A question regarding "need"

[vox_populi]

We talk about "to each according to his need."
But how do we define need?
And who will decide what people needs?

Would appreciate pretty detailed answers :D

P.S I couldn't find a previous thread about this...so if there is one plz link :P

[Djehuti]

You can check out this thread, it might give you some answers.
http://www.socialism.nu/index.php?page=for...=thread&id=5388 (http://www.socialism.nu/index.php?page=forum&section=thread&id=5388)

[loveme4whoiam]

I'd like to, but unfortunately I've neglected my German studies recently. That is German, right?

I would say that the needs of people are two-tiered - basic, survivalistic needs and lifestyle needs. It comes back to Maslow's hierarchy of needs I suppose (that's a psychology theory, but I'd say it applies to the rest of life), in that basic stuff like food and water and shelter are at the bottom, and with other stuff above, like aesthetic and knowledge requirements.

As for to what extent these can be applied to the real world post-revolution, I should hope that society could meet the survival needs; food, clean water and housing must be available to all. Knowledge (Maslow called it something else, but I've forgotten what - hmm, maybe that explains my bad test score :lol:) should also be fulfilled as a basic requirement - education, at every level, should be available to all. This includes large numbers of vocational courses as well as the traditional University options.

As for everything else, the line becomes a bit blurry for me. Can we say that it is a necessity for everyone to get a new set of clothes once a month? Obviously the right to clothing should be available (but not mandatory, can't infringe on the nudists' rights :D), but how frequently should new clothes be a necessity? From my own experience, the government (or at least, a debt-buster agency) says that each child in my family thinks we should have £20 worht of new clothes every month. I dunno how that equates to a moneyless society though.

[Jadan ja]

I thik this was already asked before and I already posted this link, but I will post it again. There are some links on the bottom of the page that gie more detailed information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs

[nickdlc]

We talk about "to each according to his need."
But how do we define need?
And who will decide what people needs? "Each according to his needs" means you self defined needs. No one decides what your needs are!

[vox_populi]

I'd like to, but unfortunately I've neglected my German studies recently. That is German, right?

Nope It's Swedish..but their both germanic (or german...i don't know the correct english word for it...)languages


"Each according to his needs" means you self defined needs. No one decides what your needs are!
But what I really want to know is...how do you prevent people from getting greedy and taking to much?

[loveme4whoiam]

Nope It's Swedish..but their both germanic (or german...i don't know the correct english word for it...)languages
I thought the Swedish spoke French as a first language? Meh, my ignorance shall be my undoing :D


But what I really want to know is...how do you prevent people from getting greedy and taking to much?
Indeed, a tricky one that. Obviously in a socialist society the answer is obvious, since there is still a state to regulate things like this. In a Communist environment there is no such regulatory body (since we've got rid of it :)). This is one of the main reasons I can see for there to be a need for a socialist transitory period, since, basically, people will need to relearn how to behave.

In Capitalism we are rewarded for being greedy, obviously. Once capitalism is gone people will still hold the behavior patterns of that system, namely greed=good. This is why I can see a really big period of chaos following an Anarchistic revolution, as people will suddenly see a gift economy and think in terms of capitalist self-interest. But if there is an intermediate dictatorship of the proletariat these patterns of behaviour can be reduced and replaced, before instituting a proper Communist society.

So, to make this post more than a random rant, we will regulate our own needs in a Communist economy, knowing that we take as much as we need but not more than that, just as our neighbours do.

[vox_populi]

I thought the Swedish spoke French as a first language? Meh, my ignorance shall be my undoing
Haha! That was the funniest thing i've heard about Sweden since an American Tourist told me that he was disappointed because there were no polar bears on the streets here :D
But you learn something new every day :D


people will need to relearn how to behave.
Hehe...that gives me some bad vibes :P
I know what you mean but when discussing, you'll need a more "non-brainwashie" wording...

But it's pretty safe to assume that when the revolution comes people will be really sick of the capitalist system and hungry for change and a system built on solidarity...so people probably won't have that much a problem adjusting to the non-greedy mood of society :D

Right?

