History Of The Universe Unit Tracking Sheet: Fill & Download for Free

A classic debate! Good or Evil? Chocolate or Strawberry? Star Trek or Star Wars? But unlike those timeless questions this one really does seem to have a compelling answer. And its not what the majority seem to think.A few necessary caveats (take heed ye trolls):1) Although it hardly needs saying...these are both completely fictional universes whose technology and scientific foundations are, at best, bolted on after the fact as part of the setting and/or necessary plot devices. This entire debate is like meaningfully debating the combat prowess of Unicorns vs. Dragons...but we're going to do it anyway.2) The goal is to assume the most favourable interpretations for each technology as demonstrated most coherently by each canon. Obvious mistakes (i.e using parsecs as a measure of time...Hello Han) or figures completely inconsistent with the results offered (Star Destroyers with power generation of 7.75 x 1024 W...only 100x times less than the SUN!!) will be ignored. For those crying foul a Star Destroyer that needs that much power (to create the abilities displayed) would represent the most fantastic inefficiency ever conceived. Likewise, some of the energy readings suggested for Star Wars laser weapons would instantaneously vaporize any unshielded craft, not to mention the atmosphere in between them, in rather spectacular fashion. Nothing in the physical behaviour of these weapons supports these values (for instance that Slave 1 has 64,000 GW lasers or 190 Megaton missiles. Never, in any battle, was a blast of that nature or kind observed). Bottom line: All weapons and systems should be evaluated on how they ACTUALLY perform as depicted in the canon as opposed to often innumerate and psuedo-scientific gibberish offered in support of them. As a more concrete example in Prometheus the distance travelled to LV223 is 35 light years but stated by a character of being "Half a Billion miles" from Earth...or just past Jupiter. In a case like this we would assume they were capable of travelling 35 light years. Not the innumerate idiocy of half a billion miles. Having said that, where a vaguely credible explanation has been offered it will generally be taken (i.e. lasers are lasers).3) The treatment of technology dramatically complicates the task of comparison. Star Trek consciously attempted to provide at least some basis (however weak or novel) for the science behind their technology. Star Trek represents a technological utopia and was promoting the idea of a better future via modern technology. This is also evident in that the technology of Star Trek advances dramatically over the course of the various seasons (including referencing far future Star Trek timelines with mastery over time itself). Star Wars makes no such claims and depicts an utterly static technological milieu in which no appreciable advances have been made (save perhaps the Death Star itself) in tens of thousands of years. In addition, Star Wars often offers little, or no scientific explination for its tech (Hyperspace...its fast). I am assuming the general tech capabilities of Trek as found as late as Voyager.With those out of the way lets get to the point. This is not a close fight. Despite the desires of the many fans the Star Trek universe is rife with economic, tactical, social, and technological superiority. Claims of Star Wars victories all seem to echo the Stalin-esque view that 'Quantity has a Quality all its own. But this is profoundly misguided. Here's why:EconomicStar Wars population is very difficult to assess. Some estimates suggest a 1,000,000 world Empire. But the Galactic Senate depicts a vastly smaller political entity. According to Star Wars Wiki the Empire was divided into units of 50 systems each with a senator. However, the Senate only has 2,000 members. Which means a galactic polity of 100,000 active members. This is still vastly greater than the Federation with something like 150 members and 1-5 thousand worlds. However, the nature of this population is most important. The Empire, while having far larger population appears weakly integrated. Entire populations (quite commonly) are depicted as isolated and poor. Basic farming or harvesting seems commonplace. Much of the population appears uneducated and even tribal. While the core worlds are densely populated they are apparently completely dependant on agricultural and other products from the empire. This means Star Wars retains a traditional resource economy model. Star Trek by contrast has matter/energy conversion. The Federation is deeply integrated with almost no poverty and a large decentralized membership of worlds. The importance of matter/energy conversion cannot be overemphasized. On a war footing the only limits to the Federations economic capacity is energy which is in vast supply in both universes. In addition, each world is at least theoretically capable of self sufficiency. Although there still appears to be strategic resources in Trek (dilithium comes to mind) these are relatively