Keeping people working under communism.

[atlas]

In school I was always taught that communism, although a great economic system theoretically, would never work being put in practice. Why? Mainly because in communism, everyone is as equals; the lazy bum gets the same treatment as somebody who always works their hardest. Of course people are lazy and are going to try and get away with the least work possible. How do you fix this flaw? Money is what motivates people, and keeps them working. How do you keep people motivated in a communist government?



EDIT: To add more:

It just seems to me that you need some kind of money to keep the people motivated. They should be able to buy their own food and luxuries of their choice, but not have anybody work under them (at least in a private buissness), this way you eliminate the classes (at least for the most part).

Also: how do you tackle the problem of the jobs nobody really wants? Nobody wants to have to be a miner, or some other job involving physical labor, or possible injuries (e.g. the black lung). Everybody would want to have a job were they don't have to do much physical labor.

Maybe it's because I've grown up in a capitalist society, but communism just doesn't seem to make much sense.

[Connolly]

Primitive forms of communism exist today in remote areas of the world, untouched (at least little) by modern capitalism, new ideas and technology. If that was an argument - dont you think they would have fallen apart a long time ago?

Such arguments seem to forget that the majority of our human existance has been primitive communism. That is, economic equaity.

The reason greed does not become an issue under communism is because our actions and thoughts are defined by our material conditions, and, in terms of society, these material conditions are defined by the economic mode of production.

Greed exists because capitalism allows and needs it.

for example

If you plant a single apple tree along a street, you can bet there would be a run to colllect all the "free" apples when they grow. If you plant apple trees on every street - I bet there wouldnt be the same reaction. (probably a bad example :unsure: )

The communist mode of production would allow greater amounts of production, limited only by resources. things would (and can presently) be produced in such quantities as to remove greed altogether. Yet, due to capitalistic restraints, things are produced only by what can be sold - not by actual human demand.


It just seems to me that you need some kind of money to keep the people motivated. They should be able to buy their own food and luxuries of their choice, but not have anybody work under them (at least in a private buissness), this way you eliminate the classes (at least for the most part).

Such motivation is not needed. As I said, peoples thoughts are based on their material conditions. Their way of thinking and interacting with each other would change. It could be expectwed also, that the hours (if any) people work per day will be at a minimum.

Money is not needed. Money is a tool for the exploitation of others and also suggestes the existance of property (which does not exist under communism).

Communism and money are incompatible.


Also: how do you tackle the problem of the jobs nobody really wants? Nobody wants to have to be a miner, or some other job involving physical labor, or possible injuries (e.g. the black lung). Everybody would want to have a job were they don't have to do much physical labor.

Technology maybe? Humans are pretty inflexible when it comes to physical labour, cant lift heavy mass; not very precise or accurate; slow to react and produce; cannot work under most physical environments; need rest; need food;

All thats left to invent or develop is the decision making process for which humans are best. And, unlesss thats it! the end of human technological advancement, it can be expected that this last advantage can be "sussed" in time.

Lets face it - the physical human labour that humans do on a daily basis is simple enough? The only thing thats stopping the automation of it is the cost of the machines themselves.

Even still, capitalisms need to remove human labour and reduce costs can e seen all around - TESCO with their automated check out tills, Japan with their automated railways etc etc (cant think of any others at the moment)

Its justa matter of time before automation takes root, eliminating the need for human physical labour.

[BobKKKindle$]

It Really depends on What you mean by 'Work'. Under Capitalism, Workers Must sell their wage labour as a commodity in order to make an income because they do not own the factors of production with which they can produce commodities of their own. They often have little choice in the work avaliable, and the work itself, whether one means a white collar worker or a blue collar worker, is often fundamentally boring and repetitive. The Commodities that are produced are owned by the Capitalists (someone who owns the means of production), and are sold to make a profit for the Capitalist. The Worker is payed less than the full value of his work, in what marx termed 'the extraction of surplus labour value'

Basically - Under Capitalism - One does not work because one wants to - one works because one cannot survive without selling one's labour power. Not Fun.

Now We Revolutionaries think that this is fundamentally Wrong. We Feel that 'Work' should not simply be a means to live, but should instead be something of the individual's own choosing, and, whats more, should be an act of creativity and self expression and fulfillement. Under Socialism, People would not work for money, but would simply do the kind of work they like best. There are of course some jobs that nooone would freely do, at least not for long - Working in Agriculture, Factories, or Menial labour being the most obvious examples. But we firmly believe that 'conscious and free labour' (Labour of one's own choosing) would be so liberating and non-alienating that this less popular work could be shared out equally amongst everyone without any protest.

This New type of work is quite difficult to imagine, because it is so radically different from the type of work in the present. To put it simply, work under Socialism is an end unto itself, not just a means of living. And That would be so incredible, that I certainly dont think that money is required as an incentive.

