North Korea Increases Aid to Russia, Mos... Tue Nov 19, 2024 12:29 | Marko Marjanovi?
Trump Assembles a War Cabinet Sat Nov 16, 2024 10:29 | Marko Marjanovi?
Slavgrinder Ramps Up Into Overdrive Tue Nov 12, 2024 10:29 | Marko Marjanovi?
?Existential? Culling to Continue on Com... Mon Nov 11, 2024 10:28 | Marko Marjanovi?
US to Deploy Military Contractors to Ukr... Sun Nov 10, 2024 02:37 | Field Empty Anti-Empire >>
Promoting Human Rights in IrelandHuman Rights in Ireland >>
News Round-Up Wed Jan 08, 2025 01:28 | Richard Eldred A summary of the most interesting stories in the past 24 hours that challenge the prevailing orthodoxy about the ?climate emergency?, public health ?crises? and the supposed moral defects of Western civilisation.
The post News Round-Up appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Elon Musk Wants to Buy Liverpool FC, His Father Reveals Tue Jan 07, 2025 19:30 | Will Jones Elon Musk's father has confirmed that the billionaire Tesla owner has expressed an interest in buying?Premier League?team?Liverpool.
The post Elon Musk Wants to Buy Liverpool FC, His Father Reveals appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Is Squid Game the Next Victim of Go Woke, Go Broke? Tue Jan 07, 2025 17:34 | Jack Watson What happened to Squid Game? The Korean show broke records in 2021. But the new season spends tedious scenes exploring a trans character's background. It's the latest victim of go woke, go broke, says Jack Watson.
The post Is Squid Game the Next Victim of Go Woke, Go Broke? appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Facebook Dumps ?Politically Biased? Fact-Checkers That Have ?Destroyed More Trust Than They?ve Creat... Tue Jan 07, 2025 15:20 | Will Jones Facebook is to scrap its fact-checkers after Mark Zuckerberg said they have "been too politically biased and destroyed more trust than they've created" as he pledged to "restore free expression" on the social network.
The post Facebook Dumps “Politically Biased” Fact-Checkers That Have “Destroyed More Trust Than They’ve Created” appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Why Won?t the Jo Cox Foundation Defend Rosie Duffield? Tue Jan 07, 2025 13:11 | David Ward The Jo Cox Foundation has come to the defence of Jess Phillips over the Elon Musk furore. But why was the foundation silent when Labour MP Rosie Duffield received death threats? Could it be her gender critical views?
The post Why Won’t the Jo Cox Foundation Defend Rosie Duffield? appeared first on The Daily Sceptic. Lockdown Skeptics >>
Voltaire, international edition
After Iraq, Libya, Gaza, Lebanon and Syria, the Pentagon attacks Yemen, by Thier... Tue Jan 07, 2025 06:58 | en
Voltaire, International Newsletter N?113 Fri Dec 20, 2024 10:42 | en
Pentagon could create a second Kurdish state Fri Dec 20, 2024 10:31 | en
Resolution condemning the glorification of Nazism Tue Dec 17, 2024 11:08 | en
How Washington and Ankara Changed the Regime in Damascus , by Thierry Meyssan Tue Dec 17, 2024 06:58 | en Voltaire Network >>
|
People, Pollution, Profit and Production
international |
environment |
opinion/analysis
Thursday May 08, 2008 20:43 by Gabhan Gleeson
The last century has been marked by the most explosive growth of pollution and production in the entire history of the humanity. The changes brought about by industrialisation under the economic system of capitalism have lead to a large number of systemic problems. Anarchist communism is in a unique position to solve these systemic problems.
The last century has been marked by the most explosive growth of pollution and production in the entire history of the humanity. The changes brought about by industrialisation under the economic system of capitalism have lead to a large number of systemic problems. Anarchist communism is in a unique position to solve these systemic problems.
When we as workers engage in the production of goods and services, we do so for the benefit of the owners of the means of production. These capitalists, utilise our productive efforts to extract profits. This profit motive underlies many of the ecological and social problems that exist in modern society.
