• Swaus01@piefed.socialEnglish
    15·
    24 hours ago

    I don’t think I’ve heard the pitch on why abolishing the wage system would be good. Anyone want to infodump?

    • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      34·
      22 hours ago

      Kropotkin goes into in “the conquest of bread”, his argument is that our main priority as a society should be getting everyone’s needs met. Once everyone’s needs are met wages aren’t really necessary as you are being provided food, housing etc. based on your need. At that point wages and money can only cause problems in the commune as it would only be for accumulation, and if someone starts accumulating money they also accumulate power, which challenges the equality of everyone in the commune.

      Maybe the commune can collectively hold currency or gold to exchange with other communes, but if you give individuals that currency that is private property ( in the Marxist sense ) and should be removed to protect anarchy.

      • Samskara@sh.itjust.works
        12·
        10 hours ago

        Sure basic needs might be met with food rations, a designated housing, standard uniform as clothing.

        What about art, beauty, self expression, tickets to the opera, exotic food, fast vehicles, musical instruments, toys, cinema? You know the non essentials that make life more than subsistence survival.

        Humans also desire and compete on social status.

        • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          5·
          6 hours ago

          Kropotkin also goes into this, the idea is that once we re organize labor and get rid of all the middlemen, rent seekers, dead weight etc. We’ll only have to work ~4 hours a day for necessities. That leaves an additional 4 hours of leisure time. You can use that new leisure time to work on art, music etc. especially the background labor that people often ignore. You want a canvas to paint on? Go to the art workshop and help them out for a day and they’ll give you a canvas. Want tickets to the opera? Go work on setting up the stage, lights etc. and they’ll give you a ticket. Want a toy, go put in some hours with santas elves and help to make some toys and you’ll get one in return.

          How feasible is this? Probably not as much any more. Kropotkin doesn’t value specialization very highly, which makes sense as he was writing about Russia in the 1800s where most work was unskilled brute force labor like farming and working in a factory. Back then it was maybe possible for you to show up to the piano workshop and they could give you some menial job that would help them out. Now all the menial work is done by robots and machines and you need a decent amount of technical knowledge to be able to help out at the piano factory.

          Anarchism has trouble dealing with specialization. While it increases efficiency, now more than ever, it also inevitably leads to classes and eventually a hierarchy of labor. Before they thought maybe mass education would fix this, as everyone would know a bit of everything and could help everywhere, but as education has expanded so has the complexity of the system, and the knowledge needed to be a functional part of that system.

          • Samskara@sh.itjust.works
            4·
            6 hours ago

            Only being able to go to the opera if I work for them creates a lot of power and elitism around this. Who decides, who gets to help set up the opera or clean afterwards? You need far less people to run an opera production than fit in the audience.

            Okay, well maybe bribing gifting the doorman with some precious stones will get me inside.

            Want a banana? Well, you just have to travel to the tropics by working on a ship, then help out at a plantation.

            As you yourself point out this doesn’t work with highly productive economies.

            • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              4·
              3 hours ago

              Yeah, but it’s not like opera attendance right now is spread very equally. At that point you have to ask is it more unjust that a janitor can’t afford to see the show he’s put work into, or someone can’t see the show because they weren’t able to get an in.

              Who decides, who gets to help…

              The workers do, hiring and firing decisions are either voted on by the troupe or by elected representatives of the troupe. Same with all the excess tickets, which would probably be split by how much labor you put into the production. So maybe you can’t get a job in the opera, but maybe you can babysit for the director while they’re working late and they’ll give you a ticket. In this sense the audience becomes more of a community because all of them have some sort of connection to the performance, and all of them get to see the fruits of there labor. As opposed to now where you’re alienated from the production and your only connection to the show is through purchasing a ticket. That community connected by labor will get more satisfaction from the opera then an audience of ticket buyers.

        • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          4·
          6 hours ago

          Kropotkin says that you should use your labor to help out the video game co-op and then they’ll give you the game. If we organize labor better we’d only have to work 4 hours a day for necessities, so the other 4 hours can be used to work on other projects and in return you’ll get the products of that labor.

    • SpikesOtherDog@ani.socialEnglish
      3·
      23 hours ago

      I can only guess that the alternative is a standard government stipend.

      The only way this can work is if there is no bourgeoisie.