A solution to laziness?

[Mac]

Hi,

In communism, I realize that it is very tempting to do no work, yet receive everything you need. If everyone did this, there would be no materials to use. So, fellow communists, what should be done to keep members of society working?

[Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk]

People will need to work otherwise they wont have the things they need to survive. Humans are communal and the notion that they need currency as an incentive to do anything is a myth - currency is the incentive to slavery in a world dominated by capitalistic class relations. Under a stateless and classless society, people would be required to work for the benefit of their own well-being as well as the well-being of the community.

Would you let your streets become littered with rubbish, or yourself grow hungry, or your house to go without electricity? Or would your organize with the community to make sure that everything that needs to be done is done? Do you make sure that your house is clean for profit? Do you eat dinner for profit? You do these things because you need to, work is no different.

[Welshy]

In a communist society people will be free to enter fields of work that interest them the most and provide them with the greatest sense of accomplishment and etc. With out having to worry about their financial situation or about maintaining a crappy job in order to feed themselves and their families, people will be able to perform better.

Ultimately people aren't inherently lazy. If we were, I doubt we have gotten to where we are today. Plus if some people don't want to work then they don't have to, though one would have to imagine there would be some social pressure to work.

[IndependentCitizen]

Unless you're disabled, or legitimately unable to work, then the question is. Why should your community put their effort into you, when you're not contributing? Everyone would be working for the sole purpose of helping their community. Because if I was to sit at home, do nothing, but take everything my comrades are creating, and providing. How am I different to the bourgeois boss?

[¿Que?]

I think Lenin alluded to this in State and Revolution. In the first phase of communism, then labor (or rather, that people are contributing their share) would be strictly enforced by workers. In the higher phase of communism, then this ceases to be a problem, as the reactionary elements of society no longer exist and as has been sort of implied in the previous comment, wanting to benefit without contributing is somewhat reactionary.

From State and Revolution:

Until the “higher” phase of communism arrives, the socialists demand the strictest control by society and by the state over the measure of labor and the measure of consumption; but this control must start with the expropriation of the capitalists, with the establishment of workers' control over the capitalists, and must be exercised not by a state of bureaucrats, but by a state of armed workers.
And a little bit later:

For when all have learned to administer and actually to independently administer social production, independently keep accounts and exercise control over the parasites, the sons of the wealthy, the swindlers and other "guardians of capitalist traditions", the escape from this popular accounting and control will inevitably become so incredibly difficult, such a rare exception, and will probably be accompanied by such swift and severe punishment (for the armed workers are practical men and not sentimental intellectuals, and they scarcely allow anyone to trifle with them), that the necessity of observing the simple, fundamental rules of the community will very soon become a habit.

Then the door will be thrown wide open for the transition from the first phase of communist society to its higher phase, and with it to the complete withering away of the state.

[el_chavista]

In communism, I realize that it is very tempting to do no work, yet receive everything you need. If everyone did this, there would be no materials to use. So, fellow communists, what should be done to keep members of society working?
Think of the primitive communism. It was very tempting to just do some harvesting and scavenging for a living :lol:

[Os Cangaceiros]

work really hard and your local kolkhoz will issue you a bright new shiny tractor!

[Rêve Rouge]

Unless you're disabled, or legitimately unable to work, then the question is. Why should your community put their effort into you, when you're not contributing? Everyone would be working for the sole purpose of helping their community. Because if I was to sit at home, do nothing, but take everything my comrades are creating, and providing. How am I different to the bourgeois boss?

Exactly, what do you think should be done with people like these? A lot of people might say something along the lines of "they'll be kicked out of the community", or something like that. But communities come in different sizes, ranging from something as small as a simple commune, to huge cities. and how would you come about kicking them out without doing so against their own will?

States such as the Soviet Union and Democratic Kampuchea had a simple solution, purging. But that seems just a bit too drastic...