limited and the series has routinely demonstrated that they can innovate when necessary around them. The greatest advantage of the Empire is size. But the small highly integrated and economically more advanced Federation is similar to the inequality many leading nations in earth history have held over their more numerous adversaries. Numbers alone cannot determine the issue.SocialThe Federation is a democracy with fully functioning representative government that has demonstrated unfailing resolve in the face of both invasion and subversion. A careful, adaptive, and strategic mindset is universally depicted with the Federation routinely tackling better armed and more numerous adversaries. The Empire is a dictatorship deeply riven by insurrection and dissent. Entire planetary economies are in de facto revolt with the best technology of key defence companies in the hands of the Rebellion (I.e. Incom). Control is maintained through direct rule via regional governors and is shaky enough that planetary obliteration is required in order to maintain control. When pressed the Federation will coalesce (as it did with the Borg). Its unified Tech basis and energy economy means perfectly fluid production and great adaptability. Individual initiative and problem solving is a Trek hallmark. Similar initiative in Star Wars is shown as being a quick way to a Force induced death. Although both world have great diversity the Empire is deeply racist and enforces a human first ethic which severely restricts the full participation of most of their Empires inhabitants. Star Trek has no such barriers. Such social cooperation would present a huge propaganda advantage to Trek. Who could offer union to the vast, under trodden alien masses and endless material support to the Rebellion.TacticalDetection, Evasion, Range. These three elements spell the doom of the Empire. The sensors in Star Trek can discern the individual cellular make up of individuals on a planet from orbit, can detect ships from trillions of kms away (in other sectors) and can track and successfully target objects at ranges of hundred of thousands of kms in space. By contrast sensors on a Star Destroyer cannot even detect droids in a unshielded pod. They cannot track down individual aliens (say...a Wookie) on a planet and most combat occurs at VISUAL range with a remarkable rate of misses. Cloaking technology in Trek, which is effective against that milieu's vastly superior sensor Tech, would be an overwhelming advantage making most Trek vessels effectively invisible. Even without this, the range and accuracy of sensors means that Trek vessels could detect SW vessels at vast distances, and engage them while remaining completely invisible. As modern fighter combat has routinely demonstrated the age of the dog fight is past. Long range detection and strike renders numbers almost meaningless. Like a modern F-22 (with nearly unlimited ammo) enemies inside the weapon envelope can be eliminated long before they can even bring their weapons to bare.Weapon tech is also no contest. Photon torpedoes travel at warp speed. This means that are unblockable by SW vessels whose reaction time is such that skilled humans can provide superior guidance as compared to their computers (thus their manual firing). Photon torpedos are matter/antimatter devices whose yeilds have been described as being able to wipe out cities with a single torpedo. Proton torpedos are sublight (and slow) missles that can destroy city blocks. Given that several LASER shots and the impact of a vessel travelling at sublight was sufficient to destroy the shield generators on an Executor Class vessel it is perfectly possible for ST ships to target the sheilds of Star Destroyers from ranges well beyond the detection range of those ships and bombard them with total impunity.Without going into the difficult discussion around energy outputs of beam weapons. ST beams are computer controlled, use the vastly superior Trek sensors and computer systems and have output that has been described as being capable of destroying the entire surface of a planet. Turbo lasers (save and except the Death Star) have limited firing arcs and while incredibly numerous are dramatically limited by poor fire control and range. In Trek it would be a foolish captain that would enter firing range but Trek Shielding has repeatedly encountered "laser" weapons and indicated that they posed little or no threat to the sheild capacity of their vessels. On more than one occation Trek shields have resisted near nuclear strikes, plasma blasts that have eradicated entire planetary installations (near nuclear level) or torpedos capable of reducing modern vessels into component atoms (ST: The Motion Picture). Given the ability of small, unshielded craft to survive direct strikes from turbo laser batteries the shields of Trek could offer near complete shielding for all but the most intense fusillade. On this note, much is made of the lack of fighters in Trek. One simple explanation is that such craft simply cannot survive when pitted against capital ship level phasers targeted by near AI level computer and tracking systems. Put simply, what Trek ships aim at they hit. Nearly always. Small ships simply do not challenge large ships in Trek and with good reason.Additionally, transporters have huge tactical advantages. Without shields and at distances of tens of thousands of kms the Federation would be able to teleport fusion weapons directly into launch bays or engine rooms. Finally, warp capability means that Federation ships can travel faster than human reaction (which is apparently the benchmark for targeting in Star Wars). This means they can effectively move with impunity through the battle zone.Bottom line, the sheer size of the Empire presents the most compelling threat to the Federation. But it is facing a small, tightly intergrated, post scarcity Federation possessed of ships with vastly greater tactical flexibility. The political attractions of the Federation are also not to be understated as political warfare is an area the Federation may be uniquely well positioned to capitalize on. If the Federation could survive long enough to ramp up to a war footing sheet tactical advantages could prove more than a match for the Empire's vast numerical superiority.

Marx’s vision of communism was society in which the workers owned the means of production. It was stateless, moneyless and classless. “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”The Soviet Union has been called “communist.” This is a colloquialism. Lenin said the Soviet Union was “socialism working toward communism.” The Soviet Union was Marxist Leninist.Lenin advocated the importance of centralized planning and control to resist imperial attack. Early democratic forms of socialism were destroyed by capitalists and imperialist forces. The most notable was the Paris Commune.The Paris Commune was a democratic socialist community set in the middle of Paris in 1871. There was no private property but communal ownership of the means of production. The workers managed themselves. It was a democratically ran community. It was classless. But it wasn’t long before the French Army slaughtered them. 20,000 people were brutally killed.“Influence on Marx and LeninVladimir LeninAlmost immediately after the defeat of the Communards, left-wing radicals analysed why the revolution had failed. These critiques were very influential. None more so than that of Karl Marx, the founder of Communism. He studied the reasons for the failure of the revolt and published his findings in his work the Civil War in France (1871). He believed that the Commune failed because it was not ruthless enough and that if it should have been led by some professional revolutionaries. Marx believed that the Commune was the first example of the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’, that is a form of participatory government, where all power was in the hands of ordinary people. The Communards and their revolution were to have a huge influence on Lenin. The Russian Revolutionary studied the works of Marx on the history of the Communards. He came to the conclusion that professional revolutionaries were needed to ensure that a revolution would succeed and not be quashed as were the Communards. Lenin was also influenced by the organisation of the Communards and wrote extensively on their ideas and revolution. He modelled his Soviets or workers’ councils on the democratic councils established by the French Revolutionaries in 1871. The revolution of 1871 was to have an important influence on the Russian Revolution in 1917.”What was the impact of the Paris Commune of 1871 on Revolutionaries?“The Paris Commune was a failed revolution. It attempted to fulfil the more radical ideas of the French Revolution in 1789. It was savagely repressed and there was to be no similar revolution in France until 1968. The repression of the Communards encouraged many left-wing groups to adopt more violent tactics and in the decades after the revolt, terrorism became a feature of European life. The ideas and the example of the Commune of 1871, were to have a decisive influence on both Marx and Lenin and continues to this day, in left-wing circles.” Id.Revolutionary CataloniaRevolutionary Catalonia was a democratic socialist society that had similar characteristics as the Paris Commune. It was also crushed by the fascist Franco. This happened in 1936.What happens when anarchists run a country? History has an answer.Anarchism in Action - The LandIt was in the countryside that the Spanish revolution was most far reaching. The anarchist philosophy had been absorbed by large layers of the downtrodden peasants and the outbreak of revolution was the opportunity to put these ideas into practice.