.png)
By Cathrine Mountain, Class of 2015
Our seminar with Dr. David Imbroscio this semester introduced some very interesting and, in my case, novel ideas about worker ownership in communities and companies. While our seminar focused much more on the large-scale concept, promoted by Gar Alperovitz, I found myself much more interested in the small-scale operations. Dr. Imbroscio assigned us some readings from both Alperovitz and his own essay, which discusses the ways in which community and worker ownership of businesses and even corporations can decrease inherent economic inequality, especially in disadvantaged neighborhoods. In his essay, Dr. Imbroscio further explains the possibility of establishing such a system, describes the scholarly works that support this idea, and provides a number of examples in which certain aspects of this process have been successfully implemented.
After highlighting and describing the many theories concerning redistribution theories within the School of Urban and Public Affairs, Imbroscio continues to explain that the system of redistribution currently in place (taxing the rich and providing welfare to the poor) is politically and normatively problematic. Imbroscio quotes John Rawls, “the preeminent liberal political philosopher of our time,” who believes that “participants in a redistributive welfare state… will tend to regard the least well off as ‘objects of our charity and compassion.’” This is problematic because it makes citizens seem unequal regarding political rights and undermines their independence. Imbroscio also argues that in terms of being normatively problematic, the redistributive paradigm tends to centralize an enormous amount of power and weakens democratic control. After describing why the current system is defunct and why a number of other proposed systems would be just as ineffective, Imbroscio begins to describe the ways in which an Alternative Urban Policy can provide a much more effective alternative to the current redistributive paradigm.
Once I was finally able to decipher the scholarly jargon and fully understand Imbroscio’s argument, I had a sudden, “Well, duh!” moment. This model for the Alternative Urban Policy is similar to a movement that encourages supporting local business. The Alternative Urban Policy promotes worker ownership so that the profits of a company go directly back into the community. It is obviously more than just an appeal to buy local products, but it certainly helped me understand the real importance of local consumption. Dr. Imbroscio’s essay calls for a big change to occur especially in impoverished neighborhoods. By setting up companies with the workers owning shares of the company, more money can flow directly to disadvantaged neighborhoods, instead of snaking its way through the redistributive system. The idea is by no means new, but the way Imbroscio presented it through his essay certainly helped me understand the importance of creating such a system.
Cathrine Mountain, of Frankfort, Ky., is a sophomore McConnell Scholar at the University of Louisville. She is studying anthropology and political science.