Yes, of course. If you lived in a society where everyone contributed their labor freely in return for access to all of the fruits of the labour of others, wouldn’t you be happy to work as a plumber or an electrician in that society? We work to pay our bills, but if we didn’t have bills, if everyone was just provided for, by default, why would you need to be paid to work? Why wouldn’t you want to give back to a system that gives so much benefits to you?
Some people have to dress up in a special suit and swim through raw sewage to repair a big pump - and they have to do it blindly because the sewage is opaque.
Some people have an even dirtier job: They have to clean off that guy’s shitty suit before he can take it off. They might have to do it multiple times if he needs to come out to take another look at schematics.
They do it because it pays very well. It pays very well because nobody wants to do it.
I’d do it in a heartbeat if we got to live in the world I outlined above, and so would many others, because we all want to live in a society that has functioning waste treatment facilities, and someone has to do it.
In a society in which everyone can choose whatever career they want, all for the same “pay”/outcome/whatever it’s called in a moneyless society, I would bet that most people would choose not to do these things.
When the demand for such tasks outweighs the number of people who are both willing and skilled to do those jobs, what can be done to meet the demand?
Btw, I’m not asking rhetorically - I’m genuinely curious. If there isn’t enough people to serve such an important job for society, what can be done?
Again, if something really needs to get done, like repairing necessary sewer systems, then it will get done, because it needs to. Do you really think that people who have the skills to repair the water treatment plant are going to just deal with sewage backing up into their home because they don’t want to do the work?
For a more comprehensive analysis of the question, I’d direct your attention towards an anarchist FAQ. I’ll quote a few choice sections below, but the link goes into great detail, comparing and contrasting multiple approaches to handling the problem.
There are some jobs that few, if any, would enjoy (for example, collecting rubbish, processing sewage, dangerous work, etc.). So how would an anarchist society deal with it?
[…]
It would be easy to imagine a free community sharing such tasks as fairly as possible between a community’s members by, for example, allocating a few days a month to all fit members of a community to do work which no one volunteers to do. This would soon ensure that it would be done, particularly if it were part of a festival or before a party. In this way, every one shares in the unpleasant as well as pleasant tasks (and, of course, minimises the time any one individual has to spend on it). Or, for tasks which are very popular, individuals would also have to do unpleasant tasks as well. In this way, popular and unpopular tasks could balance each other out. Or such tasks could be rotated randomly by lottery. The possibilities are many and, undoubtedly, a free people will try many different ones in different areas.
[…]
Of course, no system is perfect – we are sure that not everyone will be able to do the work they enjoy the most (this is also the case under capitalism, we may add). In an anarchist society every method of ensuring that individuals pursue the work they are interested in would be investigated. If a possible solution can be found, we are sure that it will. What a free society would make sure of was that neither the capitalist market redeveloped (which ensures that the majority are marginalised into wage slavery) or a state socialist “labour army” type allocation process developed (which would ensure that free socialism did not remain free or socialist for long).
In this manner, anarchism will be able to ensure the principle of voluntary labour and free association as well as making sure that unpleasant and unwanted “work” is done. Moreover, most anarchists are sure that in a free society such requirements to encourage people to volunteer for unpleasant work will disappear over time as feelings of mutual aid and solidarity become more and more common place. Indeed, it is likely that people will gain respect for doing jobs that others might find unpleasant and so it might become “glamorous” to do such activity. Showing off to friends can be a powerful stimulus in doing any activity.
Do you really think that people who have the skills to repair the water treatment plant are going to just deal with sewage backing up into their home because they don’t want to do the work?
In their own city’s infrastructure? No, probably not. But that doesn’t quite clear things up, so I’ll throw out some numbers as an example:
Let’s say, on average, ~100 pumps need repair/maintenance at any given time.
Only 50 people have the skills to fix those industrial pumps[1].
Do an average of 50 cities have sewage backing up at any given time? How do you fill that gap?
Also, do you have an example of a society that functions like this today? Maybe I’m just stuck thinking inside a box because the society I’m most familiar with is not like that. If so, an example might be helpful.
