Common Wealth Party - Managerialism

Managerialism

CW’s later political philosophy was pervasively influenced by James Burnham’s The Managerial Revolution (1941). Burnham argued that the rise of a salaried managerial class, accompanied by the withdrawal of shareholders from active involvement in the running of businesses, had transformed the nature of capitalism, creating a split between ownership and control. CW used this idea to develop a modified Marxist analysis, interposing managerialism as a new mode of production between capitalism and socialism. This proved to be a powerful tool for understanding the Attlee government’s nationalisation programme. In 1948, CW set out its critique in a pamphlet, Nationalisation is not Socialism.

Many features of Labour’s programme appeared to confirm the theory that power, in ‘socialised’ economies as much as market ones, was now in the hands of a largely unaccountable managerial class serving the owners of capital at arm’s length. Private owners were not expropriated; in many cases their shares were replaced by loan stock at inflated valuations, the interest on which was paid from the profits of now State-run industries. Ministers refused to answer Parliamentary questions on operational matters, meaning in effect that the managements of nationalised industries were not subject to ongoing democratic control. Worker representation at board level was either token or non-existent. The official explanation for not extending worker involvement was that workers did not yet possess the organisational skills required, an unconvincing argument given the record of the co-operative movement, the trade unions and the Labour Party itself. The extent to which former military leaders were appointed to run the nationalised industries led Common Wealth to warn throughout the 1950s and 1960’s against trends towards regimentation in society and later the growing cult of the ‘expert’ technocrat.

CW was active in publicising successful examples of workers’ control in industry, notably the Scott Bader Commonwealth. It was also an admirer of the system of workers’ self-management introduced in Yugoslavia under Josep Tito (see Economy of SFR Yugoslavia), though not of the Communist regime itself. Although sympathetic to the non-aligned movement, it was critical of dictators from whatever part of the political spectrum and some members were active in Amnesty International.

Other influences during this era included humanistic psychology. Noted psychologists Dr Don Bannister and Dr James Hemming were CW members. CW enthusiastically adopted the 'executive-sensory nexus' model of organisation, derived from left/right brain theory. Under this model, the Executive Committee, responsible for current decision-making, is shadowed by a scrutiny panel, known in CW as the Sensory Committee, whose role is monitoring and review, research and longer-term development. CW's interest in optimising social organisation consistent with its principles also led it to develop close links with the School of Integrative Social Research at Braziers Park, Oxfordshire.