[lbo-talk] To each according to work

[andie nachgeborenen]

I love the way Carrol imposes his values on everybody. What about those who like to work? Hey, you, Michelangelo, get down off that ladder, we don't care if you haven't finished the statue. Will there be leisure police like they have in France to make sure that no one is working more than 16 hours a week? (35, there, or until recently.) I recall one old German grouch who attacked Adam Smith for assuming the labor was a burden as opposed to a form of self-expression. Though perhaps Carrol means necessary labor. What, however, is that? Is teaching necessary labor? Suppose I work 16.5/wk hrs on class prep (not unrealistic), I will be in violation of socialist legality and what is more, prohibited from teaching my classes, which would be an additional several hours. All of which silliness show s the danger that Carrol is usually keenly aware of about not getting to detailed about a  future society. Best to say: we'd like to maximize free time from unpleasant

 necessary labor so that people can do more of what they like, including work if the choose. Even on necessary labor.

--- On Sun, 4/20/08, Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:


> From: Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] To each according to work
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Sunday, April 20, 2008, 6:29 PM
> Robert Wrubel wrote:
> > 
> > Miles Jackson <cqmv at pdx.edu> wrote:
> > 
> >   "Are there enough people intrinsically
> interested in cleaning public toilets so that we
> >  need no social or economic coercion to make sure all
> the public toilets are cleaned?"
> > 
> >   (BW) Apparently, no one on this list was in the
> military, or has heard of KP duty. Although the military is
> a coercive system, there is a difference between doing
> something because a sadistic sergeant is screaming at you,
> and doing it because you realize it has to be done.
> > 
> >   All the unpleasant work just needs to be divided by
> the number of physically capable people in the society and
> each person then required to do his/her part.
> 
> In addition, there simply is not that much work that is
> unpleasant in
> and of itself; it is the long hours of such work that makes
> it seem
> impossibly obnoxious. And cleaning toilets, though always
> the example
> given, is really not a good example to use. Try shovelling
> the plaster
> dust that drifts up into the loft of a plaster factory in
> 100@ Kansas
> heat. The friend that had that job said he had to go
> outside every 40
> minutes or so to dig the hardened plaster out of his nose
> and ears. But
> divided up even that would not be all that horrible.
> 
> What is essential for socialism is that no one have more
> than a 16 hour
> week. Then there is no hardship imposed by assigning people
> (coercion)
> to nasty work.
> 
> If consumption has to be reduced, so be it. Leisure is what
> counts and
> everything else is secondary.
> 
> Carrol
> 
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