[Ocean Seal]

Hi,

In communism, I realize that it is very tempting to do no work, yet receive everything you need. If everyone did this, there would be no materials to use. So, fellow communists, what should be done to keep members of society working?
To be fair what we know as ingrained human psychology is really just a reflection of material conditions. In a society of abundance, we wouldn't need to be instructed to work as abundance would make our "nature" different. Just think about how our idea of human nature has changed through the ages. Ask a person from the primitive communist stage of history if they're a greedy individual constantly trying to stab people of the tribe in the back to reach the top, and ask them their opinion of private property, I guarantee it would not be the same as a person living under capitalism today or feudalism four centuries ago.

[RedSonRising]

Until material scarcity ceases to be a problem and we all learn to get along in a global collection of communal societies, Lenin's slogan of "He who shall not work, shall not eat" will probably remain intact in some form, at least for in an immediate post-revolutionary period.

Communism isn't a free super-welfare-check in the mail every month, it's a holistically democratic integration of all working individuals into the decision-making processes of production and distribution within society, and the abolition of exploitation via the class system.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Remember when automation in the factory was supposed to reduce the work week to ten hours?
Yeah, I don't either.
So, what, are we just going to self-manage the service industry?

[Decommissioner]

I don't think people should be forced to work, but rather should be compelled to.

Those who do work should get extra benefits. Those who don't shouldn't be forced to live a substandard life for not doing so.

I don't believe in laziness as much as I don't believe it's a good thing to be "productive". In contrast to the strong emphasis capitalist society places one being a "good worker" (ie productive) I support laziness 100%. I am lazy at my job and proud, I will do as much to circumvent the accumulation of profit for my boss as I can as an individual. I believe people, when not alienated from the labor, are compelled to perform labor naturally, whether it's necessary to society or not. The "lazy" people such as myself just don't have respect for the capitalist workforce, and thus we spend our energies into labors of passion rather than alienated labor.

This is why socialist society can't have "lazy" people, becuase if it is a true socialist society there will be no emphasis on being "productive" (remember, this word is a synonym for surplus labor), and those who aren't performing necessary labor wont be relied upon or looked down on. People are always working even if they're not "working", no one naturally just wants to sit around and do literally nothing. The people who do only do so under capitalism where they are overworked to the point of not caring and not having energy. Honestly, if I could I would totally choose not working over slaving every day just to eat, we only sacrifice our time and lives to enrich our bosses because we are forced to (whereas under socialism, the time we put into labor will enrich our lives directly). When I do finally manage to have free time away from work (like in between jobs or on vacation) I quickly go from not wanting to do anything from wanting to create and do things that actually matter, because my energies are no longer being expended accumulating profit for a capitalist.


True communism doesn't just abolish the notion of private ownership, it also abolishes the notion of just being a worker. We should strive for a society where people who help build and maintain it are heroes, and those who choose not to perform necessary labor are free to do so. There should only be so much labor required for each individual to put forth into maintaining society (the minimum amount that is required of them to put in over a life time). Those who work extra should be provided incentives. Those who don't work at all should not be denied the necessities of life. All people under communism should be able to live under a society where each person can reach their maximum human potential. Each person should be able migrate with the seasons as a bird would, each person should be allowed the chance to become a philosopher or an architect or just exist and be happy, and have the facilities available to them to use their time wisely to achieve any goal. I believe with freedoms such as this, no one would want to ever go back and I believe people as a whole would maintain this society at all costs.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

If people are naturally lazy, why do they work so hard under capitalism, even when it isn't economically necessary? Why hasn't every benefits system ever created quickly collapsed?

Some people are more averse to strenuous mental and/or physical activity than others, but as far as I know this is mostly down to upbringing.

Not to mention also that the capitalist price system has significant "dead weight" of its own but still manages to tumble along, so far.

[bcbm]

the solution to laziness is to stop valuing hard work so much

[black magick hustla]

people were "working" before there was a class society have do you think they ate or clothed themselves.

