This was a question or rather a series of questions I heard over the weekend as I was discussing Marxism, class, labour etc. with a friend and I frankly couldn’t really answer their questions. So here I am again asking it because this community provides incredible answers <3

The discussion was about work and their question was: “If class is abolished in communism and the people are taken care of, why would anyone work at all? Who is going to work in coffee shops, pick up trash, work in stores etc.? What would be the incentive for people to do anything productive?” I did my best saying that those jobs would still exist, but I kind of fumbled the argument.

  • -6-6-6-@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 days ago

    when the same question gets asked “Who will scrub toilet under communism” I’m always there to pitch in and say that I would. I love maintenance and janitorial work, but they do not pay me enough to survive.

    • LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      I honestly would prefer simple-minded work because I am not really the type to do anything complicated (at least I would not based on how my health is currently).

      • -6-6-6-@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        I wouldn’t even consider it simple-minded. There’s a lot that goes into janitorial work and especially maintenance and there is a lot of ways to hurt yourself. Understanding your PPE, mainly. People really hurt themselves because they don’t pay attention or in a lot of the cases, the job doesn’t provide the proper PPE for the job. Working with asbestos, glass, fiberglass, lead…all things I have done and taken the extra steps to protect myself against them. Knowing how to use the tools you’re using especially as well. Some dumb shit I have done when I was younger that “worked” that make me cringe thinking about it now.

        Janitorial work is important in that regard too. You should always wear gloves, mask; check the chemicals you’re working with and really try not to breath in power-cleaners when you’re working in a row of 30 stalls. Sometimes there really are cases where all you can do is get the air moving; but that does LEAGUES more than just huffing straight chemicals in a porcelain and tile room.

        • LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          My apologies, I was not saying that maintenance and janitorial work were simple-minded professions; I was saying that I just wanted a job that would not require me to think much. Also, I never knew that being a janitor was dangerous in that way… you have my thanks for cleaning the stalls of dirty bathrooms :3

          • -6-6-6-@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            14 hours ago

            No offense taken or apology needed! I just like telling people that the job has a lot of work to it that has a certain danger to it.

  • loathsome dongeater@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    7 days ago

    I feel like this kind of thinking presupposes that people are naturally lazy leeches who won’t put in work unless a sword is hanging over their head. How did people in hunter gatherer societies do their part without the incentive of per berry payment? This kind of reactionary thinking is sort of Thatcherite. The willingness to work or lack thereof is not immanent to human neurobiology. It is a product of the culture and society.

    Regarding how the economy and supply chains will be organised, it is important to keep in mind classless communism is only expected in a very very advanced stage of societal development. This hard to foresee but not entirely pointless to ruminate about. Not being able to imagine a better world doesn’t mean that a better world is not possible. If you take an example of a less fun job like garbage collection, there are various possibilies. It’s possible that the technological advancements have made manual garbage collection obsolete. Or that maybe you are provided equipment that makes it safe, you work for 6 hours in a day and free for the rest to do as you please, not having to worry about rent, medical costs, paying your kid’s tuition etc. Either way it won’t be like manual scavenging in today’s India.

    • LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 days ago

      True, I was tempted to give my thoughts on exactly how communist society would work (per-berry payment is funny), but it is very far into the future and I do not know much about what little we can assume anyways. What you say about work and humans is also correct, because people are not money-driven machines without any desire to help one another (people that support capitalism tend to deny reality in blatant ways such as this).

  • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    7 days ago

    Even in a classless, stateless, moneyless society, people can still get together and organize themselves, make plans, assign tasks, assign roles, reward or recognize individuals for extraordinary achievements while reprimanding and correcting individuals whose actions (or inaction) damage the collective. It doesn’t mean everyone just does what they want with no regard to the interests of the whole society.

    What’s important to remember is that we don’t believe that these conditions can be achieved overnight. The whole point of the period of socialist construction under the dictatorship of the proletariat is not just to create the material base for communism but also the human base. This means instilling in the people values of community and solidarity and collective action while unlearning the individualism, egoism and greed of capitalist society. This new culture is then reinforced through positive incentive structures which reward social and collaborative behavior, in a diametrically opposite way to how capitalism teaches and rewards anti-social, exploitative, “every man for himself” behavior.

    • LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      You put what I said about the community under communism in a much more concise and correct manner! I applaud you for your effort and I agree with what you said: The development of a community-based focus under communism is inevitable based upon what can be assumed about communism.

    • znsh ☭ @lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      Absolutely agree, it’s however insanely difficult to do so (I still have a lot of individualism and egoism along with decades of social conditioning to overcome). It’s doubly difficult to do so for other people around me, especially if they don’t have an open mind or don’t read theory/only read capitalist or imperialist core media.

