Recently there's been a slight spat on twitter arguing about the relationship of Work and leftism in general, this is about as far as I know on how to even approach this:
As it is now, work can be described as trading your personal time producing/providing commodities /services for an arbitrary amount of fiat usually given by someone that owns the means to carry out such tasks, whom then takes said commodities/services to be sold at a much higher margin in comparison to the amount of fiat given
however, the reason why someone would accept this is due to how unless one owns (or partially owns in the form of stocks/shares/investments etc.) said means/platform (or decides to be a landlord), work is largely a necessity, welfare even if provided either does not suffice or often is under threat of being removed by changes in the political sphere, making it's existence incredibly frail and ineffective
Now the usual idea thrown around is such work (and it's relations) being non-existent after achieving communism, the point of contention comes during transition to such a state, or if certain situations would necessitate a regression to it.
>transition to communism? why not just go for it immediately?
I see alot of arguments over the need for transition, mostly centered around how currently we already have a surplus of production, but this surplus exists within capitalism and is unlikely to be sustainable or unexploitative, along with how even if climate change, zero-profits and growing governmental distrust intensify, there is no guarantee that the major powers of the world will all be weakened enough for a global revolution, thus resulting in a similar scenario of the post-WW1/2 period, where nations affected less significantly by these catastrophes became the dominant world powers (well, specifically the united states) , which would (for a time) eliminate the chance of a global revolution and thus an immediate transition to communism (since these world powers would no doubt flex their power and provide moral or literal incentives for their citizens to crush whatever revolutions would occur globally), additional factors include historical racial griefs, ethnic tensions, religious differences/parties, class sympathies (sure, jeff bezos is deplorable, but the average person would still very much question or disagree the repression of local businesses, especially if it's a local food-store they like or something along the lines of petty bourgeoisie etc.) which are unlikely to dissolve without significant repression (especially in the case of religion), in short unless the stars align in a miraculous display of spontaneous global commitment and cooperation towards achieving communism, this seems incredibly unlikely
>what's the issue with work then? how could it still be necessary? isn't automation already pretty advanced? don't humans naturally productively carry out their interests, thus merely needing mutual aid to guide them?
(Before I go on, I must clarify for those of whom are truly unable to act, like someone in a vegetative state, or recovering from traumatic experiences, this doesn't apply)
Message too long. Click
to view full text.
155 posts and 23 images omitted.