What is so great about work?

[scarletghoul]

Something that has always put me off communism is its obsession with work and workers. I understand that workers are the core of functioning human civilization and deserve the product of their work, but do not think that they are they only class that matter or that emancipation of the workers will bring a good and equal society. Unless everyone was a worker, but this is what I really disagree with-

Why should everyone work? I despise the idea that we should all have to work. The arts are as important as industry etc IMO, and I think that the best society would be once where people did not have to work and the arts could flourish so people could fully appreciate life. Would this be possible in a communist utopia?

This is not an argument btw, it is a sincere question.

[Drace]

The hell :laugh:

Were not hippies.

[BobKKKindle$]

Communism is not "obsessed" by work, and if we situate socialism within the broader context of Marx's approach to history we can understand that the reason why the abolition of capitalism would be progressive is that it would remove the fetters on the further development of the productive forces - in other words, by overturning capitalism we can take full advantage of the technological advances that have occurred during the capitalist epoch and can enhance our technological capacity even further, and by doing so we can reduce the need to work and possibly even abolish work at some point in the future by completely mechanizing the production of necessities and consumer goods, leaving people to spend time doing the things they enjoy.


but do not think that they are they only class that matter or that emancipation of the workers will bring a good and equal society

The proletariat is the revolutionary class due to the fact that all workers share the same relationship to the means of production (unlike the peasantry, which is actually divided up into a large number of different strata depending on how much land each individual peasant owns and how they generate the majority of their income) and are concentrated together in large units of production as capitalism develops, which allows workers to exercise their collective strength against the ruling class and overthrow capitalism. This does not mean that the proletariat would be the only class to benefit from a socialist revolution, especially in the imperialist periphery where the land question has not been solved during the capitalist epoch because the domestic bourgeoisie is too closely linked foreign capital and the remnants of the feudal regime to carry out land reform on its own, but the proletariat is the only class capable of constructing socialism due to its strategic position in relation to the production of goods. The ultimate aim of the proletariat is too abolish itself as a class by ending wage-labour and the need to work.

[scarletghoul]

Thanks.

[chegitz guevara]

Work sucks. I've been unemployed since June 10, and I'm not in any hurry to go back. Hurray for unemployment! I just wish I'd spent more time at the beach, but my hip was hurting me until just about a month ago. I s'pose I could go now, but the water is too cold unless you're a tourist.

[mikelepore]

I despise the idea that we should all have to work. The arts are as important as industry etc IMO, and I think that the best society would be once where people did not have to work and the arts could flourish so people could fully appreciate life.

If we got rid of the socially unnecessary kinds of work (militarism, advertising, speculation, bureaucracy, etc.) and only the genuinely necessary kinds of work remained, we might only have to require everyone to work about six hours per week. Then out of a week that contains 168 hours, the other 162 hours that can be as you envision it.

But the way you said it literally, that no one has to work, that can only be a world that has Santa Claus's magical elves.

[Black Sheep]

Another question.Why do Marxists claim that the most sacred right is the right to work, as opposed to the anarchists most sacred right, the right to freedom.

[scarletghoul]

But the way you said it literally, that no one has to work, that can only be a world that has Santa Claus's magical elves.
This makes no sense. It is possible to not force everyone to work. A good method would be to reward those who do work, but making sure everyone else is well off too maybe.

[BobKKKindle$]

Another question.Why do Marxists claim that the most sacred right is the right to work, as opposed to the anarchists most sacred right, the right to freedom.

Er, generally both anarchists and Marxists generally reject the concept of a "right" as part of the ideological superstructure of capitalism with no relation to material reality. Marxists may have occasionally used "the right to work" as a transitional demand to expose the fact that employment is an inevitability under capitalism (and so, given the negative impacts of unemployment both on people who are still working, and those who are unable to find a job, a reason to overthrow capitalism) but at no point in history has any serious Marxist ever claimed that there is a "scared right to work".

[scarletghoul]

A lot of marxists might campaign for the right to work under the capitalist system possibly?

[Comrade B]

would be once where people did not have to work and the arts could flourish so people could fully appreciate life. Would this be possible in a communist utopia?

Labor is an important thing, people work to improve society. Of course though, people will receive breaks and a time to retire, but it is imperative to the improvet of society that people strive to increase the productivity of the country, thus increasing the luxuries of the people and stability of the communist government (please anarchists, don't say "I don't think that we need this" because I know you don't, and that is why you are an anarchist, and I am not).

As for art, I was having a discussion with my father (an art history professor) about art under Lenin and I agree very much with the whole idea of the time.
Painting on canvas is obsolete. It exists so that the wealthy may own something to display to others to tell of their wealth, during Lenin's time, the man in charge of education (not sure of the position name) changed quite a bit in the school.
1. There were no grades, you entered the school to learn.
2. Everyone was accepted.
3. Teaching painting small works was removed from the school.