A capitalist, attempting to make profit from the productive endeavour of workers, has no reason to have regard for the health and safety of the workers or those around that are affected by production. The capitalist's main aim, profit, gives a big incentive to engage in any practice that will increase the profitability of production regardless of the effects. The externalised costs, foist onto the community and the worker are known as "externalities of production". They include things like the dumping of chemicals, the lack of safety precautions for both workers and the community and the cost of the eventual disposal of items when they are no longer used. Pollution, in all its forms, is an externality of production.
One way in which capitalism contributes to environmental problems is through overproduction. Many goods are simply unnecessary. When you go to the store to purchase some item of food, it is often contained in a large amount of packaging with colourful images and statements intended to attract you to the purchase of the good. These packages create excess waste. The burden of disposal is then pushed onto the consumer who often has to pay for the effects of disposal.
Many goods are designed to be disposable or break. This has the advantage to the capitalist of creating a constant market for a good that would otherwise saturate the market and lead to a decrease in profits. These disposable goods flooding the market may require nearly the same inputs to produce as goods that last a long time. Again, the worker and consumer is made to pay these hidden costs so that the capitalist can increase profits. In Ireland we are forced to pay the costs of the irresponsible production of capitalists when we pay bin charges. When you hear the slogan "polluter pays", you should rather hear "make the worker pay".
Advertisement is one of the most important predatory instruments of the capitalist. It is used to convince people of the need for consumption of goods. Through the study of neuroscience and psychology the capitalist has created an intricate science that can take advantage of our weaknesses in order to convince us that we need things that are unimportant or even harmful.
In addition to all this the monopoly of the means of production also stands to ensure that the consumer has no real choice in the types of products that exist. The capitalist will never create items that can not maximise profit. The large array of goods that are produced create an illusion of choice, yet it is nearly impossible to purchase goods which reduce externalities by being durable or by being produced responsibly. Even if good were so produced they would be restricted to those who could afford to pay the premium that the capitalist would require to make up for the reduced production.
We hear the slogan that capitalism generates steady progress in innovation. Yet what type of innovation does it create? It creates innovation that maximise profits. A quick look at these innovations makes the claim look a lot less positive.
The history of industrialisation has largely been a process of deskilling the worker. Deskilling is the innovation of processes by the capitalists to create productive jobs that require the least amount of knowledge, thereby widening the labour pool. This has the dual effect of making jobs miserably boring and forcing wages down by increasing the supply of labour available for a given productive endeavour.
Anarchist Communism provides an alternative society which is capable of creating solutions to these systemic problems. As anarchist communist workers we will be engaging in production for ourselves. There will be no profit since this would simply be stealing from ourselves. The lack of a profit motive means that the generation and distribution of goods takes place on an entirely different playing field.
Without a profit motive, there is no reason no reason to try to displace external costs of production such as pollution onto the worker and the consumer. Production of goods will be a cooperative enterprise between the community and the workers. The worker has no interest in dumping toxic chemicals into the community, especially since they almost certainly live in it. Similarly, they are unlikely to avoid safety precautions, since it is their own lives that they save! The worker can take pride in their work.
The production of long-lasting durable items is not disadvantaged in anarchist communism as it is in capitalism. We, as a society, can take a bit longer in production and make 100-year light-bulbs and machines that work for generations without fear that the demand will subside because there is no need to maximise production. When one person no longer needs some good they can give it to another such that the overall demand for goods is reduced. Reduction in the demand of goods in anarchist communism does not result in the same sort of economic downward trend that exists in capitalism. Instead it would translate into more free time for workers.
Without a competitive environment for making profits, there is no reason to spend huge amounts of productive effort in packaging. Why create extra work for no reason? In cooperative production advertisement ceases to exist altogether. Instead it is replaced with information. There is no incentive to trick people into thinking your product is good since you make no profit from increasing the amount of production.
