Hacker News Reader

Comment by keskival | Hacker News Reader

In normal stock companies all (voting) stocks vote, and those can be distributed globally to all sorts of people and institutions who have no idea about the reality on the ground.

By comparison the decision-making in cooperatives is much better grounded in reality and has fewer disinterested and uninformed participants.

View on HN

It's not about voting, it's about vision and taking decisions to accomplish it. That's why companies have a CEO, CFO, CTO and many managers.

What if I told you you could have the CEO elected by the workers, rather than randos whose only interest in the business is making money off of it?

Yes, that's how it works for larger cooperatives where direct democracy can become problematic. Even in direct democracies in societal level, presidents are typically elected, and there are ministers and managers by necessity. The same goes for cooperatives.

It's one person one vote applied to the corporation. In principle there's no reason why we should demand any less democracy inside corporations than what we demand in societies at large.

It's curious how many of these comments in this post could be reframed to be basically: "democracy can never work" or "democracy is clearly an inferior system to feudalism".

Interesting! A lot of people wouldn't want to live in a feudal society but are OK with working in one.

I guess it's all about inertia.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com