10

When we say, "noone will go without food, shelter, or clothing", exactly how generous are we being with that?

Submitted by drh1138 in Socialism

At least in the early stages of a post-revolutionary society, there will still be reactionaries, "an"caps, as well as newly-dispossessed Donald Trumps, Oprah Winfreys, and Elon Musks of the world attempting to reassert their stranglehold over society, and who probably won't contribute much, if anything, in terms of labor and social cooperation.

So what kinds of conditions do we have to guarantee these people? When we say they won't starve or go homeless, will they be living in comfort? Or do they get the "nutrient paste and communal barracks" treatment?

Personally I see no particular reason to guarantee any level of comfort to the reactionaries beyond simple survival.

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

4

AngryData wrote

If you treat different groups of people differently you are just fueling another class struggle down the line.

Learn from the failure of previous communist states, if everyone isn't equal, then nobody is equal, which pretty much guarantees a ruling dictatorial class will assume power and start trampling on the 'undesirables' and once they are done with them they will move on to you.

4

sand wrote

ask again when you've actually got reactionaries at your mercy

also what the heck is a post-revolutionary society

4

red_pepper wrote

If we put all the reactionaries in communal barracks and feed them nutrient paste, they're never going to integrate into post-revolutionary society. If that's our goal, then we might as well cut out the middle man and just send the to gulag. But, I don't think we want that. Our generosity should go as far as our material conditions can allow and should have the same basic guarantees for everyone.

3

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

Just forcibly move capitalists to a different region, strip them of most of their property, and change their last name-- so they'd little influence over anyone. Then give them the same conditions as everyone else so long as they work.

And for the non-capitalist reactionaries: as long as they're non-violent, yea, afford them the same conditions as other workers.

Or do they get the "nutrient paste and communal barracks" treatment? Personally I see no particular reason to guarantee any level of comfort to the reactionaries beyond simple survival.

please no gulags :(

3

XMarxTheSpot wrote (edited )

If they contribute to the national workforce in a meaningful way, they should be guaranteed all of the above rights. It’s really simple: do work, get shit. Obviously business structure would change somewhat under democratic worker ownership, but the work in of itself wouldn’t change much.

Quality of food and housing would depend upon the status of the nation as a whole. The more people contribute, the better off everyone is together. In America, pretty much the entire working class would see an improvement.

2

selver wrote (edited )

100% generous. Abolish class. If you set up a new system to determine who gets to eat and who doesn't, you've already lost and done nothing more than replace one ruler for another.

I don't even care if you work, everyone gets necessities. Any socialist regime that denies people food and shelter deserves to be bombed, stolen from, and overthrown like any capitalist.