117. COÍPERATION IN PRODUCTION.—The three forms of co÷peration which we have been considering seek to eliminate unnecessary middlemen from industry. In producers' co÷peration, on the other hand, the attempt is made to get rid of the entrepreneur, or managing employer. A group of workmen get together, subscribe or borrow the required capital, purchase tools, materials, and plant, and set up as producers. They seek markets for their product, direct the enterprise either as a group or through salaried agents, share the profits among themselves, and accept the risks of the enterprise.
Co÷peration in production has been tried repeatedly in the various countries of Europe, but without success. True producers' co÷perative associations have also met with almost universal failure in the United States, though experiments have been made in a variety of industries, and in nearly every part of the country. Formerly the Minneapolis Co÷pers were a co÷perative group which seemed destined to attain a considerable success in production, but this group has now abandoned the co÷perative principle. The co÷perative marketing of fruit, cheese, and other agricultural products is, of course, not true producers' co÷peration, but rather the co÷perative marketing of commodities produced by individual enterprisers.
118. BACKWARDNESS OF COÍPERATION IN THE UNITED STATES.—In all forms of co÷peration, progress has been much slower in this country than in Europe. There are several reasons for this. For one thing, American workmen move about to a greater extent than do European workmen, whereas co÷peration succeeds best where the co÷perators have a fixed residence and develop a strong sense of group solidarity. The fact that our population is made up of diverse racial types likewise checks the growth of the feeling of solidarity.
An important reason for the backwardness of the co÷perative movement in this country is that American workmen "make, rather than save money," whereas co÷peration requires thrift, and a willingness to practice small economies. Again, the efficiency and progressiveness of our industrial system renders co÷perative ventures less necessary in this country than in some parts of Europe. It is particularly true that retail stores in the United States are more efficient than similar shops in England and on the Continent.
Altogether, the most successful co÷perators in this country are not native-born Americans, but groups of Finns, Russians, Slovaks, and other peoples of immediately foreign derivation. It is among these groups that the thrift and group solidarity demanded by co÷peration are best found.
119. LIMITS OF COÍPERATION.—Consumers' co÷peration, co÷peration in credit, and co÷peration in marketing all seek to improve the capitalistic system by eliminating some of the unnecessary middlemen from our industrial life. In so far as this is true, these forms of co÷peration are desirable developments, and deserve to succeed. Though the movement is limited by the considerations set forth in the preceding section, it is to be hoped that these three forms of co÷peration will in the future show a considerable development in this country.
Producers' co÷peration is a different affair. Rather than attempting to decrease the number of unnecessary middlemen, it attempts to supersede the entrepreneur or managing employer where he is most needed. For this reason producers' co÷peration will probably continue a failure. To run a modern business of any size at all requires a degree of intelligence, imagination, judgment, courage, and administrative ability which is altogether too rare to be found among casual groups of laborers. Varied experience, high ability, the determination to accept the risks of the enterprise, and a consistent singleness of purpose are necessary in modern production. Even though co÷perators are able to secure an amount of capital sufficient to initiate production, they rarely have the requisite ability or experience; too often they object to accepting the risks of the enterprise; practically never can they administer the business with that unity of control which characterizes the most successful business enterprises.
120. BENEFITS OF COÍPERATION.—While no longer considered a far- reaching industrial reform, the co÷perative movement brings with it many benefits. Co÷peration in retail trade, credit, and marketing cuts down the waste between consumer and producer, and thus helps substantially to reduce the cost of living. Co÷peration in production, though it fails to reach its chief objective, has the virtue of demonstrating to groups of workmen that the entrepreneur is of far more value in our industrial life than they might otherwise have realized. Aside from these advantages, co÷peration in any form is an important educative force. It fosters the spirit of solidarity and mutual helpfulness among members of a group or community. It teaches thrift. It trains the co÷perating individuals to exercise foresight and self-control. Altogether the training which it affords is productive of good citizenship.
QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT
1. Explain clearly the nature of profit sharing.