      The whole point of the period of socialist construction under the dictatorship of the proletariat is not just to create the material base for communism but also the human base

      Another big issue I run into is that people don’t feel like doing this because they will most likely never experience it themselves, so why bother if they will never live to see the day when communism wins. This is their thought process.

      • cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        I think we just have to reconcile ourselves to the fact that this will be a multi-generational process.

        Another big issue I run into is that people don’t feel like doing this because they will most likely never experience it themselves, so why bother

        This attitude is also part of that selfishness and short-sightedness that needs to be overcome.

        “A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit.”

        Our duty to future generations is to plant the seeds.

        Look at China. Do you think that the people there in the 1950s and 60s, who made huge sacrifices and worked their asses off to build China up from practically nothing, could have imagined how advanced China is today? They didn’t know whether they would be alive to see the better future they were working for, but they did it anyway. Some of those people are still alive and are now enjoying the fruits of their labor, enjoying their well earned retirement in a society with such prosperity and advanced technology that most could not even have imagined. And if they are not still alive then surely their children and grandchildren are.

        They are still far away from reaching full communism, but even in the early stage of socialism there is still a lot of material and social improvement that a revolutionary project can achieve.

        And this is what i think we should focus on. Not the far distant utopian future (though we should have a general plan for how to work toward it) but the small improvements that we can make along the way. In any big project it is important to set achievable intermediate goals. It’s important to give people a sense of progress. Socialism has shown time and time again that it can deliver those short to medium term results: real, tangible improvements in the lives of the people. Whether it’s housing, education, infrastructure, or social justice or whatever else. That’s why socialist states make Five Year Plans.

  • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    Class won’t be abolished, but the structure of class society will be such that it leads to its own negation, which ostensibly for the proletariat is no class at all. The difference implies a gentler slope than “no more class” (a mistake Kruschev committed as we know), and also situates us in history: the aristocracy did not get abolished per se, there were laws and some were executed but we see that the people composing this class eventually became old money bourgeois. They followed the order of the day and stopped complaining.

    With this in mind we can place communism back as a continuous process, just like the transition from feudalism to capitalism was a long process with setbacks and uneven development - there are some countries that went from bourgeois rule back to aristocratic rule (France is a famous example), and others that are still technically monarchies today, with varying degrees of recognizing the power of the monarch. They ask “why would anyone work at all”, but have they seen the humanoid robots already doing work in China? This is who will work - for the most part. But that requires a society that has sufficient productive forces to actually make that happen in the first place. The robots don’t come out of nowhere. There’s no prescription that says communism has to happen in five years or it’s revisionist and doesn’t count. This is an idealist precept - on whose authority?

    You’ll still want meaning and experiences, and it’s entirely plausible there will be community coffee shops just for people who want human contact and something to do, maybe 2 hours and then you go on with your day. Or maybe by then our ideas will have changed such that we will see human baristas as archaic and a late form of social torture. Who knows! Who even knows what job they will be doing 10 years from now, how can we assume the culture of a people we not only don’t know, but don’t even exist yet?

    Either way, today in capitalism restaurants are notoriously difficult businesses to run and often go bankrupt or through new management (when a restaurant changes its name that’s usually what happened). They don’t make a lot of money especially in a world where people can’t justify the luxury - and it is a luxury when they can cook at home. So who will make coffee in communism? Mate, getting your food served is already becoming extinct right now! (Maybe that’s the true actually existing socialism lmao).

    If they mean socialism then they can just look at how China does it and why their state structure as a DotP makes their system wholly different from our own even if on the surface it seems like capitalism (because you see, people in China go to work, and I also go to work!), but that would probably lead to an even deeper discussion explaining China’s system and why it’s qualitatively different from ours.

    • LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Do you mean that classes will not be abolished under communism? Also, would not the negation count as abolition anyways?

      • CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Abolition implies that it will happen in one fell swoop; while there is a law of change happening in leaps (quantitative change turns to qualitative change, but needs to be helped along), it would be more accurate to call it transformation, sublation, etc.

        • yunah-knowles@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          he made a statement so thoughtfully articulated even his opps cheered (online chud language to english: What a thouhtful use of language on your part that easily conveys the nuances of diamat)

  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    Others have given great responses, but I’ll simply add that the process of communism is in achieving a society where the products of labor are distributed based on need, along a common plan. Gradually formations we think of as natural today will likely be phased out, and we cannot concretely predict what will take their place. Automation will cover most menial tasks, and what remains for humans to do will eventually be what humans enjoy doing, which requires building the necessary productive forces for such a society.