Obviously only a VERY small fraction of those 50 would be willing to travel to whatever town needs the repair, learn the schematics of their pump model, then swim through their excrement to blindly fix it. But probably easier to just focus on a simpler set of numbers. ↩︎
I mean, sure, if you have 50 meals and need to feed 100 people, 50 people go hungry every day, right? That’s just math.
The best we can do in such a situation is choose a random 50 each day and ensure nobody goes two days in a row without eating. The thing is, though, a free society would respond to that mismatch because people wouldn’t tolerate that situation for long if it can be remedied, right? So people would naturally work to expand the production of meals because everyone wants to eat.
Likewise, people would learn to fix the broken sewage systems. They’d do everything they can to remedy the situation. Workarounds, alternatives, upskilling, and so on.
The question of supply and demand is also covered in exhaustive detail in an anarchist FAQ
Also, do you have an example of a society that functions like this today?
The Zapatistas in Mexico are probably the best example of an anarchist society functioning today. For a historical example, you could also read about Revolutionary Spain. There’s a good section on an anarchist FAQ about it.
I feel like I answered the question completely adequately, but I’d be happy to address your question too.
Why do you think people choose their careers under capitalism? Why would someone choose to be a teacher, a social worker, a mental health counselor, an academic researcher, a vet tech, a graphic designer, for example?
I’d say people choose those careers because they either have an interest/passion for a certain subject/discipline, because they care about improving their community, because they want to help others, or because they just felt like that would be an occupation that suits their abilities. Maybe they chose it because there is some prestige or respect from the peers associated with that occupation. Or, heck, maybe they just chose it because they thought it sounded interesting.
I don’t see why any of that would change at all in an absence of the profit motive.
Good for you! I hope you have a comfortable life, you deserve it - so does everyone, regardless of their career or living situation. What do you do for work?
Remember, though, that your experience is not universal. I chose my career because I was interested and passionate about it. I have friends who feel like their careers just chose them, by pure happenstance. Everyone is different.
Also, do you live with your parents? Because these comments definitely have that vibe.
Thankfully not, I live in a lovely apartment with my extremely handsome husband, who is also anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist and based as fuck.
How about you? Do you live on some billionaire’s sofa, or something? Just curious about why you’re clutching your pearls so firmly about my principled anti-capitalist position. Zero judgment, btw, we are both working class, and I am a huge advocate for working class solidarity.
Okay? I’d rather do that than eat it from the rich. It’s not like you can’t wear protective equipment or anything. Heck, give me a set of coveralls and I would wade waist-deep in a septic tank on the daily in return for a society that has no homelessness, no famine, no medical debt, universal access to healthcare and education, to live in a world without pedophile billionaires and corporations constantly fucking us all over for a percentage and for their own sick pleasures. Do you really not see how that would be a better world?
I’m an anarchist! If you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think. I personally believe that it’s the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.
Counter point: If there is no reason for some people who are capable of contributing to society to actually contribute, at least a good portion of those people will not, but they’ll still take from the system.
The inequity is inherent. There needs to be SOME reward for effort aside from pure altruism.
Edit: the guy with the Patreon shit-talking capitalism is hilarious.
Counter point: If there is no reason for some people who are capable of contributing to society to actually contribute, at least a good portion of those people will not, but they’ll still take from the system.
This is well known as the “free rider problem”, and the extent to which it is a problem and how it can be addressed is widely discussed by anarchists. I’m sure everyone must be getting sick of me referencing it by now, but our old friend an anarchist FAQ addresses the issue in great detail, but I’ll quote a few relevant paragraphs:
Anarchism is based on voluntary labour. If people do not desire to work then they cannot (must not) be forced to by means of physical coercion. This makes some wonder what happens if someone refuses to work in a libertarian society.
[…]
This ignores the many people who do volunteer work (often in addition to their “real jobs”). It also ignores those who spend their time contributing to projects they are interested in (such as fan journals) which would be considered work in other contexts. A classic example of this is the internet, particularly webpages like Wikipedia and software projects like php.
[…]
There would be few people who refuse to do any kind of productive activity. The question arises of what to do with those (a small minority, to be sure) who refuse to work.
