I know google is my friend and all so feel free to direct me back there as this certainly isn’t your job. Google defines communism as: “a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.” The whole paid “according to abilities and needs”. I’m ofc 100% for people being able to afford what they need, but what would the abilities part mean? Thanks!
Hi anon,
Don’t worry I’m always willing to talk communism - and I actually think that this shows some of the problem with learning through google, because that definition is a fundamental misunderstanding of communism. (I’m a very big believer that learning through conversations and relationships is really important to radical change).
So this definition is a complete misunderstanding of a very famous quote: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!”
There are two fundamental errors in google’s definition. The first is that the slogan makes a clear distinction between needs and ability - you give according to your to ability and you receive according to your need. But google is suggesting that you receive based on a combination of abilities and needs.
The second is that it brings in the idea of being paid - which already limits the sort of society that you’re imagining. It’s not that cash is necessarily incompatible with a communist society. But communism is envisioning radical transformation and maybe money wouldn’t be necessary.
If you read the quote in it’s context (and wrestle with Marx’s very Victorian prose) - you can see to what extent communism is about envisioning a radically different world:
In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly – only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!
I actually think that the idea of everyone contributing to society according to their abilities is almost as important, radical and exciting transformation as everyone’s needs being met.
When you think about how work is organised at the moment, it’s organised by employers or done on an unpaid and unvalued basis. While work can be shit, it also can have all sorts of benefits besides money - doing something that society values is actually a pretty basic human need. People who are excluded from the Labour market are often excluded from those experiences of undertaking meaningful work and contributing to society (although obviously others do huge amounts of important work and aren’t paid for it). That’s such a waste - work could be divided up so differently so that the question for everyone was ‘what can you do?’ Think of all those job applications that are wasted opportunity - all these people who want to do work that needs to be done, and only one will be allowed to. Think of how hard it is to work with a chronic illness or mental health difficulties, because you are expected to fit a slot your employer has created for you - you can’t organise your work based on who you are.
The other point - which Marx expresses in somewhat abstract terms as ‘the antithesis between mental and physical labour’ - is that it shouldn’t be that some people get to do work they enjoy, or that gives them a sense of achievement and they have some control over - while others have to do work they hate all day. Work could and should be organised to meet people’s needs and recognise our amazing abilities and talents.