  • ArcticFoxSmiles@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    6 days ago

    I think there will be more coffee shops under communism than capitalism. The removal of the Starbucks monopoly and people would probably rather run cutesy and or chill coffee shops than chase jobs that are higher paying, but are not very fulfilling.

    Trash collectors will be a duty to the benefit of the community and should be treated as well as services like doctors and fire fighters.

    • Johnny_Arson [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      The duties of things like fire fighting and trash collecting should be something every single person who is able is trained to do and participate in collectively. Like this week you’re on trash detail, or this week you’re on fire detail. Things like that which are necessary for all should be the responsibility of all that can do those things which also creates redundancy as well in times of emergency.

      • ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Firefighting is a substantially more intensive job then you give it credit for and the vast majority of the population would not be well suited to carrying out all the tasks a firefighter needs to do. The protective suits are 50 pounds on their own, let alone the weight of oxygen tanks, miscellaneous gear, and hoses. Carrying all that and then potentially a whole person in a hellish deadly scenario while not panicking takes a massive amount of training, strength, and resolve.

        Societies function far better with specialization anyway, sending an engineer onto trash duty feels like a waste of resources.

    • LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      And the people that set them up would be the ones that want to do so, because there is no wage-slavery that exists anymore preventing people from doing anything outside of selling their labor-power to the nearest bourgeoisie. It honestly sounds pretty sweet (though I am doubtful I will ever get to see those fruits, I think planting a tree will be good enough for me): A chill coffee shop where people get (non-Starbucks) coffee.

  • shreditdude0@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    I’d make coffee for my comrades, my fellow, caring compatriots and their kin, just as I do for my family. Hell, I’d make about a hundred dozen pupusas with some salsa and curtido for my comrades if I could (I really wish I could).

    These people see working these barista jobs as unfathomable since they and the exploitative class have dragged the reputation of the service worker through the mud as much as they’ve done their wages.

    But I’d wager that some folks would love to open a restaurant or cafe or lounge with good friends, build an inviting place of rest for their community if they weren’t at the whims of the capitalist looking to extract every last cent out of patrons and every last hour of labor from the workers, all without factoring socialization, and extending decency and kindness unto others into their practice.

    They have such a twisted perception of this type of labor but because of the reality they’re subjected to under the ruling dictatorship of capital, they can’t separate work from the value it produces in terms of money. It’s always about money for these people, but that isn’t a mistake. The idea of seeing use-value instead of profit-value in things is such a foreign thing to those living with the corruption of bourgeois education. Take a car, for example. How many times you’ll hear “you’re better off just buying a new one; replacing xy and z plus the labor to put it all together would be unreasonably expensive. Just send that thing to the junkyard!”. What if I have sentimental attachment to that car? But how we feel is never important. The human part of us must always be stripped away from these decisions. But sadly, we really are in a bind and we must make the most reasonable choice given our circumstances. Even as a kid, this type of thinking always made me sick, and at this young point in my life, I was decades from ever having read any Marxist theory.

    Coffee, pastries, or any sort of good that would bring us so much enjoyment are always given so little value through the lens of the twisted, capitalist worldview. Even the labor to create these things. To think of the centuries of human development, experimentation, experience, and culture that have contributed to the existence of these simple pleasures only for them to have someone say “who the hell wants to do THAT job!? Not me!” leaves me with a deep sadness.

    I want there to be coffee brewers, pastry chefs, cooks, and all those laborers who create these simple marvels that undeniably bring us so much joy. And I want them to be liberated from the backwardness, selfishness, and ingratitude that capitalism foments among people.

  • Bronstein_Tardigrade@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    7 days ago

    They are still looking thru the capitalist lens, “me, me, me, what about me” and not as communists, “us, us, us, what about us.” “Menial jobs” under capitalism will still be done, only the persons doing them will be elevated to the economic and social status they deserve; can’t say the same for management.

  • opiumfree@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 days ago

    yesterday i was making my usual coffee and i thought about how i would make coffee for all my friends

    • LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      What I like is all of the communists here coming out to say that they would make coffee for their friends. It is nice.

  • GreatSquare@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    7 days ago

    “If class is abolished in communism and the people are taken care of, why would anyone work at all? Who is going to work in coffee shops, pick up trash, work in stores etc.? What would be the incentive for people to do anything productive?”

    Work still needs to happen. This takes coordination and organisation. Production is still required but people won’t live in a class based society.

    The modern world produces way more complicated things than a cup of coffee. People are still going to own personal possessions under communism. They just aren’t going to be able to charge someone else rent to use their stuff.

  • amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 days ago

    “But which servant will be there to bring me my footstool when there are no longer nobles?” The people would collectively do the work that matters most, rather than shoving servile roles onto a lower class.

