this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2026
30 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmygrad

1319 readers
17 users here now

A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] zedcell@lemmygrad.ml 32 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I make coffee and tea for my family and friends for free all the time.

[–] znsh@lemmygrad.ml 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Honestly, pretty good answer.

[–] LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago

And pretty simple too, which is always nice to see :>

[–] burlemarx@lemmygrad.ml 30 points 3 weeks ago

If you look towards history, this question has been asked many times:

  • In slave societies, if you abolish slavery, who will do the harvest / work in mines / construction?
  • In feudal society, if you abolish serfdom, why wouldn't the serf just leave? How would the serf work to supply the Lord and the city with food and services?
  • In capitalist society, why would anyone work without wages or profit incentive?

The reality is, when society changes, the material incentives for work also change. In slave society, the material incentive was violent coercion, in feudal society, the serf would be able to keep part of his work but would also be coerced through an oath to their Lord, in capitalism the worker is coerced through a wage and through the fear of unemployment.

In communist society, which now is only an idealized abstraction, society will have its own material incentives. But speaking of today, we do have blueprints for what could evolve in the next stage. We could all have a share on both in direct wage or in the capital accumulated, in case of cooperative enterprises. We could have an incentives based on goals and performance, as it happens in state owned companies. The wage system won't disappear overnight, but wage is not necessarily a problem if you don't have labor-capitalist social relations.

[–] cfgaussian@lemmygrad.ml 17 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

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 3 points 3 weeks 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.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

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 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks 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.

[–] ksynwa@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

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 8 points 3 weeks 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).

[–] starkillerfish@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The question "how would communism look like / function" (which is what your question boils down to) is the most difficult one because the correct Marxist answer is "we don’t know". We cannot predict the future.

However, we can theorize based on current conditions. To answer "why would people work for free" we can look at volunteer work, of which there are so many! People volunteer to write wiki pages, make mods for games, but also to work at soup kitchens or community gardens. There are several aspects to why people volunteer. It might be fulfilling creatively, or they might be community expectation around this work. If you lived with others im sure you had to do a round of chores.

So this is how I see work in a communist society. People do it because it is either fulfilling or there are certain community expectations around it.

[–] starkillerfish@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

As a P.S. - some people might find this answer unsatisfactory because their whole lives are built around capitalism and the exchange of money for labour. Imagining communism also requires us to imagine a completely new and different logic of human relations. Sort of like proposing to a medieval serf to imagine a world without kings. It might be tricky to wrap your head around at first.

[–] znsh@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

This is probably the single most difficult thing for people to imagine, a different system to the one they are currently living in.

[–] starkillerfish@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 3 weeks ago

This is why the goal of communists is also actively building an alternative to physically show what’s possible. Not only theorize on paper. To tie it back to your question, my communist party organizes a festival every year that’s fully run by volunteers. People cook, clean up, build big tents. It doesn’t pay, but it rewarding nonetheless to participate in a community and work towards something concrete. In a way this is a little communist production model.

[–] ArcticFoxSmiles@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 3 weeks 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.

[–] 6kb_@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

we are never going to return to this state of affairs before capitalism of communal farming societies with no profit motive, but those are examples you can point your friend to to prove that different reasons for labor have existed and diminished and still we labor, and it's like, pretty certain that in the future labor will still be required just in different conditions that we currently cannot conceive of. but also, like, voluntary labor has existed in every form of society, because we are humans and while ppl in the comments r right that human nature doesnt exist in the way most ppl perceive it, like, you'd be hard pressed to ever find a time in human civilization we weren't just doing a few things for the hell of it. why do cave art when you can't sell it?! were they stupid?!

it’s also that automation might resolve a lot of the need for different types of labour, service sector too, but voluntary labour for things like cooking, art, etc. exist right now and many people will flourish without the need to divert their energy into other things in this, admittedly abstract and not uet real, conception of a communist society.

as star said we don’t know for certain, but it’s silly to pretend like that’s really going to negate anyone’s willingness to do things for the heck of it. not to mention some pf these thankless tasks are crucial to the function of society ajd some people posited communal engagement in these tasks. as for other thankless tasks we do it now in a society entirely centered on capital and people express all the time how they want to if not for that need to subsist and earn wages. does your friend think hobbies will die out or flourish without capitalism?

[–] GreatSquare@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 3 weeks 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.

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.

[–] shreditdude0@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks 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.

[–] amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

"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!

[–] LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks 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 :)

[–] znsh@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

“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 5 points 3 weeks 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 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

While I cannot exactly answer everything about communist society, I will say that this question from your friend (seemingly not Marxist, I might add) is a bit strange: Do they think people just do not do things unless they have a wage or profit incentive?

