Auto-organização social no mundo do trabalho e produção: notas para uma crítica à economia solidária

IF 4.1 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Politics & Society Pub Date : 2020-11-19 DOI:10.5007/175-7984.2020v19n45p301

Cássio Brancaleone

{"title":"Auto-organização social no mundo do trabalho e produção: notas para uma crítica à economia solidária","authors":"Cássio Brancaleone","doi":"10.5007/175-7984.2020v19n45p301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The contemporary debate on alternative experiences of work organization and production isin Brazil dominated by the so-called “solidarity economy”. Also known as “cooperatives” or“recovered factories and enterprises”, many of these experiences are evidently not new, goingback to the first practices of resistance and social self-organization carried out by the workingclass. At the same time, their condition and potential as a societal “alternative” in a varietyof circumstances are minimized and even challenged by the way in which they fall withinthe framework of relations of subordination and dependence on agencies, mechanisms andactors of the state and the capitalist market. The article in question aims to present a briefcritical review of the theoretical repertoire mobilized by exponents of the solidarity economyin the perspectives from the anarchist and heterodox marxist, relating it to the proposal of the“participatory economy” (PARECON). Thus, it is hoped to contribute with a critique of thistheoretical framework through the recovery of the antisystemic sense of the concept of self-management, subsidizing the reflection and analysis related to such experiences.","PeriodicalId":47847,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Society","volume":"19 1","pages":"301-336"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5007/175-7984.2020v19n45p301","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

The contemporary debate on alternative experiences of work organization and production isin Brazil dominated by the so-called “solidarity economy”. Also known as “cooperatives” or“recovered factories and enterprises”, many of these experiences are evidently not new, goingback to the first practices of resistance and social self-organization carried out by the workingclass. At the same time, their condition and potential as a societal “alternative” in a varietyof circumstances are minimized and even challenged by the way in which they fall withinthe framework of relations of subordination and dependence on agencies, mechanisms andactors of the state and the capitalist market. The article in question aims to present a briefcritical review of the theoretical repertoire mobilized by exponents of the solidarity economyin the perspectives from the anarchist and heterodox marxist, relating it to the proposal of the“participatory economy” (PARECON). Thus, it is hoped to contribute with a critique of thistheoretical framework through the recovery of the antisystemic sense of the concept of self-management, subsidizing the reflection and analysis related to such experiences.

查看原文本刊更多论文

工作和生产世界中的社会自组织:团结经济批判笔记

在巴西，当代关于工作组织和生产的替代经验的辩论被所谓的“团结经济”所主导。这些经验也被称为“合作社”或“恢复的工厂和企业”，其中许多经验显然并不新鲜，可以追溯到工人阶级进行抵抗和社会自我组织的第一次实践。与此同时，在各种情况下，他们作为社会“替代品”的条件和潜力被最小化，甚至受到挑战，因为他们处于从属关系的框架内，依赖于国家和资本主义市场的机构、机制和行动者。本文旨在从无政府主义者和非正统马克思主义者的角度，对团结经济学的倡导者动员的理论储备进行简要的批判性回顾，并将其与“参与经济”(PARECON)的提议联系起来。因此，希望通过恢复自我管理概念的反系统意义，对这一理论框架进行批判，资助与此类经验相关的反思和分析。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Politics & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.