However, around the same time in Mexico, socialist mural painting was just coming to life. This should be something taught in schools as well. It is the greatest form of socialist painting because it is something made for no individual, but the society as a whole, everyone can see the work whenever they wish.
Prints are an important part of socialist art. Prints of images make it possible for everyone to have a work in their home. Sculpting is taught for those who wish to do public works, also architects will be similarly trained so that we do not end up with the shit housing projects that countries like the US and later Soviet Union developed.

[ZeroNowhere]

]1. There were no grades, you entered the school to learn.
2. Everyone was accepted.
The anarchists (Ferrer) have all the good ideas.


Something that has always put me off communism is its obsession with work and workers.
Like everybody else, us commies are a bunch of lazy fucks, and thus we mostly wish to use technology, etc, in order to decrease work hours dramatically. For example, if everybody were to do productive labour, rather than a few parasites at the top getting their money, unproductive labour, people being unemployed, etc, then the working time would be short enough that people would have enough time to develop the arts and pursue their own interests, while still doing necessary labour, which would probably decrease over the years.

[wigsa]

The thing is,when some people are given exemption from work,there becomes an elitist branch,a two tier society,similar to what capitalism has created.

Everyone has something to contribute,therefore everyone should work.

[rednordman]

This has been answered better by the previous posters, but i will give you my opinion anyhow. To keep it simple..if no one worked, than any economic system would collapse. Why should some people work and not others? I know what your saying, but it is my honest belief that everyone has something positive to give to society, whether it is profitable or not. In fact, if people where actually taught this in school, i recon that any unemployment would be seen as totally unacceptable and people would turn against capitalism as it limits the number of jobs in a society and thus hidering them from forfilling their potential. Plus from my own experience, being unemployed for long spells of time is murder. Having a job and role in society changes everything, regardless of what situation you are in.
I guess it all depends how you look at things though, some people see their jobs as a chore and become totally alienated from it, whereas some people love what they do even if its shit, because its better than nothing and atleast they are contribuiting something. I can 100% sympathise with both. I suppose when people work in a communistic society they would do things for the common good of that particular society rather than for their own self interests.

[ernie]

Everyone has something to contribute,therefore everyone should work.
Everyone should...that doesn't mean everyone will. What should society do with those that refuse to work? Should they be refused a decent standard of living? Should they be put in prison?

My opinion is that they should receive the same amount of material goods than anybody else, and that the "punishment" should come from somewhere else.


The thing is,when some people are given exemption from work,there becomes an elitist branch,a two tier society,similar to what capitalism has created.
Every society has had different social statuses. I don't see why communism will be any different in this regard, except in what they are based on and what that status means. In capitalism, money is what gives you, among other things, status. In communism, I hope it will be more meaningful things, like reputation in your area of work or dedication to volunteer work. By the same token, people who don't contribute anything and take more than their share will be looked down upon.

In capitalism, money and social status also gives you decision-making power; wealthier people have more power than poor people. In communism, social status should not give official power, although I imagine people will be more willing to listen to someone with high social status.

We gotta remember that communism will not be "heaven"; it won't be a society of Ches. There will be still be bad and undesirable things, and revolutionaries should discuss how to deal with them.

[Drace]

1. There were no grades, you entered the school to learn.
2. Everyone was accepted.
3. Teaching painting small works was removed from the school.

Holy shit. Thats what I want.

[bolshevik butcher]

Nothing is great about work, well particularly work under capitalism.

Marxism is not about fetishising 'work' or even workers themselves for that matter. Marxists take a scientific approach, the working class that is wage labourers who do not own capital and sell their labour power, their capacity to work to owners of capital, capitalists, in return for wages are the only consistantly revolutionary class under capitalist social relations. This stems from the fact that the working class does not own capital and collective class consciousness that stems from the proccess of production it is inovlved in and the fact that it is only through collective action that the working class can defend its interest.

The working class is the most powerful class in society and its power develops in tandom with captialist development- electricity, transport, factories, the emergence services etc would all not run without the working class. Beyond this the struggle of the working class unlike all other class struggles is not merely that which aims to replace the interests of one class with another but as it represents the will of the vast majoraty of society it is the struggle to end class relaitons themselves.

[Comrade B]

Holy shit. Thats what I want.
The idea was that if someone wants to learn, why prevent them. There is nothing to gain from going to the school to slack off, there is no stupid prestige just from the name, it is all about what the person has given the effort to learn.

[ZeroNowhere]

Holy shit. Thats what I want.
Well, there's always the free skools and AnarchistU. :)