well-being economy through market societism. Consumer choice can determine economic outcomes not the maximisation of profit and shareholder interest. This is particularly important because equality, good mental health, the quality of our lived experience and societal life - indeed almost every aspect of our well-being is affected by our economy and the society it creates and influences.

Equality, living standards and outcome are determined by the way profit and economic purpose attach to pre-existing capital and wealth. The lines which divide society can be traced to the magnetic force which draws power and profit towards private capital, and in favour of those who already own it. A societal economy breaks the link between pre-existing capital and outcome, in favour of the general population.

We can be inspired by Motkraft in Norway, started by Bjorn Spieler and his fellow students. It is purposed to provide energy at cost for households, generating sufficient profit to sustain its business, and reduce the cost of living for its customers. The Patagonia group supply clothing. Yvon Chouinard, following his personal ethical values, decided to "go purpose", and structured the group as a benefit corporation through a trust and collective organisation, to use its profits to impact non-profit purpose, chiefly related to the environment. Patagonia is avowedly a societal company, for-profit, competitive in the free market, and using its profits for a societal purpose.

A societal sector can reduce the cost of living and provide a better deal for customers across the economy, but particularly where buyers form an identifiable group with similar requirements, such as for energy, water, and travel. It is suitable where there is pooling of risk, such as insurance. It can help achieve ethical outcomes related to business activity, and a greater representation of wider stakeholder interests. Staff connect as stakeholders in many ways, including when enterprises recognise...