    “But without the threat of unemployment, why would anyone do anything?” Human societies were communal before they were capitalist and for much longer. The closest parallel in modern day is how (some) families still act, doing things more on a basis of duty and shared responsibility toward the health and wellbeing of the family rather than looking at it like monetary cost and payoff.

    We can look at the sense of security China has nurtured for a glimpse at how this kind of thing works: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/11447997

    Combination of material changes and culture enforce/reinforce a mindset that makes for a safer environment for most people. And this is with China not even being at the stage of development the question is about, yet it still has substantial, noticeable differences compared to the capitalist norm.

    Incidentally, one thing I remember coming across in trying to learn Chinese is that the word they tend to use for the equivalent of “everyone” in English is 大家 (which literally translates to “big family”). Ain’t that telling? We don’t have to only imagine, we can look at the successes of AES states for glimpses of what developed communism would look like.

    The problem with capitalism-brained people asking these questions is they are essentially asking, “What if individualism and idealism (the current superstructure) with communist societal organization (a future base)? How would this be sustainable?” They are right to be confused when they mash it together like that, but it’s not how societal changes happen and it’s one of the pivotal reasons that transition is such an important concept in ML. We know the current way of thinking and behaving will not change immediately. There is a process of getting there and AES states are living proof that it’s possible to make progress on it!

    • znsh ☭ @lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      “What if individualism and idealism (the current superstructure) with communist societal organization (a future base)? How would this be sustainable?” They are right to be confused when they mash it together like that, but it’s not how societal changes happen and it’s one of the pivotal reasons that transition is such an important concept in ML. We know the current way of thinking and behaving will not change immediately. There is a process of getting there and AES states are living proof that it’s possible to make progress on it!

      When I make these same arguments I’m usually bombarded either by “Chinese propaganda! They spy on their people, they have no privacy!” or “This is utopian thinking, humans will always fight in wars just like they did before, there will always be a society that is better than another and it will dominate them, it’s human nature! Wee wee wee!”

      • amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 days ago

        Yeah, it can be hard to get through to people precisely because they’re thinking in the individualist/idealist mode and probably have 0 exposure to dialectical and historical materialism. It probably wouldn’t go over very well to actually say this, but in the abstract, it amuses me the idea of telling somebody like that, “That’s because you’re thinking like an idealist/individualist and until/unless changes in your base (material conditions) happen, there’s going to be little pressure for you to rethink your superstructure (your beliefs/worldviews).”

        Still, I think in general being able to speak positively on behalf of AES states is worth something, more so if you’re saying it to someone who otherwise knows you and tends to trust you. Even if people don’t immediately agree, the knowledge that somebody they know thinks that way may at least cause them to pause and have to admit they are sharing the world with real people like this; which may lead to “there must be a reason they think this way” which may lead to at least trying to understand where it’s coming from.

        Now understanding where something comes from doesn’t automatically mean agreeing with it. Fascism came from somewhere and there was real fervor and planning involved, not just “unhinged random violence”, yet it’s also a grotesque and violent system.

        So there is also the step of making sure we bring the receipts on why communism is a historical good. This is one reason I like Blackshirts and Reds as an earlier book recommend. Because (from what I can recall) Parenti makes a point of distinguishing between what was actually communists practicing, and what was fascists taking advantage of working class fervor and then throwing the working class under the bus. It is a critical difference to be aware of. There are frauds out there (like the patsocs in the US) who will frame themselves as like communists but are carrying water for something else. But there are also real Actually Existing Socialism projects run by communist vanguards. This is, I think, easier for people who are used to anti-communism to stomach than presenting communism like it’s an unquestionable good at all times and you should trust everyone who says they’re a commie (which wouldn’t be true anyway).

        Then with dialectical and historical materialism to put it in context, the why it’s imperfect is not “because humans are inherently tribal and will hurt each other any chance they get” but because of contradictions, clashing interests, and the nature of transition; which means creating a society that is more communal and cooperative on a fundamental, willing level (not just at threat of punishment) is possible. But it requires working through the contradictions, not trying to push past them through sheer individual will.

    • LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      True, they analyze communism and socialism (alongside other related theoretical and practical parts of Marxism) with a capitalist lens and fail to understand that it is like analyzing a train with the understanding of a carriage: an example of outdated thinking. They do not realize that capitalist formations (superstructural and base) are not inherent to humans or societies in general, but are specifically existing because capitalist contradictions led to such things existing. Also unintentional anarchism dunk :)

  • Johnny_Arson [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 days ago

    Wingnut Dishwashers Union - Jesus Does the Dishes

    Who does the dishes after
    the revolution well
    I do my own dishes now
    I’ll do my own dishes then
    if we can’t love without dishwashers
    how could we live without cops