Real choice can come about in production and consumption. People can decide what they want, but only those things which people are willing to produce can be made. The choice of production will be a balanced cooperation amongst ourselves - one in which real communication can take place because it is no longer driven by attempts at extracting profits.
The entire notion of innovation will change fundamentally as well. The innovations that will occur in an anarchist communist society are those that make the workers and consumers happiest. The creation of machines that serve only to make jobs where the worker engages with production as an automaton will almost certainly disappear. New more interesting jobs will be created. We will innovate for the enjoyment, safety and well-being of everyone rather than the few who happened to start with capital.
In anarchist communism the consumers' desires will be fulfilled in a way that makes the worker more happy and comfortable. And rightly so, since the consumer is the worker! No longer will we be organising the production of goods to advantage the rich. We will be doing it to make our lives better. The quality of life, which includes the quality of the environment in which we live, will be in our own hands.
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (1 of 1)
Jump To Comment: 1This is an excellent piece Gav, it’s very interesting and thought provoking. However, I’d like to offer a critique on a few of the points that have been raised.
“When we as workers engage in the production of goods and services, we do so for the benefit of the owners of the means of production.”
I wasn’t sure whether it was the intended meaning of the comment, but this line sounds like we want to work for the benefit of capitalists. I think it is important to point out that we do in fact work for the benefit of ourselves, or else, why would we work. Chopping it in half and adding the next line might be more appropriate. “…capitalists, utilise our productive efforts to extract profits.”
“Advertisement is one of the most important predatory instruments of the capitalist. It is used to convince people of the need for consumption of goods.” And “[Advertising] trick[s] people into thinking your product is good…”
Although my views on this certainly only inhabit the realm of personal opinion, I would have to say that I doubt the validity of this statement. I feel that placing too much emphasis on the effects of advertising on consumers’ behaviour leads one to the conclusion that we are somewhat brainwashed and incapable of making rational decisions when faced with corporate advertising. I feel that other factors, beyond advertising, have a greater influence on our consumption habits. For example, the amount of disposable income consumers have, must be taken into consideration. I don’t think that any amount of advertising actually convinces people to consume well beyond their means (despite inevitable exceptions). I would hold the view that advertising, for the most part represents our existing desires, and that it merely points out how we might fulfil those wants. I don’t particularly believe that advertising creates those desires. I would hope that in an Anarchist society, however, we might collectively and democratically decide that we should abstain from meeting some desires, for obvious reasons.
“The creation of machines that serve only to make jobs where the worker engages with production as an automaton will almost certainly disappear.”
Again, I can only postulate on a future Anarchist society, but I would be cautious of the idea that we could ever eliminate jobs that only engage individuals in menial ways. I think that mass production is inevitable in big societies, and that seems to require a lot of people to do pretty dull jobs for the most part. I feel that identifying the alienation that we feel as workers, with the use of technology in production, flips the argument the wrong way. If capitalists introduced production practices that allowed everyone to use all of their creative abilities and eliminated machines that made us “automatons,” would our alienation still exist? I feel that the role of technology is entirely overshadowed by the real problem we face in our work lives, we don’t the own the means of production and there is no democratic control of the workplace. I feel that these are the real alienating aspects of work. (I appreciate that the word “alienation” was never used in the text, but I feel that it was implied in the argument).
“The history of industrialisation has largely been a process of deskilling the worker.”
I would that posit that this argument is invalidated given the history of the development of welfare states as an example. I accept that contemporaneously we have seen “deskilling” in a number of job sectors in the economy, many of which are now taken up by women, migrants or part-time workers in the labour force, but I would argue against the totality of the statement in the text. As an historical aspect of the welfare state in Britain and Ireland, the state education system developed at a time when industrialisation demanded better-educated workers and it has continued ever since. The process of providing a highly skilled labour has only intensified in Ireland in modern times, with the provision of free third level education to meet the demands of corporate and state employers, for such a workforce.
Anyway, I was very impressed by the scope of the piece and I hope my comments might allude to some interesting discussion.