[loveme4whoiam]

Haha! That was the funniest thing i've heard about Sweden since an American Tourist told me that he was disappointed because there were no polar bears on the streets here :D
Hahahaha, that's a good one. I picked up that bit of incorrect knowledge from a Bernard Cornwell novel (read them), I guess he screwed up

But you learn something new every day :D
Indeed, and I thank you for it :rolleyes:


I know what you mean but when discussing, you'll need a more "non-brainwashie" wording...
Good point, although I was thinking in psychological terms rather than people terms :). I'll hve to have a think on how to pitch that without sounding "brain-washie", I'm not looking to start a cult :P


But it's pretty safe to assume that when the revolution comes people will be really sick of the capitalist system and hungry for change and a system built on solidarity...so people probably won't have that much a problem adjusting to the non-greedy mood of society :D
I don't know about that. If the people are so fed up being exploited by the time revolution rolls around, I'd expect people, when the chains are taken off, to go berserk, looting and soforth. This is where the, er, "relearning" comes in, getting people to not want to go on a rampage to celebrate their freedom from wage slavery by making it harder to get a working society going post-revolution.

Does that make sense?

[Zero]

One large problem I've found is that under Capitalism there is no trust between haves and have nots. That is a large reason (IMO) why there is so much controversy behind Welfare. When you don't use the Limbaugh model of it all it is is aid programs. However you'll never actually see an agency under the federal government who polls the poor, and gets them what they need...

Simple solution...

But I agree with loveme4whoiam. There will definately need to be a period where the sins of Capitalism have been washed off the backs of the prols. Heck, some of them may even support Capitalism. Once we are away from it, we can discuss with impunity how worse off we, and the entire world would be if Capitalism somehow found the strength to keep on for 50-100-200 years.

[vox_populi]

Does that make sense?
Yes it does.
But do you think that the communist party could turn the spontaneus and "riot-like" revolution to an organised uprising and minimize the "chaotic aftermath"?

[loveme4whoiam]

Simple solution...
I never thought of that - how many aid agencies in the UK actually ask poor people what they want to be given? Something to think on, that...


But do you think that the communist party could turn the spontaneus and "riot-like" revolution to an organised uprising and minimize the "chaotic aftermath"?
I guess so, in fact I should hope very much so. Harnessing the anger of the masses and directing it in an organised fashion is what will make the revolution different from just another riot (that, and the fact that it'll be on a completely different scale :D). But what I'm worried about is post revolution, after the establishment has been thrown off and the people see "no need" for organised direction anymore. I think that even without any of our brainwashing they'd come to their senses sooner or later, but it should be the job of the communists to stem the random violence afterwards as well as before.

[vox_populi]

But what I'm worried about is post revolution, after the establishment has been thrown off and the people see "no need" for organised direction anymore. I think that even without any of our brainwashing they'd come to their senses sooner or later, but it should be the job of the communists to stem the random violence afterwards as well as before.
Yepp, you got a point there!

[Djehuti]

Originally posted by [email protected] 24 2006, 08:44 PM
I thought the Swedish spoke French as a first language?
As many others you have probably confused Sweden with Switzerland.
Switzerland have three languages, french, german, italian and romansh.

[loveme4whoiam]

:huh: :mellow: :o :blush:
For the love of... Doh! What a fool I am. Many thanks for that Djehuti, I wouldn't have picked up on that if you hadn't pointed it out. I should have known better than to doubt Cornwell's research, and also known better than to trust my reading and observation skills :P

[Scars]

People only NEED 3 things:

* Food
* Shelter
* Warmth

Everything else is a WANT i.e. somthing that would be nice to have, but is not necessary in order to live.

[loveme4whoiam]

Indeed, this is what my post above (before the confusion about the Swedes and their language that isn't French) is saying. The things people need in order to survive are small in number (but can be hard to acquire if the circumstances are against you). But that is mere survival, not living. Everything above those three needs you identify are variables that alter the quality of life a person has. What this thread is asking (I think) is what kind of variables should be available to everyone as a matter of course?