“Collectivisation of the land was extensive. Close on two thirds of all land in the Republican zone was taken over. In all between five and seven million peasants were involved. The major areas were Aragon where there were 450 collectives, the Levant (the area around Valencia) with 900 collectives and Castille (the area surrounding Madrid) with 300 collectives.Collectivisation was voluntary and thus different from the forced ‘collectivisation’ in Russia. Usually a meeting was called and all present would agree to pool together whatever land, tools and animals they had. The land was divided into rational units and groups of workers were assigned to work them. Each group had its delegate who represented their views at meetings. A management committee was also elected and was responsible for the overall running of the collective. Each collective held regular general meetings of all its participants.If you didn't want to join the collective you were given some land but only as much as you could work yourself. Not only production was affected, distribution was on the basis of what people needed. In many areas money was abolished. If there were shortages rationing would be introduced to ensure that everyone got their fair share.Production greatly increased. Technicians and agronomists helped the peasants to make better use of the land. Scientific methods were introduced and in some areas yields increased by as much as 50%. Food was handed over to the supply committees who looked after distribution in the urban areas.However, slander was also thrown at the collectives. It was claimed that each only looked after itself. This was rubbish as in many areas equalisation funds were set up to redistribute wealth. Machinery and expertise were shifted to areas most in need. One indicator of the solidarity is the fact that 1,000 collectivists from the advanced Levant moved to Castille to help out.Federations of collectives were established, the most successful being in Aragon. In June 1937 a plenum of Regional Federations of Peasants was held. Its aim was the formation of a national federation "for the co-ordination and extension of the collectivist movement and also to ensure an equitable distribution of the produce of the land, not only between the collectives but for the whole country". Unfortunately many collectives were smashed by the Stalinists before this could be done.The collectivists also had a deep commitment to education and many children received an education for the first time. The methods of Francisco Ferrer, the world famous anarchist educationalist, were employed. Children were given basic literacy and inquisitive skills were encouraged.Anarchism in Action - IndustryAlthough the revolution didn't go as far in the cities as it did in the country, many achievements are worth noting.To give some idea of the extent of the collectivisation here is a list provided by one observer (Burnett Bolloten, The Grand Camouflage. By no means an anarchist book!). He says:"railways, traincars and buses, taxicabs and shipping, electric light and power companies, gasworks and waterworks, engineering and automobile assembly plants, mines and cement works, textile mills and paper factories, electrical and chemical concerns, glass bottle factories and perfumeries, food processing plants and breweries were confiscated and controlled by workmens's committees, either term possessing for the owners almost equal significance". He goes on "motion picture theatres and legitimate theatres, newspapers and printing, shops, department stores and hotels, de-lux restaurants and bars were likewise sequestered".In each workplace the assembly of all the workers was the basic unit. Within the factory workers would elect delegates to represent them on day-to-day issues. Anything of overall importance had to go to the assembly. This would elect a committee of between five and fifteen worker, which would elect a manager to oversee the day-to-day running of the workplace. Within each industry there was an Industrial Council which had representatives of the two main unions (CNT and UGT) and representatives from the committees.Within workplaces wages were equalised and conditions greatly improved. Take for example the tramways. Out of the 7,000 workers, 6,500 were members of the CNT. Street battles had brought all transport to a halt. The transport syndicate appointed a commission of seven to occupy the administrative offices while others inspected the tracks and drew up a plan of repair work that needed to be done. Five days after the fighting stopped, 700 tramcars, instead of the usual 600, all painted in the black and red colours of the CNT were operating on the streets of Barcelona.With the profit motive gone, safety became more important and the number of accidents was reduced. Fares were lowered and services improved. In 1936, 183,543,516 passengers were carried. In 1937 this had gone up by 50 million. The trams were running so efficiently that the workers were able to give money to other sections of urban transport. Also, free medical care was provided for the work force.In 1937 the central government admitted that the war industry of Catalonia produced ten times more than the rest of Spanish industry put together and that this output could have been quadrupled if Catalonia had the access to necessary means of purchasing raw materials.”1936-1939: The Spanish civil war and