I hope that helped. I dont know if you are a socialist - but dont worry - I used to have the same misgivings. Hopefully the contributions of myself and others will change your mind.

I will Leave you with a little quote from Marx - One of his few Descriptions of Communist Society

"After labour has become not merely a means to live, after the productive forces have also increased with the development of the individual, and all the springs of cooperative wealth flow more abundantly - only then can the narrow horizons of bourgeois thought be left fully behind, and the banners of society will proudly proclaim - From Each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs"

[R_P_A_S]

the reason i doubt communism won't fly in this day in age is because humans have already been currupted with money and material things.

You can't expect everyone being willing to give that up. I would but im sure 1000 others wont

[Janus]

Sure, that's why it may take people a while in order to develop this type of attitude necessary for communism. As usual, it will most definitely rely on the material conditions.

Possessing things is not inherently bad but exploiting others in order to acquire more is.

As for work in a communist society, people will gravitate towards the work they enjoy. Furthermore, they can actually make a difference in the work place by engaging in planning. In short, they have control over their own lives and labor, something that is virtually impossible in capitalism.

[atlas]

I'm not talking about primitive forms of communism, I'm talking about why you cannot implement it into modern capitalist societies today; it's got nothing to do with greed. It's about work ethic. How do you keep workers motivated? You can always give them the job of their choice, but they will still try to get away with doing little work. Now I could possibly understand this changing after capitalists are forgotten, but how do you handle the transitionary period? There will be people left from capitalism who will feel the need to slack off, and would likely pass these lazy tendancies onto their children. How would you eliminate that? Use positive and negative reinforcement starting at a young age in school possibly? Teach them how bad laziness would be?


People also will not all want jobs to involving to much physical labor. Even with machines doing 'everything' that would normally be an unwanted job, there still has to be physical labor involved, whether it be maintaining these machines that do 'everything', or doing something a machine is unavailable for. How do you decide who gets these unwanted jobs? And don't you think there would be an unspoken 'class' difference between the people working in an office and the people with more unsavory jobs, even if they all live in equal conditions? Or do you think they would all treat each other as comrades working torwards a common cause? Do you think a solution to that would be communities that intermingle these kinds of jobs and workers?

[Janus]

You can always give them the job of their choice, but they will still try to get away with doing little work. Now I could possibly understand this changing after capitalists are forgotten, but how do you handle the transitionary period?
Labor credits or labor time vouchers.

Here is a good thread where it was discussed.Labor time vouchers (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=45039)

[atlas]

Alright. That answers that question;
-How do you decide who gets the unwanted jobs?
-Do you think there would be a divide between the people working these jobs? Or do you think they would treat each other as equals, and comrades working torwards a common cause?

[Noah]

-How do you decide who gets the unwanted jobs?

Many unwanted jobs that exist today such as let's take a dustbin man for example could be done through voluntary work and some sort of system.

For example every sunday people could go and dump it themselves or perhaps, there could be community volunteers.

The reason I think community volunteers would pick up more than it currently does in capitalism is because in communist society people will gain respect for doing the extra work.
The reason for this is because when you go for a placement at university for example, in communist society, people will see all the work you've done for the community, this would gain you respect...it would mean you'd be a better candidate. However, in capitalist society if the university interviewer sees a part-time sweeper and also interviews a middle class well dressed sweet smelling boy..well I wonder who will get in :rolleyes:

It also depends what you mean by 'unwanted' jobs. I would imagine that many 'unwanted' jobs would go with capitalism itself. For example, flipping burgers for the rest of your life.


Do you think there would be a divide between the people working these jobs? Or do you think they would treat each other as equals, and comrades working torwards a common cause?

Communism is a way to minimise inequality. There will always be divide in my opinion, however it will be greatly reduced from what we have now and will not be based on money. In time, a new system will come along and replace communism and create even less inequality and so on...

[kurt]

I'm not talking about primitive forms of communism, I'm talking about why you cannot implement it into modern capitalist societies today; it's got nothing to do with greed. It's about work ethic. How do you keep workers motivated? You can always give them the job of their choice, but they will still try to get away with doing little work.

How do you "keep workers motivated?" How do you "give them the job of their choice"?

What sort of "communism" are you envisioning here? If someone is "giving" people jobs, and "keeping" people motivated, it certainly isn't communism in any meaningful sense of the word.

Why would people need to "get away" with doing as little work as possible? The whole phrase implies some sort of power structure, coercing workers into submission, whilst they attempt to "subvert" the system, by doing as little work as possible.

If there aren't any bosses, and labour is solely on a voluntary basis, people have nothing to "get away with".