[bcbm]

the glorification of "hard work" is an invention of capitalism though, the whole "protestant work ethic" thing, for much of history hard work was viewed as unsavory

[Jose Gracchus]

Admittedly most of that was all individual or kinship based labor and production, and not much of a guide to follow for urban industrial technological society.

[black magick hustla]

the glorification of "hard work" is an invention of capitalism though, the whole "protestant work ethic" thing, for much of history hard work was viewed as unsavory

i agree but my point is that people think human beings will just lay around, human beings have existed under many different conditions and modes of production and they have found a way to survive and find creative ways to survive. the whole idea of how can we prevent "laziness" as in people not doing anything productive that guarantees their survival, is really just a non question because that has never happened.

[bcbm]

Admittedly most of that was all individual or kinship based labor and production, and not much of a guide to follow for urban industrial technological society.

isn't the mantra for further development of this type of society that we'll all work less? i think we could certainly learn something from people who saw more value in communal festivals than labor given that we're among one of the most overworked societies in history

[Tenka]

Unless you're disabled, or legitimately unable to work, then the question is. Why should your community put their effort into you, when you're not contributing? Everyone would be working for the sole purpose of helping their community. Because if I was to sit at home, do nothing, but take everything my comrades are creating, and providing. How am I different to the bourgeois boss?
That's dreadfully hyperbolic, to compare some freeloader under socialism to a bourgeois boss, isn't it? With such attitudes, this individual would be unlikely to escape being subject to copious ridicule and scorn by their fellow proletarians more productive than they.
Anyway, it is my hope that eventually many of the physically labourious aspects of socialist production will be pretty well mechanised/automated, reducing the necessary human element and making a whole lot more of us seem like freeloaders.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

the glorification of "hard work" is an invention of capitalism though, the whole "protestant work ethic" thing, for much of history hard work was viewed as unsavory

That's because it was the sort of thing done by peasants and slaves.

[bcbm]

That's because it was the sort of thing done by peasants and slaves.

peasants, at least in much of medieval europe, likely spent more time drinking than working. it was a difficult task for earlier industrialists to break them from this.

[Pilkington]

Hi,

In communism, I realize that it is very tempting to do no work, yet receive everything you need. If everyone did this, there would be no materials to use. So, fellow communists, what should be done to keep members of society working?

Sorry but you're making it sound as though people are cogs in some kind of machine that needs oiling. If people are content and ambitious, they will invariably find something satisfying to do as a living. For those who don't do anything, it's down to them to get motivated. If they do, great, if not, that's life.

[brigadista]

well there should be opportunites for skill sharing and those who have boring unrewarding jobs should be given opportunities to learn new skills and those with skills be prepared to share their skills and also take their share of boring mundane work - rota systems perhaps ? this may sound utopian but i once worked in a collective where this worked very well of course it would need some serious planning on a large scale-

[Q]

"Lazyness" is a thoroughly bourgeois moral concept that attacks the alienation inherent to capitalism by stating you need to be exploited (that is, get a job and participate in the wageslave cycle).

Have a read at what Paul Lafargue wrote about it back in 1883: The Right To Be Lazy (http://www.marxists.org/archive/lafargue/1883/lazy/)

[Nox]

Put it this way, it's a communist society and 100 people don't want to work.

Step 1 - Warn them that their supplies will be cut off unless they work (95 will work)
Step 2 - Start cutting off their supplies for a very short period of time (4 will work)
Step 3 - Send them off to prison for some forced labour (last 1 will work)

[Dr Mindbender]

Put it this way, it's a communist society and 100 people don't want to work.

Step 1 - Warn them that their supplies will be cut off unless they work (95 will work)
Step 2 - Start cutting off their supplies for a very short period of time (4 will work)
Step 3 - Send them off to prison for some forced labour (last 1 will work)

Fuck that.