revolutionGeorge Orwell wrote about Revolutionary Catalonia and the Spanish Civil War in his book “Homage to Catalonia.” Homage to Catalonia - WikipediaRevolutionary Catalonia - WikipediaConclusionMarx’s vision of communism was not authoritarian. But Marx also recognized the problems associated with socialist communities under threat of imperial attack.Lenin advanced these theories further and developed Marxism Leninism. His answer to imperial attack was to have vertical power structures where the Communist Party represented the interests of the workers by exercising a dictatorship of the proletariat. This was to ensure that bourgeois enemies do not corrupt the system and destroy it from within and from outside. Lenin talked about how liberal democracy is actually bourgeois democracy, a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, built for the rich and ran by the rich. Politicians would be bought by campaign contributions and laws would be passed for those who owned property, not the public. This system worked well in the Soviet Union so long as the high ranking party members in the government did not develop into their own class of bourgeoisie. To prevent this there was a regular rotation of leaders based on ideological commitment, job performance, and dedication. During the Brezhenev period this stopped. It wasn’t long that the party elites decided they would rather dissolve the Soviet Union and outright steal the public goods. China has done the opposite and the state is strong. This is quite apart from socialism vs market capitalism.In the modern day there are communities ran by the Mondragon Corp model. These are democratically managed, cooperative communities that build socialism from the ground up. Using open source software, non hierarchical management systems, and sharing they have achieved success by leveraging cooperation and community solidarity to become successful.Mondragon: Spain's giant co-operative where times are hard but few go bustCo-operatives in Spain - Mondragon leads the way"The Mondragon Corporation is based on a commitment to solidarity and on democratic methods for its organisation and management," says Mikel Lezamiz, director of Mondragon's c-ooperative dissemination unit. Mondragon demonstrates an alternative to the 'business as usual' mantra of shareholder-owned companies, he maintains: "Our mission is not to earn money, it is to create wealth within society through entrepreneurial development and job creation."Mondragon has grown to be the tenth largest business in Spain and it certainly dominates the Basque economy, historically one of the industrial powerhouses in the Spanish state. Having begun with the manufacture of domestic appliances, it continues to have a strong presence in the white goods industry (mainly under the brand name Fagor). It also has major interests in other areas of manufacture as diverse as bicycle production and lift manufacture (the latter including its UK Quality Lifts subsidiary, based in Wiltshire). It counts as its competitors firms such as Hitachi, Mitsubishi, GE and LG. Mondragon also has major interests in retailing, in finance (where it operates a savings bank and an insurer) and in education, where it operates schools, technical colleges and a cooperative university. There are also 14 research and development centres.Given this breadth of activity, there are obvious questions to ask in relation both to Mondragon's overall strategic management and corporate governance. Mondragon, in fact, operates less as a single corporate entity of the kind familiar from conventional multinational corporations and more as a network of more than 120 separate co-operative ventures, each of which are managed semi-autonomously. This means, for example, that workers in individual businesses within the Mondragon framework have the sort of rights of membership and control more often found in smaller workers' cooperatives. Co-operative membership – and with it the right to benefit from profits - is usually open to employees after an initial six or twelve month period.Mondragon has also explored some interesting models of stakeholder co-operative governance, an area where its ideas may prove to be valuable elsewhere in the world. Its retailer Eroski, for example, is jointly run by representatives of consumer members and employee members. Its schools and universities give formal governance roles not only to staff and students, but also to a wider group of stakeholders, including other co-ops and local authorities.The individual co-operatives within Mondragon contribute financially to the Corporation's development, exchange staff (particularly as an alternative to redundancies in one business) and jointly establish Mondragon's strategy. This is done through the Co-operative Congress (650 delegates, representing each member firm) and the General Council it appoints. One interesting issue which Mondragon has begun to address is the way in which staff working in overseas subsidiaries can be included in the internal cooperative democracy. Mondragon was historically