Since the communists on Reddit couldn't offer a reasonable answer to this question, I offer this question to this potentially more sophisticated board.
So the question goes: In a communist society, what benefits/reasons are there for a farmer to produce a surplus of food that can be distributed to the local urban community that capitalism does not offer?
Under a capitalistic/free market system, a farmer's incentive to produce food is their ability to sell that food for an amount of money that can be spent on other needed expenses, so is there a superior incentive for a farmer to produce a surplus of food for others under a communist nation such as the Soviet Union or Cuba?
Thank you for your time at look at this, I am deeply interested in your responses!
Question for Lefty Pol on Food Surpluses
Other urls found in this thread:
Large scale farming wouldn’t be done by a single farmer. As for what incentive, possibly labor vouchers.
Accidentally saved. My bad
*saged
Fml
not getting gulagd
seriously though, depends on what stage of development we're talking about and furthermore what you even understand to be a "farmer". the owner of that land who makes people work there? the guys slaving away there and hardly getting paid enough to sustain themself?
on the example of the soviet union and the collectivized farms one of their major advantages was simply less work, free time, access to culture and education and even holidays, plus the social security of not being dependend on a good harvest for them personally alone to stay alive during the winter.
not doing your share of work obviously also has its consequences still. besides getting your ass handed for sabotage.
Mutualism. Person one provides a surplus to person two, who does the same to others, repeat.
In capitalism, due to supply and demand, when supply (of food) outpaces demand the supply must drop. Food surplusses in capitalism can't be redistributed for free either. In Socialism and communism, food is distributed according to need.
Basically in capitalism, food and resources are wasted because they're made for profit, aside from the occasional charitable donation. In communism, there is no profit motive, only a moral motive, which also means no waste.
My dude, this isn't going to work, yes some people are altruistic but it's not good policy to assume everyone is or will be, even under socialism, especially in the first stages.
Begin the culling by targeting non-essential degenerates (people who don't make food and the like) through identifying them through brain scans and then immediately electrocuting them. Don't make the revolution last longer than it needs to; we need communism ASAP.
Nigga no one should be making food, that shit should be automated to the point where no one has to farm anymore
Besides doing it for your fellow man, so he can help you in kind? I guess labor vouchers, as said.
Large scale farming is generally done not by a single person in these societies. Farming is collectivized.
Also, don't bother going to Reddit, they tend to be garbage.
Isn't that why the Kulaks were killed anyways?
nigga what
Automation will likely not come immediately. At the very least there are going to have to be a few people manning the semi-autonomous machines.
We can't have communism with people who don't really have an internal motivation to uphold it for anything beyond economic reasons. Communism, or at least its refined form, will be shed of all those who lack the morality that characterizes the meaning of such a post-scarcity society. You can always repress people to follow the law, of course, but the best way to get things to flow is to have them be intrinsically motivated, which evidently not all people are.
That's kind of the point of communism, no? It's in our own class interest. It's not for morals.
Are you trying to imply that there's the ability for brain scans to detect how "communist" one person is? That's absolutely insane.
You're fucking with me, right?
Class interest is moral though. It is the greater interest of the working class, above the materialistic and lesser desires of the ruling one. Brain scans could be used to detect… I don't know, some kind of structure or wiring that identifies individuals as adept at living in communism. Regardless, surely any quality of a person could be ascertained through brain scans, even their "communist-level", although the only measure that matters is their intrinsic desire for and comprehension of the meaning of the communist society, to be able to optimally live and function within it.
labor credits followed by full near full automation of farming(at which point even if someone slacks off for twelve hours a week it'll still work) is the best explanation I can think of.
do you need an explanation of why labor credits aren't money?
It's not that it's not moral, it's that the fact it's materially in our interest is more important.
okay no
that's sounding dangerously like eugenics fam
just for the sake of the fact OP is clearly new to all this, you might want to explain it to him
youtube.com
t. benis gogshodd
It's true that yes, we would have the benefits of material aspects, although what matters of that as well is the living that is facilitated in such an environment. It seems to me that some people just aren't piqued by good environments – that despite being in FALC, they will still take very little of it because of their desires. So it seems with certain people now, that despite them being away from factors that could corrupt them, they remain in this sort of perspective which fails to enjoy the intricacies of what is to be. This is like quickly eating a little from each of twenty boxes of chocolates instead of savoring, for greater benefit, one box. It seems some people are just naturally this way, although I could be wrong.
In communism we will be above eugenics – there will be no breeding. Rather, there will be a community of well-knowing individuals who have the nature and meaning of the post-scarcity society as their commonality.
What the fuck are you even talking about?
also read critique of the gotha programme
google it OP, or check the reading list
vouchers aren't money
Nah , fuck that shit
I hate projecting like this since you can never predict how history will unfold but since you people love it il do it.
Farms get colectivised, Oposing owners or farmers get shot or gulaged (this is less of a problem today since agriculture take way less manpower than it used to).
Farmers who don't rebel get their lives and communities improved however possible via schools worker rights or other imediate needs, this is especialy important in the third world.
Production proceeds as normal except distribution is based on need not on buyers probably using established suply chains. (planing can be centralized or not)
Yes farmers are essentially working with guns to their heads, but their lives should be the same if not improved.
By now communist ideology is widespread, so people are well aware of the importance of work and how humans are interdependent, farming is a job like any other and people may be paid with labour vouchers instead of money.
By now we can expect automation to make rural labor even less common than it already is (automation should be one of the main focuses of any self respecting socialist movement)
Communist mindset is the norm, people work because that is and has always been the human condittion, automation should be widespread to the point where work takes a way smaller chunk of someone's day than today.
Money is no longer needed, people just take what they need and want.
Farming probably takes almost no workers and those who work at it are probably biologists and engineers also studying and perfecting production.
Now, serious, correct answer and full .
There is no difference between communism and socialism in that regard.
Farmer produces value that he contributes to society and retains commodities that equal what he produced in that regard.
The only difference between the two, of course, that the only thing that determines said value is labour, not the arbitrary privilege of ownership of either the land, the means of production or the labourer himself.
Oops TYPOs.
Hey it is OP here and I just want to express thanks for all of these answers to the question. While some of these answers are troubling to me in a moral sense, I am still glad you guys were able to provide such insightful responses.
They will likely have shorter hours and such and that obviously makes a job more desirable.
Ask me more questions if you want I'm happy to answer.
They in turn get the services of others with no strings or sum shit.
Like if he needed a windmill built a building group would be all like "hey dude, we help you make food so we in turn can have more/better food."
Basically, mutual aid.
Also this
Flag checks out
You should clarify this as that they are not being forced to farm, just that counter-revolution will not be tolerated and that land cannot be denied form others farming it if they do nothing.