The Way to Industrial Democracy

[p020] THE WAY TO INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACY Mr. Bevan is far less satisfied with the course of democracy in industry than with parliamentary democracy. In this field, he believes that not much progress has been recorded and very much remains to be done. Most workers will heartily second this judgment. After the nationalisations of the two Labour governments, the workers encounter two main types of autocratic rule in industry. The first comes from the monopolies, trusts, and private interests which still own and manage—or rather mismanage—key segments of industry. Their driving concern remains the extraction of maximum profit from their operations regardless of the cost to the working people 18

[p021] and the effects upon the national economy.* The Conservatives are trying to pass back nationalised industries to these private owners. The right-wing Labour leaders called a halt to nationalisations. Mr. Bevan now urges that nationalisations go speedily forward so that all the ‘key sections of the economy can be brought under public control. _ “Judged. from any angle, the relations between public and private enterprise have not yet reached a condition where they can be stabilised. That is why it is so foolish for certain Labour men to preach ‘consolidation’ at this stage. Before we can dream of consolidation the power relations of public and private property must be drastically altered. The solution of the problems I have been discuss- _ ing cannot be approached until it becomes possible to create a purposive and intelligible design for society. That cannot be done until effective social and economic power passes from one order of society to another. “At the moment we are between two worlds. We have _ Tost the propulsions of one and we have not yet gained - the forward thrust of the other. This is no place in which to halt.” (p. 118). _ Bevan presents ample evidence that unless and until far more private property of the capitalists becomes public property it will be impossible to reorganise industry and operate it effectively. “To steer a wholly private enterprise economy in a given direction for any considerable length of time is practically impossible. It is alien to the laws of its being.” (p. 117). In the society of the future, private property must yield and public property predominate. Mr. Bevan remains the advocate of “a mixed economy” where private enterprise competes with nationalised industry * See, for instance, the following taken from the London Times, April 21, 1952. “Come what may, you may rest assured that we shall do everything in our power to increase our profits— the only sanction we know.”—Sir Cyrit F. ENTWHISTLE, Q.C., M.C., Chairman, in his report to the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Decca Record Company. 19

[p022] eee to keep both on its toes for the benefit of the nation. Now. he urges the definitive subordination of private enterprise to public ownership. The mixture remains as before, but the proportions have been shifted toward the socialist side. For the time being he is clearly orienting socialist economic policy in the right direction. Experience has already shown that nationalised indus- tries raise new problems. The most important pertain to the management and control of nationalised industry. Among the new state managers the workers are often seeing the revival of old methods of boss dictatorship. Mr. Bevan devotes an interesting section of his book to this danger. “The boards of our nationalised industries, - in their present form, are a new and potentially dangerous problem, both constitutionally and socially. We have still to ensure that they are taking us towards democratic socialism, not towards the Managerial Society . . . The conversion of an industry to public ownership is only the first step towards Socialism .. . The advance from State ownership to full Socialism is in direct ‘proportion to the extent that the workers in the nationalised sector are made aware of a changed relationship between themselves and the management . . . The individual] citizen will still feel that society is on top of him until he is enfranchised in the workshop as well as at the ballot box.” (p. 102-3). How can “the discipline of fear” enforced by the over- seer’s whip be eliminated from industry, and the full energy of workers in the shop be released for efficient and har- monious production? This cannot be done so long as the workers feel that uncontrollable appointees from above arbitrarily decide their terms and conditions of work. As Mr. Bevan says, the workers want to become free, instead of industrial helots. The workers can attain this freedom only to the degree that they acquire effective control over the operations of their own shops and factories through their own industrial organisations along with control over the whole country through their own political organisations. The first step in this direction would be to institute trade union control over the nationalised industries in place of the present bureaucratic management boards. 20

[p023] Mr. Bevan aptly writes that “industrial democracy is the counterpart of political freedom. Liberty and responsibility march together. They must be joined together in the work- shop as in the legislative Assembly.” (p. 105). The next step in adding “responsibility” to “liberty” must be to vest direct responsibility for management of industry among the workers themselves.