- Capitalism and Alternatives -


Posted by: Red Deathy ( Socialist party, Uk ) on March 24, 1999 at 15:38:33:

In Reply to: free access to each others time posted by Gee on March 23, 1999 at 19:06:11:

Sorry gee, I actually did respond to this one, but the room fubarred it again, the 'biw' post was meant for the 'Bhopal factor' thread. Anyway, here goes agin.

: And people accuse me of being a hopeless idealist! Although, respecting fellow citizens, a bit like respecting their...property!

Yeah, sux dunnit, SDF called me a hopeless idealist as well, lets get together and scragg 'im.

: And as the goods have to be made this means free access to other peoples time, to their lives. What force is going to stop hording of 'free' goods, bribery, blackmail, extortion and the growth of powermongers in its disposal? There would need to be a system of law.

1:No, hording only occurs under scarcity, given that everyone will have free access to as much of everything as they need, there will be no need for any system of regulation, other than self regulation.
2:People would work voluntarilly, as much time as they felt they owed to society, without any immediate reward/payement, otehr than sharing in the goods of society. 'From each according to their abilities, too eacha ccording to their eneds'.

: More like "ive made this chair...shhh, dont let the spokesmen see it - they want if for poor sally, I'll just swap it for that wool ok? and keep quiet about it" - You know thats what i meant. (and its fun making up pretend conversations to illustrate!)

More like:
'Swap you this chair for that wool.'
'Why its your wool, just take some.'
'No, dammit this is *my* Chair, and I'll swap it for *your* wool.'
'you're a looney'
(You're right, dialogue is fun!).

All production would be social production.

: By having this 'free access' to the time, ie a proportion of life, of the people who would build them?

Correct, but everyone gives of their time freely, knowing that they can gain from the free labour of others. Further, rewards of social esteem, and pride in your owrk are available.

: Which is fine, were it so easy. What if the builders got together (a union no less!) and said no, we do a great service and we want a greater say in what goes on, or we want a greater proportion of the communal pot of goods?

1:There would be no 'proffesional' builders, as in the current concept of proffessions, such categories would be less stable as peopel move around doing different jobs.
2:All production would be democratic, the people as vote to build the houses would be the folk as build the houses.
3:They could take as much as they reasonably felt necessary to sustain them from eth pot of goods, its not rationed.

: And its compromise of self interest which will be a *must* have for any successful socialist society - especially one with diverse people.

Self interest would align with communal interest most of the time.

McSpotlight: Sorry about the fubar, RD; we are working on the D.R. Mk II and it should be here any day now but...

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup