helping people removes motivation?

[abbielives!]

what do you do with the people who will not work?
are we really abolishing wage slavery if people are forced to work in order to survive?

[Faux Real]

People will (theoretically) adhere to 'from each according to their ability, to each according to their need'. Comradery and unity will make "work" seem like normal human interactions and relations. If people won't work I would imagine they would be disabled in some way. If they're capable of "work" yet don't, maybe no one will notice or rush to help them if that individual is acting spoiled, if you will.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

What is work, anyway?

Generally speaking, we use the term "work" to refer to activities that people do for money. When someone "works," that means they are doing something in order to get paid - something they wouldn't be doing if they weren't getting paid. In other words, "work" is by definition any unpleasant activity that people do only because they receive some form of compensation.

The ultimate goal of communism is to abolish "work" in this sense - to create a society where people do NOT have to spend most of their day doing something they don't like.

Ideally, in a communist society, everyone would be doing something they enjoy. This would, of course, require radical changes in our society and our technology. The technology we use today is designed to separate "work" from "play" - to separate the activities we do for money from the activities we do for fun. In communism, "work" and "play" will have to be merged. As a small example, it will probably be necessary to replace television with some other form of entertainment that is a more productive use of your time; something interactive, probably internet-based.

Now, of course, there will always be jobs that are just unpleasant by their very nature and that no one wants to do. If they cannot be combined with some form of play, then a communist society will either have to invent machines to do those jobs, or share the burden equally between all members of the society (e.g. everyone has to collect the trash one day per year).

[OrderedAnarchy]

(e.g. everyone has to collect the trash one day per year). How on earth do you suppose that a classless, stateless society would enforce something like that?

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18, 2007 06:22 pm

(e.g. everyone has to collect the trash one day per year). How on earth do you suppose that a classless, stateless society would enforce something like that?
Make it a holiday. A yearly anniversary of the established anarchy! We get to pickup trash. :P

[Janus]

People who choose not to work (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=69281&st=25)
Lazy people (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=56562)
quality of work (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=54607)


How on earth do you suppose that a classless, stateless society would enforce something like that?
Placing such undesirable jobs on a rotation basis through democratic decision would most likely be the best solution to the low appeal for unpopular or unsatisfactory work. Some people may volunteer for this kind of work though in the long run, it would be more optimal to mechanize these types of roles.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 03:22 am

(e.g. everyone has to collect the trash one day per year). How on earth do you suppose that a classless, stateless society would enforce something like that?
"You have to help us collect trash one day this year, otherwise the community will stop collecting your trash."

Simple.

[BreadBros]

People will always have to work to some degree (although the exact amount of labor needed would reduce itself through automation). Quite simply, in order to have an economy and society that runs and takes care of people work has to happen. So the question of abolishing wage slavery and work are distinct, IMO.

A system that expands democratic control of the economy would be distinct from wage slavery. Think of it this way: under capitalism, no matter what level of prosperity a society reaches people still have to sell their labor to survive because of the wage system. In a communist/anarchist society people might still be working but towards a clear and present goal: the management and betterment of society, NOT the maintenance of a system of wealth extraction. That would effect everything, from the organization of workplaces to the organization of society as a whole.

[Tatarin]

How on earth do you suppose that a classless, stateless society would enforce something like that?

Maybe a stupid question - but who are enforcing it now?

[abbielives!]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2007 07:27 am
People will always have to work to some degree (although the exact amount of labor needed would reduce itself through automation). Quite simply, in order to have an economy and society that runs and takes care of people work has to happen. So the question of abolishing wage slavery and work are distinct, IMO.

A system that expands democratic control of the economy would be distinct from wage slavery. Think of it this way: under capitalism, no matter what level of prosperity a society reaches people still have to sell their labor to survive because of the wage system. In a communist/anarchist society people might still be working but towards a clear and present goal: the management and betterment of society, NOT the maintenance of a system of wealth extraction. That would effect everything, from the organization of workplaces to the organization of society as a whole.

not sure i understand
as far as i can tell all that would do would be to abolish the wage and replace it with a kind of rating system...

[BreadBros]

Rating system of/for what?

I'm simply saying that a post-capitalist economy would be organized around maximizing production/efficiency as opposed to a wage system that has it's own internal logic. Under the wage system work is necessary regardless of whether it is truly "necessary" for economic efficiency because people have to make a living. That wouldn't be true under socialism, instead work would be more logically based on societal needs.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Well, if we're talking about technology, it stands to reason machines/robots would eventually replace the need for work until all that's left is sports, art, and other "recreational activities."

I think socialism is possible without this technology and communism is possible with it.

[redcannon]

damn i can't wait till robots remove all contingency from humankind. I'm just so goddamn sick of cleaning the drainage pipes at work...

[Schrödinger's Cat]

With no state and monetary system, and people having achieved a continous reservoir of resources through the use of technology and community awareness, the motivation will be even stronger because the only tasks left will be the ones individuals enjoy. It would take only one small group to figure out how to [make a healthier alternative to burgers, make a new car] and then the item[s] would go to whoever thought they needed it.

People wouldn't be motivated by profit. There would be no restrictions in their potential. As long as there's nothing to lose from allowing everyone to have it, people would be motivated.