phryk 🏴"All is for all! If the man and the woman bear their fair share of work, they have a right to their fair share of all that is produced by all, and that share is enough to secure them well-being. No more of such vague formulas as “The Right to work,” or “To each the whole result of his labour.” What we proclaim is THE RIGHT TO WELL-BEING: WELL-BEING FOR ALL!"
sofia ☮️🏴@phryk "All is for all! If the man and the woman bear their fair share of work,"
so that what "to all" means 🤔.
@sofia Yeah, that "if" was a bit of a sour note, tho I assume it's there to appease the protestant work ethic we're suffering under in Europe.
@phryk i dunno, it feels like it kinda defeats the whole point of the communism thing. seems to me like even he doesn't quite trust the idea of a society where you get everything and never have to give anything in return…
but instead of being able to have some stuff, it's it's just all or nothing. be productive enough or face expulsion.
i mean, i don't hate Kropotkin or anything, but there's a reason i'm not an ancom…
@sofia Yes, I can definitely relate to that, tho he also says that it's impossible to judge if/how "productive" somebody is. Also I think part of this is because the book was written before any complex automation - in his time all the machines still needed constant tending by people.
Nowadays most people have access to the means of automation and that's a big, BIG game changer IMO.
@phryk yeah, he kinda rejected labour value, but his theory of exploitation seems very marxy which is rooted in that…
and yes, i very agree on the automation part. this is also why i think distribution is so important.