criticised by some for leaving these workers disempowered.This is becoming more important as Mondragon Cooperative Corporation increasingly becomes a global business. International sales now represent 65% of total turnover. Its President José Maria Aldecoa talks of the cooperative's " firm commitment to reinforcing Mondragon's international business", both in Europe and in the BRIC countries of Brazil, Russia, India and China.Mondragon also has something to teach other cooperatives in its approach to capital, always an issue for businesses not using equity-based capital markets. Employee members are required to make a financial investment in their business, typically of €14,000, which is automatically deducted from salary over the first three or five years of their membership. Profits paid across to members are also retained in the cooperative, being distributed only at retirement or if a member of staff leaves. Interest on members' capital is paid, however, when businesses are profitable.If Mondragon is a unique creation, the impulse which led to its development has also been at work elsewhere within Spain, particularly in the Basque country and Catalonia. The Basque coop confederation KONFEKOOP represents over 800 coops operating in the Basque autonomous region, whilst the equivalent Catalan body is the active Confederació de Cooperatives de Catalunya. Catalonia has over 5000 coops, in broad terms one in five of the total for Spain, and although they are predominantly small ventures (on average, employing about seven staff), they operate in many sectors, especially services and construction, but also in industry and agriculture. Proponents of cooperative schools in the UK may be interested in the Catalan experience, where about forty cooperative schools are currently operating.Workers' cooperatives– there are about 18,000 across Spain, together employing 300,000 people - have their own organisation in Coceta. Coceta, which has just celebrated its 25th birthday, points proudly to recent data from the Spanish state suggesting that coops have in total created 19,000 new jobs in the last quarter of last year. Coceta's president Juan Antonio Pedreño says that coops are providing a valuable solution to Spain's current chronic unemployment problems. "In moments of crisis, coops are capable of creating jobs while other forms of business are destroying them," he says.More generally, cooperatives in Spain are seen as an important constituent part of the broader social economy, which also brings in not-for-profit associations and foundations. "The concept of the social economy is relatively strong in Spain, and cooperatives are seen as one of the key actors," says Klaus Niederlander, Director of Cooperatives Europe. The Spanish social enterprise association Cepes, analogous in some ways with Social Enterprise UK, is a member organisation of the International Cooperative Alliance.” Id.Yes, there is an alternative to capitalism: Mondragon shows the way | Richard Wolff“MC is composed of many co-operative enterprises grouped into four areas: industry, finance, retail and knowledge. In each enterprise, the co-op members (averaging 80-85% of all workers per enterprise) collectively own and direct the enterprise. Through an annual general assembly the workers choose and employ a managing director and retain the power to make all the basic decisions of the enterprise (what, how and where to produce and what to do with the profits).As each enterprise is a constituent of the MC as a whole, its members must confer and decide with all other enterprise members what general rules will govern MC and all its constituent enterprises. In short, MC worker-members collectively choose, hire and fire the directors, whereas in capitalist enterprises the reverse occurs. One of the co-operatively and democratically adopted rules governing the MC limits top-paid worker/members to earning 6.5 times the lowest-paid workers. Nothing more dramatically demonstrates the differences distinguishing this from the capitalist alternative organization of enterprises. (In US corporations, CEOs can expect to be paid 400 times an average worker's salary – a rate that has increased 20-fold since 1965.)Given that MC has 85,000 members (from its 2010 annual report), its pay equity rules can and do contribute to a larger society with far greater income and wealth equality than is typical in societies that have chosen capitalist organizations of enterprises. Over 43% of MC members are women, whose equal powers with male members likewise influence gender relations in society different from capitalist enterprises.MC displays a commitment to job security I have rarely encountered in capitalist enterprises: it operates across, as well as within, particular cooperative enterprises. MC members created a system to move workers from enterprises needing fewer to those needing more workers – in a remarkably open, transparent, rule-governed way and with associated travel and other subsidies to minimize hardship. This security-focused system has transformed