I would imagine (again, I have not studied this part of communism) that under communism, there would be people who would want to do some of the things you mentioned because there would actually be a sense of community under communism (no class divisions means that there will be no exploiter-exploited relationship to divide people), and people would not need an "incentive" (if we mean incentive in the context of money being given so that people can do things) to provide services or do anything productive (hell, the wage incentive existing does not prevent people from helping others out despite it not being related to their wages).

In fact, profit gets in the way of incentives for doing productive things because it is only productive insofar as it relates to profit. If there is no profit, nothing productive in a given field is likely to be done. Eliminating classes would eliminate the fetters of capitalism on people in doing the things that they want to do, but they would also be able to better help out their community.

I think of it like this: Under capitalism, class divisions created in society not only cause them to experience capitalism differently, but feel the effect of things (like trash buildup) differently due to their different economic statuses causing some to experience the same situation differently or different experiences to exist entirely. The out-of-touch capitalists know little and care little about trash buildup in an impoverished neighborhood if they do not have to go there and if it does not serve as an anti-profit obstacle, so they would have no reason to pay others to clean it up (even if they pay others to clean up trash, others are cleaning up the trash, not them, so they will not understand the severity of the problem). On the other hand, if no class distinctions existed, people would have different roles but would experience similar environments (if they live in the same approximate area), and if something negatively affected a community, then there would be no "shield" from it in the form of capitalist privileges and no distancing from the problem because a negative thing affecting a community would affect all members of a classless society in a roughly equal manner (of course, I only mean roughly, because other factors would certainly affect the relative desire of any given person to provide a service to the community, but it will be less of a factor than it would under capitalism).

Sorry for the answer not explaining all aspects of the question, but your friend does not seem to understand that people do not stop doing things because of no classes existing.

Edit: I wrote this using my last remaining brain fumes before going to sleep, so some stuff might be inaccurate but I just really wanted to answer the question because it involves annoying arguments some libservatives make (yes I combined those two), yet are hardly difficult to counter if you understand basic human empathy.

[–] 6kb_@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

communism is when you just lie there atrophying

[–] LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

And it is mega evil because workers are no longer oppressed by their ruling lords... and wokeism (conservatives are physically incapable of defining this) will destroy the master race (joking, obviously).

[–] 6kb_@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

i got diagnosed with wokeism and all i got was this stupid t shirt and the destruction of the master race kim-gun

[–] znsh@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That kim gun emoji is amazing

[–] LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I have trouble understanding the joke, but Kim Jong-Un is a cool emote. Do you like using these human cutout emotes?

Seriously, conservatives have a physical incapability towards defining woke: POC, women, trans people, queer, communism, etc.. It is just a buzzword for anything remotely progressive, let alone anything communist (and they never tell you the origin of the word during the Civil Rights Movement...).

[–] 6kb_@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (5 children)

oh nothing i’m just referencing the slogan t shirt I went to Blank and all i got was this shirt. and i jusr picked that emoji because i was so immediately enraptured i chose it regardless if it fit with the joke

  1. Yup i agree w ur points on how the term woke has been defanged if not made so vague and all encompassing it may as well be gibberish. its history is interesting but even then by the time it was coopted as a (MAINSTREAM!!!!) serious (in their own opinion) moniker by, say, 2010s usa celebs, it was Silly and meant nothing, and by now, it’s just something fent addicts like alex jones shout to freak out random seniors
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] dazaroo@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

fr like I'd totally be down to just make people coffee

[–] 6kb_@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 3 weeks ago

another example of evil communist norf korean brainwashing🤬

[–] LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago

You must have been paid by the communist state (joking) to do that or you were bribed by the Stasi.

[–] znsh@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Do they think people just do not do things unless they wage or profit incentive?

Yes, in their opinion no one (or not very many people) would be incentivized to pick up garbage, deliver food or do thankless work without monetary compensation.

[–] LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

...what ideology does your friend uphold? Also, I am just baffled at the position of this person on incentives. People are not fed or controlled by money in the sense that instincts direct animals.

Charity organizations pop up all throughout capitalist society without much in the way of wage or profit incentive in spite of capitalism's drive for profit.

[–] znsh@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I would probably say petit bourgeousie and neoliberal ideas, which is pretty funny since she is a proletariat.

[–] LeninZedong@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago

sigh

Typical indoctrinated neoliberal that has trouble understanding capitalism, and as a result, misunderstands the idea that society can exist beyond capitalism.

[–] znsh@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Also it might come of that I am pulling these types of people out of thin air (had a post about a biologist and human nature), but I swear these are people that I talk to on a regular basis.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] demeritum@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

The soviet union had cafeterias.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] opiumfree@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pyromaiden@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

No coffee under communism. Stalin ate all the coffee beans.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] 666@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

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 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

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).

[–] 666@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CriticalResist8@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Cowbee@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 3 weeks 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.

load more comments
view more: next ›