Abolishing work means living by the anarchist principle: “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs”. By sharing labor and resources equally, there is no “work” involved for anyone. We could participate in activities a few hours (<10h) a week to feed, house and heal everyone.
Work is the institution and structures in society, based on christian morality that we have to suffer in this life. It’s the structure that ensures tons of people are employed for useless or “bullshit jobs” (see david graeber), and that the more useless your job is the higher you get paid… or put another way, the harder you work the less you get paid.
Work only makes sense in a society based on competition and private property (and money). In a cooperative society, there’s stuff to be done to address our needs, and we ensure it’s done. There is no “work” as we know it with managers and timetables and…
This quote is often attributed to Marx, but it was already a cliché in communist circles at the time it was written down (at least according to Wikipedia). And as @poVoq@lemmy.ml pointed out, communism used to be more or less equal to anarchism, before some people started this “dictatorship of the proletariat” nonsense :)
Automatizing every job that’s stupid ass balls shit where you are alienated all day every day and it could be replaced by a machine without too much change. Science and stuff can be done by hoomans, still, although it can also be automatized and the line between human and machine will become more blur. IMO that can only be achieved in China (maybe Vietnam in a couple more years), the US is super fucked up and it’s not the place to begin any fucking shitty nothing of a leftist movement.
Well, the thing is that that is right-wing automation, if you automate jobs while in a capitalist dictatorship you will produce less jobs, force more people into poverty unless they meet the requisites to be a cognitariat and income inequality increases. Automation needs to be done while promoting other measures like poverty eradication, the destruction of a class society, universal basic income, etc; but if you apply automation or UBI without socialist policies you’ll end up creating hyper corporativism rather than any leftist utopia.
As an anarchist, i personally strongly disagree. Yes what can be automated should be automated: for example using wind/watermills for mechanical work.
However, most “jobs” are non productive and therefore entirely useless or outright detrimental to humanity (cops? marketing? accounting?). Trying to automate everything in a capitalist structure will not produce more justice, and we certainly don’t need electronics and robots to share labor and resources more equally.
Also worth noting: if you’re refering to robotization, that electronics require tons of slave labor and produce considerable amounts of pollution. The startup nation promoting farming bots is just a dystopian dreams that will not fix problems for anyone (i could elaborate if you’re curious).
I never mentioned any capitalist structure, jobs that exist merely to support a speculative bourgeoisie dictatorship should be abolished
Well, automation involves robotization, too, and while there may be waste produced by the creation to them, it’s worth noting that if you invest in scientific research to find the most effective way to live while applying these measures a green path can be find.
jobs that exist merely to support a speculative bourgeoisie dictatorship should be abolished
Cool. I just think it doesn’t go without saying :)
Well, automation involves robotization, too
I don’t think so. I mean you can achieve automation with robotization, but that’s not the only way, like in the windmill example. I also don’t think trying to robotize everything first then trying to find a “greener” way is a good approach: where has it taken us so far? Electronic devices are everywhere and their ecological impact keeps growing, and we are still no closer (if not much farther) from green electronics than we were a few decades ago.
If you think about it, electronic devices from the 80s were rather simple components and easily repairable. So even when something broke down, you could always change a single part (minor ecological impact). And overall, much less materials were involved in building them, which meant less extractivism, and more possibilities for recycling.
What does abolishing work mean?
Abolishing work means living by the anarchist principle: “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs”. By sharing labor and resources equally, there is no “work” involved for anyone. We could participate in activities a few hours (<10h) a week to feed, house and heal everyone.
Work is the institution and structures in society, based on christian morality that we have to suffer in this life. It’s the structure that ensures tons of people are employed for useless or “bullshit jobs” (see david graeber), and that the more useless your job is the higher you get paid… or put another way, the harder you work the less you get paid.
Work only makes sense in a society based on competition and private property (and money). In a cooperative society, there’s stuff to be done to address our needs, and we ensure it’s done. There is no “work” as we know it with managers and timetables and…
That phrase is marxist, though, not anarchist, or at the bare minimum it’s communist.
This quote is often attributed to Marx, but it was already a cliché in communist circles at the time it was written down (at least according to Wikipedia). And as @poVoq@lemmy.ml pointed out, communism used to be more or less equal to anarchism, before some people started this “dictatorship of the proletariat” nonsense :)
deleted by creator
not having to work for basic human rights
Automatizing every job that’s stupid ass balls shit where you are alienated all day every day and it could be replaced by a machine without too much change. Science and stuff can be done by hoomans, still, although it can also be automatized and the line between human and machine will become more blur. IMO that can only be achieved in China (maybe Vietnam in a couple more years), the US is super fucked up and it’s not the place to begin any fucking shitty nothing of a leftist movement.
deleted by creator
Maybe I was overly optimistic saying they could do it now, but it clearly is the only country that could do it in a foreseeable future.
deleted by creator
Well, the thing is that that is right-wing automation, if you automate jobs while in a capitalist dictatorship you will produce less jobs, force more people into poverty unless they meet the requisites to be a cognitariat and income inequality increases. Automation needs to be done while promoting other measures like poverty eradication, the destruction of a class society, universal basic income, etc; but if you apply automation or UBI without socialist policies you’ll end up creating hyper corporativism rather than any leftist utopia.
As an anarchist, i personally strongly disagree. Yes what can be automated should be automated: for example using wind/watermills for mechanical work.
However, most “jobs” are non productive and therefore entirely useless or outright detrimental to humanity (cops? marketing? accounting?). Trying to automate everything in a capitalist structure will not produce more justice, and we certainly don’t need electronics and robots to share labor and resources more equally.
Also worth noting: if you’re refering to robotization, that electronics require tons of slave labor and produce considerable amounts of pollution. The startup nation promoting farming bots is just a dystopian dreams that will not fix problems for anyone (i could elaborate if you’re curious).
I never mentioned any capitalist structure, jobs that exist merely to support a speculative bourgeoisie dictatorship should be abolished
Well, automation involves robotization, too, and while there may be waste produced by the creation to them, it’s worth noting that if you invest in scientific research to find the most effective way to live while applying these measures a green path can be find.
Cool. I just think it doesn’t go without saying :)
I don’t think so. I mean you can achieve automation with robotization, but that’s not the only way, like in the windmill example. I also don’t think trying to robotize everything first then trying to find a “greener” way is a good approach: where has it taken us so far? Electronic devices are everywhere and their ecological impact keeps growing, and we are still no closer (if not much farther) from green electronics than we were a few decades ago.
If you think about it, electronic devices from the 80s were rather simple components and easily repairable. So even when something broke down, you could always change a single part (minor ecological impact). And overall, much less materials were involved in building them, which meant less extractivism, and more possibilities for recycling.