the lives of workers, their families, and communities, also in unique ways.The MC rule that all enterprises are to source their inputs from the best and least-costly producers – whether or not those are also MC enterprises – has kept MC at the cutting edge of new technologies. Likewise, the decision to use of a portion of each member enterprise's net revenue as a fund for research and development has funded impressive new product development. R&D within MC now employs 800 people with a budget over $75m. In 2010, 21.4% of sales of MC industries were new products and services that did not exist five years earlier. In addition, MC established and has expanded Mondragon University; it enrolled over 3,400 students in its 2009-2010 academic year, and its degree programs conform to the requirements of the European framework of higher education. Total student enrollment in all its educational centers in 2010 was 9,282.” Id.Mondragon Corporation - WikipediaThe Mondragon model: how a Basque cooperative defied Spain's economic crisis“The essentials of the Mondragon story are simple. What arose in 1956 as a handful of workers in a disused factory, using hand tools and sheet metal to make oil-fired heating and cooking stoves is today a massive conglomerate of some 260 manufacturing, retail, financial, agricultural, civil engineering and support co-operatives and associated entities, with jobs for 83,800 workers, and annual sales in excess of $US20 billion.Mondragon co-operatives now own or joint venture some 114 local and overseas subsidiaries, and are committed to their conversion to employee ownership on a case-by-case basis, consistent with local laws, customs and other cultural and economic considerations.As equal co-owners of their workplaces, members enjoy job security together with individual capital holdings, equal sharing of profits on a proportionate basis and an equal ‘one-member one vote’ say in their governance. Remuneration within the cooperatives is egalitarian, with the highest rates payable other than in exceptional circumstances being no greater than six and a half times the lowest.And members share at one remove in ownership of a unique system of secondary support co-operatives, from which the primary or frontline co-operatives draw resources including financial services, social insurance, education and training and research and development.For example, capital for expanding existing businesses and establishing new ones is drawn in part from the group’s bank and social insurance funds and workers are skilled to high levels at a university of technology, which is itself structured as a co-operative and attracts students in disciplines such as engineering and metallurgy throughout Spain.Reflective of the high priority attached by the primary co-operatives to the competitive advantage of intensive research and development is the augmenting of the original Ikerlan research and development support co-operative with thirteen sister bodies, specialising in the needs of particular aspects of manufacturing activity and product development.Faced repeatedly over their 50-year lifespan with cyclical economic downturns, the co-operatives have been able to avail themselves of significant flexibilities. For example, non-members employed on a temporary basis can be put off until conditions improve.Members can agree to forfeit or postpone entitlements such as one or more of their fourteen per annum pay packets or the payment of interest on their individual capital accounts, or in extreme circumstances authorise individual capital account draw-downs.Co-operatives experiencing reduced demand are able to transfer members to ones where it is increasing, without detriment to their rights or entitlements. And supplementary capital can be accessed from centrally held inter-co-operative solidarity funds.”The Mondragon model: how a Basque cooperative defied Spain's economic crisisDocumentary about Mondragon

I was 17 years old and there was this neighbour who was such a mean bitch that you could practically light a cigarette with the flames that came from her mouth from time to time.She lived alone in some beautiful decorated home since her late husband passed away and her only son and daughter both left for university a few years earlier.The lawn and garden was immaculate and her home could’ve easily made the cover of Architectural Digest with the three page article to follow with pics of every room. I’d had been in her home only twice when my mom came over for tea (more so that the bitch could find out every detail about my mom and me and my older brother and sister who were no longer living at home). Also, once I came in to drop off a large parcel that came to our home by mistake and I was scolded for ‘touching her property’ and she later complained to my mom that ‘my shoes dirtied her hard wood floor and she she had to spend money to get it inspected to assess damage and get it polished again to a shine’.Even other neighbours would call her ‘Alexis’ (from the night time soap Dynasty) or ‘The Wicked Witch of West 