On this question there is some disagreement. Some anarchists argue that the lazy should not be deprived of the means of life. Social pressure, they argue, would ensure those who take from, but do not contribute, to the community to listen to their conscience and start producing for the community that supports them. If this did not happen, then the person who refused to contribute would be asked to leave (freedom of association means the freedom not to associate)
Most anarchists agree with Camillo Berneri when he argued that anarchism should be based upon “no compulsion to work, but no duty towards those who do not want to work.”
This means that an anarchist society will not continue to feed, clothe, house someone who can produce but refuses to. Anarchists have had enough of the wealthy under capitalism consuming but not producing and do not see why they should support a new group of parasites after the revolution.
Obviously, there is a difference between not wanting to work and being unable to work. The sick, children, the old, pregnant women and so on will be looked after in libertarian communism. As child rearing would be considered “work” along with other more obviously economic tasks, mothers and fathers will not have to leave their children unattended and work to make ends meet. Instead, consideration will be given to the needs of both parents and children as well as the creation of community nurseries and child care centres.
We have to stress here that an anarchist society will not deny anyone the means of life. This would violate the voluntary labour which is at the heart of all schools of anarchism. Unlike capitalism, the means of life will not be monopolised by any group – including the commune. This means that someone who does not wish to join a commune or who does not pull their weight within a commune and are expelled or choose to leave will have access to the means of making a living.
Well, you can believe whatever you want to believe, I’m not going to stop advocating for a better world just because you’re a bit squeamish. Nobody is going to tolerate living in a society without functioning sewage systems, so the work would get done, either way, simply because it has to. I think you’re just straight up self-evidently wrong.
Yes, of course. If you lived in a society where everyone contributed their labor freely in return for access to all of the fruits of the labour of others, wouldn’t you be happy to work as a plumber or an electrician in that society? We work to pay our bills, but if we didn’t have bills, if everyone was just provided for, by default, why would you need to be paid to work? Why wouldn’t you want to give back to a system that gives so much benefits to you?
Some people have to dress up in a special suit and swim through raw sewage to repair a big pump - and they have to do it blindly because the sewage is opaque.
Some people have an even dirtier job: They have to clean off that guy’s shitty suit before he can take it off. They might have to do it multiple times if he needs to come out to take another look at schematics.
They do it because it pays very well. It pays very well because nobody wants to do it.
I’d do it in a heartbeat if we got to live in the world I outlined above, and so would many others, because we all want to live in a society that has functioning waste treatment facilities, and someone has to do it.
Maybe many would, but also, many would not.
In a society in which everyone can choose whatever career they want, all for the same “pay”/outcome/whatever it’s called in a moneyless society, I would bet that most people would choose not to do these things.
When the demand for such tasks outweighs the number of people who are both willing and skilled to do those jobs, what can be done to meet the demand?
Btw, I’m not asking rhetorically - I’m genuinely curious. If there isn’t enough people to serve such an important job for society, what can be done?
Again, if something really needs to get done, like repairing necessary sewer systems, then it will get done, because it needs to. Do you really think that people who have the skills to repair the water treatment plant are going to just deal with sewage backing up into their home because they don’t want to do the work?
For a more comprehensive analysis of the question, I’d direct your attention towards an anarchist FAQ. I’ll quote a few choice sections below, but the link goes into great detail, comparing and contrasting multiple approaches to handling the problem.
In their own city’s infrastructure? No, probably not. But that doesn’t quite clear things up, so I’ll throw out some numbers as an example:
Do an average of 50 cities have sewage backing up at any given time? How do you fill that gap?
Also, do you have an example of a society that functions like this today? Maybe I’m just stuck thinking inside a box because the society I’m most familiar with is not like that. If so, an example might be helpful.
Obviously only a VERY small fraction of those 50 would be willing to travel to whatever town needs the repair, learn the schematics of their pump model, then swim through their excrement to blindly fix it. But probably easier to just focus on a simpler set of numbers. ↩︎
I mean, sure, if you have 50 meals and need to feed 100 people, 50 people go hungry every day, right? That’s just math. The best we can do in such a situation is choose a random 50 each day and ensure nobody goes two days in a row without eating. The thing is, though, a free society would respond to that mismatch because people wouldn’t tolerate that situation for long if it can be remedied, right? So people would naturally work to expand the production of meals because everyone wants to eat.
