do communists support a worldwide redistribution of wealth?

[turquino]

1. Suppose there are two socialist countries after revolution, and in each there is a worker who produces widgets that are traded between the two. One worker gets 1/2 the remuneration of the other because her country had lower living standards. Do communists support equalizing their pay, even if it's to the detriment of the wealthier worker?

2. After communism is victorious around the world, will regions with fewer natural endowments be freely subsided by those with an abundance?

:confused:

[Schrödinger's Cat]

1. Suppose there are two socialist countries after revolution, and in each there is a worker who produces widgets that are traded between the two. One worker gets 1/2 the remuneration of the other because her country had lower living standards. Do communists support equalizing their pay, even if it's to the detriment of the wealthier worker?Speaking on behalf of everyone would be pointless, but generally - as a close consensus, no. There are other, directer methods for helping this country.


2. After communism is victorious around the world, will regions with fewer natural endowments be freely subsided by those with an abundance?Tit for tat. Everyone has something to offer, regardless of where they live.

[turquino]

Could you please elaborate?

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Could you please elaborate?

Labor is one of the two sources of wealth, the other being land (note: capitalists will try to state capital is a source of wealth, but it derives from both labor and land - not necessarily their own, but still the primary sources). An additional labor pool would be helpful for everyone. These days especially one could order anything on the "internets."

As for the first part, most undeveloped countries suffer from the develop world's appetite for pillaging. A socialist economy would try to build up its own infrastructure and open mutual exchange between itself and the underdeveloped country. As I said, labor is a productive force for wealth, but under capitalism it is financially burdensome to hire as many workers as possible. You could do twice as much, but you'll have to give up your profits.

[redwinter]

I think it's important to realize that the trend moving towards communism in history is not going to be a straight-line linear process, and that these changes in the lopsidedness of international relations and economics are not going to happen all at once overnight. There is going to be socialist development in individual countries and then move towards communist production relations, with different levels of international cooperation and production links (what's now called the "global assembly line") in a qualitatively new and liberating way compared to what exists now. Bob Avakian and Bill Martin begin to explore the topic in the chapter "Agriculture and Ethics" in their book Marxism and the Call of the Future. I think chunks of it in PDF format are available on Amazon and Google Books if you haven't read it and want to sneak a peek.

But I think the fundamental answer to your question lies in the fact that a socialist state exists for one purpose, and that is to advance the world revolutionary movement towards communism - and there will be wave like motion towards this during the progress of socialism as time goes on and application of "solid core with a lot of elasticity" in terms of experimenting with different models of production, distribution, and compensation (and non-compensation!) for work in an effort to advance the material conditions and raise the masses' consciousness to a higher level, to serve the advance towards communism.

The RCP also explores the question of international economic relations in their draft programme (reading this brought out to me that the question is marked significantly by the qualitative difference between imperialist and oppressed nations in the world, or formerly imperialist and formerly oppressed nations under socialism and moving towards communism). I'll quote from the RCP Draft Programme:



International Economic Relations

Proletarian internationalism comes first in all economic relations.

With the other socialist states that exist or come into being, trade will be carried out under the principles of equality and proletarian internationalism, to aid the construction of socialism in these countries and the world revolution.

Trade policies will also have to be developed toward imperialist and other reactionary states. But the new state will not put economic agreements and exchanges with other countries above its responsibility to support revolutionary movements in these countries. In some cases, in order to support the class struggle in these countries and internationally, the socialist state will refuse to carry out trade with them, or refuse to trade in some items.

The new socialist economy will end all imperialist relations with other countries, especially those previously dominated and oppressed by U.S. imperialism. The debts owed by Third World countries to the banking institutions and government agencies of the old economy will be canceled. All unequal trade treaties will be repudiated.
At the same time, the new state will meet its obligations. For instance, it will provide technical and financial assistance for helping to clean up and reverse environmental damage. It will also continue to deliver spare parts, equipment, and so forth to countries which the U.S. imperialists had made dependent on them but which may still require external supplies.

This will have to be done in accordance with the overall international situation and the conditions that the socialist state itself faces at a given time-including whether the new state is forced to defend itself against actual military attack from remaining imperialist and reactionary states and how far it has progressed in meeting the most basic and urgent needs of the masses in the country. Further-more, in dealing with matters of supplies and assistance to countries that U.S. imperialism formerly dominated, the so-cialist state must also factor in the nature of these countries, the class struggle within them, and their role internationally.

As for so-called "intellectual property rights." The class-conscious proletariat stands opposed to them and the new so-cialist state will tear up all such property rights carried over from the old society.

The fruits of imperialism's lopsided research and development apparatus, which drains scientific talent from around the world, especially the poor nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, will be made available to the people of the world. Scientific knowledge will be shared, and no longer will medicines and so forth be "protected" by patent and royalty, and priced to be out of reach to those who so desperately need them.