I have a better idea. Use automation to replace the sort of jobs people don't want to do with machinery. Reappropriate training and education services to enable everyone to have the sort of jobs they DO want.

Laziness is not caused by the fear of work per sae. Its caused by the alienation inherent in forcing people to do jobs for which they are ill suited.

[Tommy4ever]

Those who do not work, neither shall they eat.

[Nox]

Fuck that.

I have a better idea. Use automation to replace the sort of jobs people don't want to do with machinery. Reappropriate training and education services to enable everyone to have the sort of jobs they DO want.

Laziness is not caused by the fear of work per sae. Its caused by the alienation inherent in forcing people to do jobs for which they are ill suited.


Even in a perfect society where everyone has their preferred job, there will always be some people who can't be arsed to work

[Black Sheep]

Not doing any work at all is far more boring than doing a little work (which will be the required amount in communism)...

[Dr Mindbender]

Even in a perfect society where everyone has their preferred job, there will always be some people who can't be arsed to work
We need to redefine what we mean by 'work'. The word work itself remains synonymous with menial toll. This is completely unnecessary in this day and age. The idea that people should be subjugated onto a factory floor, call centre, street sweeping role or other mundane customer service role must be consigned to the waste bin of history. I fail to accept that there is anyone that cannot be engaged with at any level. Everyone has aspirations and interests. It is what makes us human.

[Nox]

We need to redefine what we mean by 'work'. The word work itself remains synonymous with menial toll. This is completely unnecessary in this day and age. The idea that people should be subjugated onto a factory floor, call centre, street sweeping role or other mundane customer service role must be consigned to the waste bin of history. I fail to accept that there is anyone that cannot be engaged with at any level. Everyone has aspirations and interests. It is what makes us human.

I appreciate that, and for the extreme majority (99.99999%+) of humans in a communist society that will be the case. I definitely agree with you, but you can't say that there won't be a single human being on the planet that won't want to work.

[Q]

I appreciate that, and for the extreme majority (99.99999%+) of humans in a communist society that will be the case. I definitely agree with you, but you can't say that there won't be a single human being on the planet that won't want to work.

If that single human being really wants to seclude itself from society, why not let them? It's not as if the success of communism hinges upon it.

Communism is about universal human freedom, not about getting everyone to work.

[Dr Mindbender]

I appreciate that, and for the extreme majority (99.99999%+) of humans in a communist society that will be the case. I definitely agree with you, but you can't say that there won't be a single human being on the planet that won't want to work.

I remember at school, at about the age of 8 the teacher would get us to vote on what we want to be when we grow up. At the end the class would make a bar chart of the highest results. Nobody said they wanted to do nothing.

My point is you are applying a dishonest analysis of human psychology because it is based on current material conditioning. People are dissuaded from pursuing their ideal job because our current culture is about the sort of conformity and defeatism that sets people on the road of being alienated from work of all sorts.

[Revy]

The advent of robotics would make this a non-issue. In fact, socialism is the only system under which robots can be used to their full labor potential. Since capitalists replacing human workers with robots would only anger the working class against them, who would be out of jobs but still have to find a way to pay for their own survival without a source of income.

Automation would also mean the irrelevance of any need for money or wages or prices. Everything provided for free. We are living in the 21st century so I don't think it is silly to discuss this.

[Dr Mindbender]

The advent of robotics would make this a non-issue. In fact, socialism is the only system under which robots can be used to their full labor potential. Since capitalists replacing human workers with robots would only anger the working class against them, who would be out of jobs but still have to find a way to pay for their own survival without a source of income.


I'm not sure. I think a scenario where the capitalists could control an entirely automated workforce would be their wet dream. That doesnt mean though it would be more efficient, they would intentionally have it running below optimum capacity to mantain scarcity. Either that most of the produce would end up getting destroyed.

I would hasten to add that is the point where a socialist technocracy and a fascist technocracy would differ. The former would make provisions for the workers.