Likewise, people would learn to fix the broken sewage systems. They’d do everything they can to remedy the situation. Workarounds, alternatives, upskilling, and so on.
The question of supply and demand is also covered in exhaustive detail in an anarchist FAQ
The Zapatistas in Mexico are probably the best example of an anarchist society functioning today. For a historical example, you could also read about Revolutionary Spain. There’s a good section on an anarchist FAQ about it.
That’s not what they asked.
These are people who have chosen a career in that industry, and spent years training to do so.
Why would someone choose that career path, over, say an artist or fitness coach? What would be their motivation?
I feel like I answered the question completely adequately, but I’d be happy to address your question too.
Why do you think people choose their careers under capitalism? Why would someone choose to be a teacher, a social worker, a mental health counselor, an academic researcher, a vet tech, a graphic designer, for example?
I’d say people choose those careers because they either have an interest/passion for a certain subject/discipline, because they care about improving their community, because they want to help others, or because they just felt like that would be an occupation that suits their abilities. Maybe they chose it because there is some prestige or respect from the peers associated with that occupation. Or, heck, maybe they just chose it because they thought it sounded interesting.
I don’t see why any of that would change at all in an absence of the profit motive.
I chose mine because it pays well.
Also, do you live with your parents? Because these comments definitely have that vibe.
Good for you! I hope you have a comfortable life, you deserve it - so does everyone, regardless of their career or living situation. What do you do for work?
Remember, though, that your experience is not universal. I chose my career because I was interested and passionate about it. I have friends who feel like their careers just chose them, by pure happenstance. Everyone is different.
Thankfully not, I live in a lovely apartment with my extremely handsome husband, who is also anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist and based as fuck.
How about you? Do you live on some billionaire’s sofa, or something? Just curious about why you’re clutching your pearls so firmly about my principled anti-capitalist position. Zero judgment, btw, we are both working class, and I am a huge advocate for working class solidarity.
And this goober thinks people are willing to do it for the love of society.
Nah mate.
Because you’re dealing with literal human faeces, that’s why.
Okay? I’d rather do that than eat it from the rich. It’s not like you can’t wear protective equipment or anything. Heck, give me a set of coveralls and I would wade waist-deep in a septic tank on the daily in return for a society that has no homelessness, no famine, no medical debt, universal access to healthcare and education, to live in a world without pedophile billionaires and corporations constantly fucking us all over for a percentage and for their own sick pleasures. Do you really not see how that would be a better world?
Socialism > communism
I’m an anarchist! If you haven’t heard much about anarchism before, you probably have some misconceptions about it, so I encourage you to watch the Q&Anarchy video series by Thought Slime or have a look through an Anarchist FAQ, because it’s almost definitely nothing like what you think. I personally believe that it’s the most coherent philosophy which adequately explains and addresses all of the problems which plague our society, and which holds the most promise for a path out of the inevitable cycle of the continuous rise and fall of fascism that capitalism makes inevitable.
I’ll check it out.
Counter point: If there is no reason for some people who are capable of contributing to society to actually contribute, at least a good portion of those people will not, but they’ll still take from the system.
The inequity is inherent. There needs to be SOME reward for effort aside from pure altruism.
Edit: the guy with the Patreon shit-talking capitalism is hilarious.
I’m not convinced
I appreciate that, thanks for hearing me out.
This is well known as the “free rider problem”, and the extent to which it is a problem and how it can be addressed is widely discussed by anarchists. I’m sure everyone must be getting sick of me referencing it by now, but our old friend an anarchist FAQ addresses the issue in great detail, but I’ll quote a few relevant paragraphs:
Even if you would be willing to do that, I doubt there would be enough to make a system like this work.
There’s a reason plumbers are so well paid.
Well, you can believe whatever you want to believe, I’m not going to stop advocating for a better world just because you’re a bit squeamish. Nobody is going to tolerate living in a society without functioning sewage systems, so the work would get done, either way, simply because it has to. I think you’re just straight up self-evidently wrong.