The proletarian revolution has erupted. The revolutionaries are seizing the means of production as proletarian uprisings erupt everywhere across the globe. Finally, the bourgeoisie’s grip on the world has been wrested from their hands. The revolutionary vanguard assumes power and the dictatorship of the proletariat is in full effect.
Assuming that the revolutionary vanguard will indeed decide to abolish the division of labor (let’s say that these workers have all read - and understood - Marx and agree with his ideas), people would be given the freedom to skip from one job to the next on a daily, if not hourly basis, as expressed by Marx himself in his famous quote:
“In communist society … makes it possible for me to do this today, that tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, to fish in the afternoon, to herd cattle in the evening, to criticize after eating, as I feel like it, without ever becoming a hunter, a fisherman, a shepherd or a critic.”
Of course, this is a little misleading because Marx and Engels stated that the technological advances developed under capitalism were a necessary precondition for communism. Yet here Marx describes an agrarian society, rather than a highly industrialized one. A more accurate description of the communist workday would have been:
“Communist society … makes it possible for me to toil at the steel factory in the morning, to nurse the sick in the afternoon, to mine coal in the evening, to do accounting after dinner, as I feel like it, without ever becoming a factory worker, a nurse, a miner or an accountant.”
Marx and Engels believed that a variety of activities would invigorate man, leading to higher production. Perhaps many people will welcome this newly instated labor freedom but not all will see the point in learning multiple trades, considering the difficulty and personal effort involved; maybe they just prefer to stick to one job – and why not? Aren’t they free to do whatever labor they want now? There is no guarantee that the labor division will disappear entirely, so the higher production associated with its abolition may not be as much as expected.
At the same time, all capitalist surplus will be redistributed among the workers. Wages will increase and profits will be shared. For working the same hours, workers now earn more. Or, they earn the same working less hours. As we’ve seen, most people will opt to work a little less when they are given more labor freedom – this will certainly be the case when they have just liberated themselves from the exhausting capitalist yoke. It is unlikely that the abolition of the division of labor would right away yield a higher production, let alone a superabundance. Yet without the superabundance, society cannot transcend into higher communism, according to Marx. Thus, an impasse will have been reached after the successful victory over the bourgeoisie.
Given that many people now assume a more leisurely approach to work, production is likely to drop. Thus, the opposite of abundance will be achieved: some shortages may occur – they will occur, and keep occurring, as a still largely selfish population has been given complete freedom to do whatever work they want. The scarcity, in whatever form or intensity it appears, will stir up people’s urges to “have,” which will consolidate their selfishness. Marx identified precisely this desire to “have” as the motor behind the existence of class divisions. The longer the shortages endure, the more people's desire to “have” will turn into a need.
Realizing this, the revolutionary vanguard will do everything in its power to resolve this impasse, thereby affirming itself as a ruling class. Soon, the bourgeoisie will cease to be the exclusive target of revolutionary “force” and the privilege will be extended to all who do not work hard enough to sustain the collective. Violence already proved itself a successful tool in the revolutionary victory, so why not make use of it some more? After all, did not The Communist Manifesto state that the communist “ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions”? Is man’s leisurely approach to work not an unwanted existing social condition? Is it not a social condition arising from man’s selfishness? By taking things easy, isn’t the worker relying on others to create the superabundance for him? How is this not a bourgeois attitude? Must bourgeois attitudes not be stamped out? According to Marx, they must. The division of labor was not abolished for people to be less productive, it was supposed to energize them. Clearly, too many have developed a bourgeois mentality – a selfish alienation that endangers the realization of communism.
Coercive measures will certainly be warranted to safeguard the freshly budding socialist society. The revolutionary vanguard shed blood for it, so it is already accustomed to using violence and force. Driven by its desire to “have” communism, it does not take into account the desires of the workers who just wish to lead leisurely lives. These are not legitimate desires, after all, because they are not socially motivated – these are selfish desires rooted in the workers' alienated past. On a more transcendental level, wasn’t the final goal of communism to resolve all human alienation? Then what signifies a little force when the result will be an energized, new humanity that is globally at peace with itself, forever living in abundance? The end truly justifies the means.
The revolutionary vanguard has every incentive to emerge as a authoritarian class, and it will be incomparably more terrifying than its predecessor. Terrifying will be the word, for this alleged “dictatorship of the proletariat” has already usurped all power – that of the state, the military, law, journalism, banking, manufacturing, distribution, trade, education, … all of it concentrated in one revolutionary vanguard that needs production to increase beyond production under capitalism in order to realize communism. To rise up against this behemoth will be even harder than to revolt against capitalism, the more so since communism - according to the Communist Manifesto - does not even pretend to uphold “Rights”, “Eternal Truths,” or “morality.” The revolutionary vanguard will become a terrifying ruling class.
On the other hand, it should be understood that the revolutionary vanguard will have no choice but to adopt coercive measures if they are serious about establishing communism. For if they don’t, the superabundance will simply not come about: people will settle for a little less work, a little more leisure, a little less pay – and that will be it. But without a superabundance, “the transcendence of private property as human self-estrangement” will never see the light of day: mankind will remain selfish, history will repeat itself, and the classless society will remain out of reach. To save the revolutionary project from failing, the revolutionary vanguard will have to increase production any which way. This pressing need opens the door to coercive leadership, and the socialist paradise will become one of rulers and the ruled.
Adapted from: Deconstructing Karl Marx & Communism
Order your copy here
Check out the blog
Comments