Now I could possibly understand this changing after capitalists are forgotten, but how do you handle the transitionary period? There will be people left from capitalism who will feel the need to slack off, and would likely pass these lazy tendancies onto their children. How would you eliminate that? Use positive and negative reinforcement starting at a young age in school possibly? Teach them how bad laziness would be?

Capitalists don't need to be "forgotten" in order for people to volunteer their labour. Do you honestly think that workers who have just made the most important revolution in all of human history will be too "lazy" to get the electricity running?


People also will not all want jobs to involving to much physical labor. Even with machines doing 'everything' that would normally be an unwanted job, there still has to be physical labor involved, whether it be maintaining these machines that do 'everything', or doing something a machine is unavailable for. How do you decide who gets these unwanted jobs?

Of course people won't all want jobs involving physical labour. Obviously menial labour is a fairly undesirable job (although it can be rewarding to do something with your own physical power, and health benefits cannot be ignored).

There are always people who have a "knack" for maintaining, fixing, and building machines. I don't see why this would change, and I certainly don't see these jobs as unwanted.

Of course, under capitalism, the conditions of these jobs can be quite dreadful in some situations, but that can be easily improved, along with reduced work hours for more physically stressful jobs.


And don't you think there would be an unspoken 'class' difference between the people working in an office and the people with more unsavory jobs, even if they all live in equal conditions
I can't think of anything "unsavory" that cannot be eliminated by automation, or simply dispensed with altoghether.

Of course, if you're refering to dirty jobs such a heavy-duty truck mechanic, then I hardly think you're qualified to call the work "unsavory". For all intents and purposes, this type of "dirty" work is quite rewarding to those in the field.

[atlas]

Well then would you please explain what 'proper' communisn is? (or at least provide a link)

[kurt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 07:32 PM
Well then would you please explain what 'proper' communisn is? (or at least provide a link)
It's a classless, stateless society. No one is coercing people into work, as there are no bosses, "overseers", et al.

[BobKKKindle$]

It is a society in which labour is not merely a means to live, but is the highest end in life in itself.

[atlas]

@ kurt: it sounds like your talking about an anarchist society, not communist

you don't feel there needs to be somebody who needs to help guide the people? generally people don't work together very well; but maybe that's because they all are trying to push for their own benefit, not for the good of the community. im still not understanding the basic principal it seems, any suggested reading?

[BobKKKindle$]

Das Kapital? Nah, Just Kidding. If you want something to help clear up the issue, I highly recommend this lecture - The Future Socialist Society, by Judy Cox - just go here, and search for 'Cox' in IE and you'll get it. its really easy to listen to, pretty funny, and describes - well, it describes the Future Socialist Society.

http://mp3.lpi.org.uk/resistancemp/fulllist.htm

[atlas]

how do you keep the workers organized? people don't organize themselves very well...I think there needs to be some kind of coordinator to keep the people well...coordinated...

[Connolly]

how do you keep the workers organized? people don't organize themselves very well...I think there needs to be some kind of coordinator to keep the people well...coordinated...

I would imagine almost everyone on this board are in favour of some type of organisation. Im sure many have differing theories as to how this organisation will pan out in a communist society.

But the fact of the matter is - we actually dont know how such a society will function in such detail.

As communism is in the future, and remains almost unique as we know it, such indept knowledge of organisation could only come from a god.

If you want an answer to such a qustion, be ready for speculation.

Ill give it a go though.

Create a scenario - be specific.

Are we talking about a factory?.......A bunch of factories?..............a whole society?

What exactly is to be coordinated?

[RevSouth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2006, 01:30 PM
It also depends what you mean by 'unwanted' jobs. I would imagine that many 'unwanted' jobs would go with capitalism itself. For example, flipping burgers for the rest of your life.

Another thing is, people sometimes have to give up jobs they love in capitalism, because they have families to support, and the such. In a truely Socialist society, if you loved to flip burgers, and that was your passion, you could do it your whole life, and never have to worry about securing a better income.

[Ali.Cat]

I understand the concept of people having the ability to do as they like as far as contributing to society, such as flipping burgers for their entire life. But what happens with the people that continuously want more? There are no doubt many people out there who work hard in their careers for the chance to reach success and be validated for that success - socially. Along with that social validation may also come the want to "show off" the fact that they have succeeded through material possessions. What happens to those people - the ones who, if living in a communist society, would not have the chance to prove their success in those ways?

[atlas]

@ Ali.Kat: Well most people are not really born this way, but a product of society.

As for keeping people organized under communism, I was talking about who keeps certain jobs organized, towns, cities. Basically how do people know what they need to do?

Also, what about material possessions(sp) that people dont want out of greed, but for recreational activities. I personally am a glider pilot; how am I to aquire a glider under communism if everybody gets the same? Could they get credits to choose what they want and put them torwards, say a glider or a musical instrument. Or say even I want to start up my own factory for building gliders. How am I supposed to go about this if everything is nationalized? Would I be able to direct everything going on in this factory, and tell people how to do what; have them working under me, but still get the same benefits? Or would I not be able to start this factory up at all, since I would have more authority over somebody else, even though everybody, including me is getting the same benefits.

