In our last blog we focused on rights of individuals in the terraistic association. Today, we will as that very same question with regard to private organizations.
What are private organizations?
Private legal entities participate in day to day live and have their own opinion-forming mechanisms. As such they should be able to become full members of the association and should – unlike nations (see below) – also have their own voting right. To repeat: A company like Walmart has over 2 million employees and a turnover of 500 billion. Volkswagen still has 670,000 employees and sales of 280 billion. By comparison, Liechtenstein has 26,000 citizens and annual revenues of 730 million euros. It is therefore understandable that the size of the organization – whether it is a non-profit organization or a commercial conglomerate – should be relevant to its importance within the association. To a certain extent, the organizations also represent the interests of their members in a specific area. In the case of non-profit organizations, this is self-evident and quite homogeneous. In companies, one can assume that at least in part the interests of the employees at their workplace and working conditions are considered. I suggest taking the number of natural persons behind the organizations as a benchmark. That should be the sum of shareholders and employees. If one were to take turnover as a criterion, banks would certainly be rated disproportionately high. They move a lot of money with few employees. Of course, these membership rights would have to work with membership numbers at certain key dates in order not to create a bureaucratic monster.
Are members of private organizations over represented?
In the absence of practicable alternatives, it would have to be accepted that in elections, a member of the association whose employer is a member and who is perhaps also involved in a non-profit association would have multiple voting rights, at least indirectly. However, this may well be appropriate and at least provide a realistic picture in a networked society. Certain aspects of a living environment are represented independently. So, in sum, in my opinion the best of many unsatisfactory alternatives.
How does it work in collective actions and gremiums?
Of course, there will be separate committees for companies and non-profit organizations as well as for nations, in which collective actions will be agreed upon. In specific committees, only those affected will then be called upon to vote. Depending on the committee, the association’s board of directors may propose specific voting procedures to prevent one or a few member organizations from blocking committee work.
What about the fees?
In accordance with the right to vote, it is obvious that the membership fees of organizationswill need to take into account the number of persons represented. However, the amount of the payment should not simply be based per capita on the membership fee of the average donation contribution of the individual. It should take the profitability of an organization into account. Whereby profitability would need to include any payout schemes to the stakeholders. Non-profit organizations could, for example, be involved for symbolic fees.
Next week will ask ourselves which role states could or should have in such an environment.