Work?

Work (in the sense of wage labour) must be abolished.

i understand what you are trying to say, but i think your theory means we must assume two things:

one, that all work can in some degree be both satisfying while doing it and something savoured afterwards.

two, that all jobs have someone who can meet this criteria.

it would need such a fine balance that it would be impossible to achieve two even if one were correct. of course, it is not too hard to think of necessary work which is not very enjoyable, especially in comparison to other work, which buggers up one.

i think that to some degree we should not define people by their actual job, especially after work is done. these are the dangers of class divides through work, as those with the 'lower' jobs are looked down upon and seen as 'worthy' of their work.

In fact, as meanoldman says, wage work should be abolished and work should be shared around the community. Those who can do something should, those who cannot need not feel disadvantaged. the worse jobs shoud be rotated, the skilled less so as need sees fit. division should be equal when all have done what is witin their power. of course this all sounds rather utopian if you look out a window...

This idea of work doesn't have to wait until a future society. It's possible now. It just needs either courage, desperation or a bit of planning.

But I don't think it's possible for everyone. Some people seem to prefer others to tell them what to do and when.

People wanting to be told what to do:

How about low self esteem? Powerlessness? Alienation?

Oh and to Pingtiao's annoyance:

Bob Black - The Abolition Of Work

Both, I think.

Generally, people have been conditioned since birth to trust and depend on The Leader. We see this in our school systems, governmental systems and also 'folklore'.

Also it's easier to leave the difficult decisions to someone else. At least we can blame them when something goes wrong!

yeah. . But when left to leaders, it so often DOES go wrong!

Perhaps a system adhering to the 'from each according to their ability, to each according to their need' aspect of Marxism could reverse this entirely. The outcome of this, as far as I see it, would be a world where the question is 'is this person's work suited to them?' rather than 'is this person suited to their work?'. At the moment it seems that what "needs" to be done takes preference over who has to do it, in a fair world we would ask ourselves if a job no one wants to do actually needs to be done.

The idea of "wage labour" is possible only if you keep people in a semi-animal state where they look to alpha-males to tell them how things are. This animalisation is done through any avenue available to those who exploit us (who are also "us") including, but not limited to, the mass media, religion, the organs of enforcement and the education (diseducation, conditioning, restricting) system. You can't ban wage labour or just install a new system of governance if you don't recognise why the system is like it is.

oh, can't you?

are you sure?

No, I'm not sure. I'm also not sure the sun will rise tomorrow either, I just think it will, based on what I think I understand. My point about "banning" waged labour is that its just treating a symptom. The capitalists try to ban things constantly as cracks appear in their system - such as free assembly, unions whatever. Its like trying to redistribute wealth by banning bling-bling and fur coats - until you deal with the underlying problem, the symptoms will return sooner or later.

There are things we need to do to survive and to reproduce our society. Get food, shelter, make things, etc. I see no reason why these things can't be done in a way that's fun; I hope for a future where there's no barrier between work and play. 'Play' is something you do when you're not coerced, that's under your own control and that you choose to do. We learn best by play; play should start when we're born and not end until we die.

There's always things that aren't fun in and of themselves, of course. In my work for my collective there's all sorts of cleaning, lugging and meetings that aren't fun -- but we can make them more fun by doing them in a team of friends who have a laugh while doing it.

/\ /\ /\

If society were to become far less centralised and people led a far more independant existence, many 'menial' jobs would disappear. In a small and largely self-sufficient community no-one would have any cause to sit behind a desk, no-one would have to clean up after anyone but themselves (and possibly elderly relatives), there would be no mindless and continuous manufacturing, and no long-distance haulage. All the really crappy jobs in this world are a result of centralised, hierarchial and class-oriented society.

The great detective above mentioned survival priorities for mankind as food, shelter and making things. From these simple needs cannot be inferred any reason whatsoever that the people doing the work should have to do so for 40 hours a week under flourescent lights and against their will.

I haven't read much about what a truly decentralised but modern society might be like and the problems it might face, but small-scale versions of this type of society have recently appeared in the likes of Brazil and Mexico, and by all accounts the people involved have found a kind a contentment that exists nowhere else in the modern world.

I don't know why i bother.