[apathy maybe]

Personally I think that technology will soon abolish the need to do more then a few hours of "work" a week. Already we have technology that would permit us to work fewer hours, the problem is the system we live in.

The current system encourages people to work 40 hours or more a week for another gram of soma, yet people complain they do not have enough time for their families.

Besides, what is wrong with being lazy? Any sufficiently advanced society will be able to cope with a few lazy people not doing any work. (See capitalist society for example.)



atlas: Communism is a subset of anarchism where goods are shared in common.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

Labor Time Vouchers until people are sober from the deadly intoxication of greed and capitalism.

[R_P_A_S]

Atlas this is a great thread! and the people who are replying are making it good too. I had this questions for a while now. I hate to be pesimistic. But is just hard to picture people willing to change their ways. think of the millioneres left and the people of power who had everything thing handed to them since they were born. think of those people. what in the world makes you think they would be willing to give it all up and be "commun" with everyone else.

I think the whole system needs to be revised. the world is not the same as it was in the 1800's

[cenv]

Along with that social validation may also come the want to "show off" the fact that they have succeeded through material possessions. What happens to those people - the ones who, if living in a communist society, would not have the chance to prove their success in those ways?
In a communist society, working hard and doing well won't be associated with having more material possessions, so that simply won't be a way people will want to flaunt their sccess. Anyway, how many possessions someone has isn't exactly a reliable gauge of how much they've contributed to the world in a capitalist society either.


what in the world makes you think they would be willing to give it all up and be "commun" with everyone else.
Of course they won't willingly "give it all up" - that's why there will be a revolution.


I think the whole system needs to be revised. the world is not the same as it was in the 1800's
Assuming "the whole system" refers to communism, what about it d'you want to improve? How would you rather have it be?

In a communist society, people will realize that they need to work for society to function, so they will work. You don't really expect everyone to sit around on their asses while society falls apart, do you?

[R_P_A_S]

how come it has never worked out then? its been taught of since when? 200 and some years? or shit maybe longer? how long has the idea of communism been around? and implemented and worked? Im not saying in NO WAY that capitalism is better. we all know is not. but it has stood and remained for a long time. we might not like it. never said it was the best out of the two, but like i said people are too corrupted. unless the revolution kills probably 4 billion or so people. wouldn't that be genocide? would that make us "better people" extarminationg all capitalist?

i don't know about all that. all Im saying is that people are far to corrupted by money and greed.

[atlas]

I've been doing some research myself. So I'll try and help out.

how come it has never worked out then?
Because there has never been a 'real' communist government that is pure idealogically, at least that I am aware of.

- The USSR failed because of the cold war and the USA. It probably would have failed soon anyway, considering how Stalin ran the whole thing. (see this (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=5200) thread.)
- China is more capitalist than communist, and I doubt they will be calling themselves 'communists' for much longer. They totally contradict the idea of communism; i.e., people being equal, while most the country is poverty-stricken while the rest is exceedingly wealthy. They also tend to just kill you or arrest you if you protest against the government. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989) (A man caught throwing ink on a picture of mao was arrested June 4th, 1989 in the T-square protest, and was just released February 22nd, 2006)
- Cuba isn't all that communist either really. They seem to be more of a socialist country, at least from what I understand. They still have a currency, a central leader and the state.
Can't really think of any more communist countries (or at least countries that call themselves that) at the moment.



its been taught of since when? 200 and some years? or shit maybe longer? how long has the idea of communism been around

Karl Marx became the first to coin the term 'communism' along with Engels in The Communist Manifesto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_manifesto), which was released in 1848. They might have talked/wrote about it sooner, but The Communist Manifesto is what comes to mind first. I'm sure there were predessecors to communism, at the time there were a lot of writings that described a utopian society, but Marx is who thought of the 'official' idea.



unless the revolution kills probably 4 billion or so people.

1/3 of the world isn't going to be very happy when they discover the other 2/3 has been killed. :blink:
There aren&#39;t that many rich people anyway. <_<
Most capitalist could be converted, with time. Especially if capitalists are the minority after an angry revolution.



i don&#39;t know about all that. all Im saying is that people are far to corrupted by money and greed.

Well speaking from an Americans standpoint most middle class (lower is a given) are just trying to survive now. Thanks to Bush the economy is F&#39;d up and people aren&#39;t making that much money. Most middle class people are to busy trying to sustain themselves (or rather their general way of life). Evreybody seems to be trying to live more efficiently, nobody is buying a new SUV or sports car every other year because they can&#39;t afford it.