While the profiled cooperative philosophy is not exhaustive, it provides a general overview of the arc of contemporary cooperative discourse on the global stage over the past half century. During that period, significant world history included: the end of the Cold War, the US beginning an endless global war on “terrorism,” multiple economic recessions, a troubling resurgence of fascism, and countless uprisings and collective expressions of a desire for new social, economic, and political orders. These events changed the landscape in which cooperative work is being conducted; they changed the language we use to discuss it.
LANGUAGE SHIFTS
The contributions from MacPherson are written after the Cold War, yet they shy away from explicit system critiques of socialism or capitalism, despite how the world was assailed by an ideological war between these two concepts for much of the century. You can read more about this language shift in the “Dirty Words” section of “Words Mean Things.” While he occasionally refers to capitalist firms, his observations and theories align more succinctly with a “business ontology” that envisions cooperatives operating primarily as business entities rather than as cells of human collaboration and development, as framed by Arizmendiarrieta. This is also mirrored in much of the cooperative canon presented, which utilizes relatively sanitized language likely in a genuinely noble endeavor to achieve universality in tone. However, Arizmendiarrieta and Laidlaw have repeatedly and directly leveraged direct, systemic critiques, and declared that the necessary transformation of society will require the end or, at least, the significant weakening of capitalist and nation-state regimes. Overall, these philosophers - notably all white men from the Global North - share similar sentiments and end goals, though the language they use becomes more reformist and less exacting over time and as political conditions change.
COMMONWEALTHS & SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION
Similarly and interestingly, the concept of cooperative commonwealths as means to social transformation is found throughout all of the texts, but the use of “commonwealth” and “social transformation” language faded considerably at the end of the 20th century given the above dynamics. It has since been reestablishing its position in formal cooperative discourse largely via youth- and worker- specific communications, including in the Guidance Notes to the Cooperative Principles in its discussion of the Sixth Principle, “Cooperation Among Cooperatives,” which - interestingly - was the only Guidance Note primarily authored by youth. MacPherson, Laidlaw, and elements of the Guidance Notes all speak to how the growing reductions of social services - once traditionally provided by nation-state governments - presents an opportunity for cooperatives to take more responsibility for these services. This effort is outlined by some as an explicit and powerful step towards creating cooperative commonwealths. It implies partial or complete replacement of governments with cooperative enterprises. MacPherson would likely conceptualize such a step as a process of “privatization,” whereas Laidlaw would likely call the same thing a dismantling of the government and a move towards community self-governance. These social transformation and commonwealth interpretations of cooperativism are in stark contrast to many very visible contemporary interpretations of cooperativism, particularly with regard to its relationship with government and the nation-state.
ROLE OF YOUTH
Of special note for this toolkit is the relatively cursory content directly addressing the role and potential of youth within the Cooperative Movement. Powerfully, the content which is included provides instructions for young people to take up cooperative discourse and the mantle of cooperative practice as soon as possible. It also challenges youth to come to their own understanding of the Cooperative Identity and, more broadly, cooperativism as philosophy and practice, just as is being done via this toolkit. Youth are identified as necessary for the sustainability of the Cooperative Movement, but feasible and progressive actions towards better intergenerational integration are not often named. Wealth redistribution, a key tenet of contemporary coopyouth strategy laid out in the “CoopYouth Statements” section, is cited in a few of the texts but without connection to the prospect of strategizing or funding youth participation or the participation of other marginalized peoples. While language and tone differs over time, the essence of the Cooperative Identity must be maintained and protected. The following section reviewing CoopYouth Statements, authored by coopyouth during the last decade, is a continuation of the cooperative discourse just outlined.