15th street’ (the street where we lived with her two houses down from our multi-unit rental house where my mom and I lived in the basement suite).Well, one day the bitch’s house went up for sale since her daughter bought a beautiful home in some sunny California seaside city with her film director husband and the bitch was going to live with them, so the house was being shown by a realtor while the bitch was away in California.One of my school friends who lived much further up the street knew what a bitch the neighbour was and even ended up with a light juvenile record because he dog once ran off and into her garden when it was a new puppy and the bitch called the police and accused my friend of breaking into her garden and trespassing when he came to retrieve it. He was an exemplary straight ‘A’ student on the honour role who was also in military cadets and he won a national award for high school math and science scores as well as track and field awards as an athlete as well as being a star on the high school basketball team and so my mom wanted me to hang out with him since he’d be a positive influence on me.Well, me and my friend dressed up a bit to look like young rich kids checking out the open house on the weekend and with several people coming and going to check out the immaculate and beautiful home we weren’t noticed as much nor paid any more attention than the scores of people who came and went.We left little notes which we placed in different rooms when nobody was looking that said things like ‘Emily Rose was murdered in this room’ and ‘beware, she is watching you’. When we visited the finished basement with a beautiful windowless bathroom we scratched on the dark cherry wooden door the words, ‘Help me’ and dropped some red dye in the toilet tank so that it appeared to be leaking blood into the toilet especially when flushed.Before we left my friend stealthily left about 100 printed leaflets with a black and white picture of the house he took from the real estate weekly newspaper in which the house had been photographed in colour and photocopied onto the sheets of paper with what appeared to be a news story with the real estate newspaper’s logo on it (my friend was a master at making such letters) with a story line clearly stated, ‘House of Horrors finally up for sale’.The fake news story which was made to look real thanks to my friend talked about some notorious (and fictitious) sick couple who used to own the house almost 80 years ago and they took in boarders as well as offering a home to some orphaned children and everyone of them were murdered in some Satanic rituals in the basement and sometimes human bones and buried personal objects were still being found on the property or when any renos were done by workmen. The house was believed to be haunted and some years back an elderly man who was believed to have once been a youth who escaped before he could be killed came back and was found dead in the back yard from a heart attack with a bible in his hand and photos of the now deceased sick couple.My friend and I left these leaflets right beside the info sheets that the realtor left on a table with the dimensions, price of the house, taxes etc and then we left without the realtor nor anyone else really noticing that we came and left since there were so many people visiting.About a week later my mom told me that she heard from other neighbours that the bitch flew back from California in an emergency and was in legal talks with the realtor and the real estate weekly newspaper and NOBODY wanted to buy her house. Rumours also circulated about it’s fictional dark history and as well as rumours going around about the bitch who owned the house and who she might be and if she’s connected to the notorious fictional couple that supposedly once owned the ‘house of horrors’.As the bitch would walk out of her home and come and go people would stare and call their children to come back into their homes and they’d watch out their windows like some monster was walking up the block (she was a monster to begin with). Everyone could tell that she was in rage and no could verify as to who left those leaflets and if there was 100% proof of the house’s fictional history but the story was already out there and everyone believed it.It took more than a year but she ended up selling the house to some immigrant family at considerably less than what she wanted for it and she left for California never to return.Years later my mom told me that she ran into the daughter with her three kids who was visiting Vancouver when her husband was directing a movie being filmed here. My mom learned that the ‘bitch’ was evicted from her’ daughter’s property after being charged with child abuse on the youngest child and she was living in some homeless shelter in Los Angeles and on the waitlist for some non-profit housing in the slummiest area of LA. That’s the last I heard of the bitch but my friend still keep in touch and we laugh about that stunt we pulled and still wonder if we went too far but we believed the bitch deserved it.