Solidarity Economy Principles

They asked me to write something in the way of looking at different funding models and strategies, but actually I doubt there's that much crossover between Stir's print subscribers and SF. Wasn't thinking to recruit but if a couple of people sign up, all good :)

The difference a worker co-op fed would provide is that CUK has a wide remit and has to focus on the needs of the large retail co-ops, community co-ops etc , so we wouldn't end up with an identical organisation. A worker co-op fed would be focused.

I saw it like this

Solidfund - a movement of individual people who are members of worker co-ops and supporters. People are members

Worker Co-op Federation - a federation of worker co-ops. The co-ops as corporate entity are the members.

or maybe I'm wrong

yes but if you analyse the patterns and similarities within the worker coop ecosystem you could make a prediction that similar things will occur in the future where the worker coop fed has to account for larger worker coops and the contributions they make to the upkeep etc etc. as i see it if you want to make a different iteration of some kind of national body you have to be able to spot the reasons as to why such an offer is appealing in the first place (eg the blind spots in cuk and how not to recreate the things that make a replacement a viable thought).

unless everybody simply wants a co-ops uk replacement that does everything that co-ops uk does but for worker co-ops, a concept that i would find utterly bizarre. but, democracy n all that init.

I think it's more about what Coops UK doesn't and probably can't do, which is to create a true and compelling narrative about worker cooperation, and a way for people to engage with and practice it - people other than business owners, policymakers and professional advisors

To some extent the larger/more established will always subsidise supoport for the smaller/newer (a bit like the retail consumer coops 'subsidise' Coops UKs services to other coops).

I thought the Social Economy Principles (thanks @Simon Ball (Blake House) ) were interesting, but perhaps more food for thought for the planning stages of a potential Worker Co-op Federation. Which in turn could itself be a Federal member of CUK?

At union-coops:uk we have adopted the 3 additional principles I first proposed in 2015

Might be a basis for further discussion

https://www.thenews.coop/94300/sector/time-to-extend-the-seven-co-operative-principles/

Credit Unions in the U.S. have proposed an eighth Co-operative Principle which addresses Diversity Equity and Inclusion in th co-operative movement. . See https://deitalks.com/

There are several escellent articles on the issue of co-op identity in this month's issue of Co-operative News, including this one: https://www.thenews.coop/159954/sector/regional-organisations/co-op-identity-with-mission-and-purpose-we-can-move-mountains/

And also this one: https://www.thenews.coop/159709/topic/business/holding-onto-the-co-op-identity-means-we-dont-lose-ourselves/

I welcome this discussion on a coop federation. I have for some time been advocating the work of Stafford Beer yet it became contentious with this group so I backed off. Since that time on my own journey I became aware of the systemic nature not only of organizations but that of our biology, cancer, nature and lately that of our own psychology. Carl Rogers brought science to his findings as a psychotherapist for self actualising man, in his existential state of "becoming".

So may I ask this group, does nature and our own psychology not show the way, one where we are not tied to the dogma of principle? As we become aware through the whole organism of our feelings, could the existential man ( woman ) naturally chose that right thing to do, whether at the biological, individual or recursive higher levels. Could it be that Beer and Rogers match the challenges of our enviroment through the VSM variety of the self actualizing individual and is this then the "Heart of Enterprize"?

Is compassionate love the glue? Just a collection of thoughts which I hope will stimulate further discussion.

I think you have it interestingly right, and it opens up infinite new interesting pathways of discussion. (although i would have to spend a bit of time reading up on the ideas to have a contribution)

It's interesting to suppose that there is a natural 'right' way, and the person encounters many different distractions/abstractions deterring them from 'the way'. it certainly helps then frame the cooperative principles as some form of baseline articulation of natural behaviour to open up the doors of possibility in the casual observer (at least in my experience).

Thanks for the reply Simon. Just a quick comment on the "compassionate love" bit. We had a recent bereavement in the family and that person seemed to have that gift. She affected everyone she came in contact with in such a loving way. The science however according to Carl Rogers holds for unconditional positive regard and for congruence, i.e. being real in our interactions with others. That brings me to the subject of principals. My comment on the "dogma of principle" may be too harsh as I found myself reacting to the idea of one list versus another i.e. does it matter who has the longest list? Surely what matters given the hypothesis that Beer and Rogers are on the same page is that the principles reinforce the need for unconditional positive regard and congruence. So yes, I agree, to a casual observer becoming interested in coops, knowing that the psychology holds with the principles which support "unconditional positive regard " would enrich an organization upholding them.