To understand this you need to understand the theory. Marx outlined that socialism and communism each had to be transitioned to after reaching a given level of social/economic development. In particular there is the notion of “withering away of the state” which would happen after a global revolution, which is the aim of this classless/moniless society they outlined.

The communist manifesto is a short read!

In fact the USSR implemented explicit market policies, a sort of contained capitalism, which was designed to facilitate reaching the necessary preconditions for socialism and communism. Essentially all of the “communist” states we’ve seen so far have been some play on the notion of just “socialism in one country” in the Marxist-Leninist version of communist parties, who have/had the goal of eventually reaching communism.

What’s probably most interesting is that the idea behind the USSR wasn’t initially to have the state direct everything from the top, but in fact to facilitate worker councils (soviets) to direct their workplaces.

But you have to remember this all happened in the context of a state which had recently undergone a revolution, was rife with counterrevolutonary action (see revolutionary France and civil war Britain to see how this played out during the birth of liberalism) and was then plunged into WW2 where most states involved were acting fairly dictatorially for the duration of it. Followed shortly by the US making it an explicit goal to prevent world communism through e.g. CIA intervention because they feared “domino theory”

Fascism on the rise? Better get their list making and person finding mechanisms sorted out for them in advance.

-liberals everywhere

As it happens you don’t actually have to be a social chauvinist for the country in which you reside.

“hey guys I was just chatting with the wives and they all think waging war is for guys with small dick energy”

I’m fine enjoying their leavings.

hello, .world! 👋

By the sounds of it the first point is handled by having essentially a year long probationary period, and then another two year period before someone becomes fully entrenched in the org as a full partner. This is almost certainly a long enough time to determine if someone is going to be a piss taker or not and so other instances of underperformance can be handled via supportive mechanisms.

It’s worth highlighting that performance “curves” in some companies seem to lay off reasonably productive people and preserve people who are great at gaming the system/metrics.

For conflict resolution I don’t know how they do it, but if I were in charge of this I’d probably have a dedicated body like an HR set up for this which would be democratically accountable but ultimately still deal with that kind of thing as a last resort (assuming it can’t be sorted out between team members).

Many worker co-ops have been resilient to recessions as members often choose to temporarily lower their own pay/share of profits rather than having layoffs or other similar arrangements. https://www.yesmagazine.org/issue/new-economy/2009/06/06/mondragon-worker-cooperatives-decide-how-to-ride-out-a-downturn

It’s too easy to reply “it is” at this point for sure.

The victims are those who want musk punished

We covered this, it’s not the case

Sounds to me like it’s a victimless crime then.

I think it’s fair to say Musk already screws them to the maximum extent possible, so the degree to which they are screwed is probably not responsive to changes in insurance premiums and we can expect that to more or less come straight out of Musk’s pocket.