Removing money from the current economic equation would strike most people as impossible, unthinkable, absolutely imponderable. Everything we do, every transaction we make, from a simple cup of tea to sending a space probe to Mars, from birth to death and at every step in between, money has become a necessary part of getting what we require. It has become an accepted, entrenched method of acquiring anything and everything but it wasn't always so and in a genuine socialist system money will be shown to have been an unnecessary, wasteful and divisive way of ordering world communities.
When initially presented with the notion of a world without money the first imperative is the willingness to contemplate a huge paradigm shift, to put aside all familiar long-held views and preconceived notions and to enter into an adventure of discovery that there is a place for all at the table, that it doesn't entail regression to the Dark Ages and that the welfare and progress of people doesn't have to come at cost to the environment.
1. Work
It is well recognised by experts in the health arena that work is one of the most stressful areas of life for reasons such as long hours, extended travelling time to and from place of employment, risk of job loss, lack of security of tenure including competition both within and without, inflexible working practices, difficulty getting release for major personal events such as bereavement, long-term illness of a spouse or partner, or even short-term care of a sick child. Loss of employment can put stress on the whole family, sinking it into debt, causing day-to-day difficulties with the budget and in many cases leading to loss of the home.
When money is not required in exchange for work and when, instead, all contribute their skills, expertise and/or manpower in return for open access to the requirements of life then we can begin to see a different motivation enter the whole concept of the “work” scenario. A moneyless world will free up millions of workers now tied to some very stressful occupations dealing only in (other people's) money – banking, mortgage brokering, insurance; those occupied in the collection of rates, taxes and utility payments; those in security work such as guards and armoured truck staff engaged only in protecting and moving money and other “valuables” – millions of workers who, when considered logically, currently fulfil no useful function and contribute nothing to society that improves that society.
Right now, worldwide, are millions of would-be workers who are sidelined in one way or another, without employment or scratching on the edges of a black economy and in some of the more “developed” countries we find some termed “scroungers” in current-day parlance.
Within the capitalist system there has to be a pool of workers unable to find work in order to keep the bargaining power in favour of the employers who strive to keep wage levels down, whereas if there is a shortage of suitable labour the bargaining power switches to the employees who try to force wage levels up. The fact that a few “developed” countries have systems which pay a percentage of workers to remain unemployed (receive benefits) is a price the capitalists are prepared to pay to maintain the tensions in society. Encouraging the employed to think that they are the ones subsidising the benefits system maintains one fissure within the working class. Also, allowing a large number of unemployed to be without benefits would cause too many problems for the capitalists with possibilities of mass looting, rioting and damage to their property
When all work is seen as legitimate and deserving of recognition, from the humblest occupations – collecting and sorting waste, stacking shelves in our stores, keeping the utilities working even in the worst weather, repairing our shoes – to those which are perceived as more elite – heart surgeons, ground-breaking scientists or cutting-edge technicians; when all are respected for their contribution simply by having the same right of access to the commonly produced goods, humankind will have truly developed to a higher level. This change in emphasis regarding human worth would, as a matter of course, give all the opportunity for further personal development in areas of individual choice which leads to the second topic for consideration.
2. Increased Leisure Time
With so many extra hands on deck working hours will be able to be considerably reduced which, with the knowledge that one's work is not tied to the ability to feed and clothe the family, to house them and provide all the other requirements of life, is to remove the stress at a stroke.
Decreased time, but working for the common good rather than increased time working only for personal remuneration. Less working time was the oft-repeated refrain in the early days of the technology era. Workers were to benefit from machine-operated production systems, computers would be able to handle many of the mundane operations previously done manually, the working week would be much reduced, maybe even leading to job-sharing and part-time employment. In fact this state of affairs never materialised and more employees found longer working hours became part of their conditions of employment, earlier agreements having been gradually eroded to the benefit of the employers.
In socialism, with millions released from wage slavery in the then redundant financial sector free to be a part of the production, distribution and services sectors, with the black economy and “illegals” no longer threatening paid workers (pay being redundant) there will be a huge reduction in individual necessary work time. When there is no profit incentive the emphasis will be on the production of quality goods from quality materials and no one need choose an inferior item based on cost. Providers of utilities such as electricity and gas, water and communications will be able to have sufficient workers to install, service, repair and develop their installations more efficiently and effectively. If there is work that no one is prepared to undertake then an alternative will need to be found democratically.
Without the constraints that we have today the workplace will become a different place, one of cooperation not competition, where we work for the benefit of all, not for the profit of a few. The lines between work and leisure may well be much more blurred than in today's scenario. People will have time, time to be creative, to learn different and multiple skills and to enjoy the time they spend working. Leisure activities seen as hobbies now – vehicle maintenance, gardening, DIY home improvements, baking, the making of all kinds of hand-made items, giving or receiving educational and training courses – could well form part of one's service to the community, bringing a greater satisfaction and contributing to individual development generally, one of the aims of socialism. With more leisure time available it is also highly likely that more 'work' would be created in the leisure area, whether sports complexes, theatrical and music productions and educational courses in the widest sense and with unlimited opportunities for the active participation of those who choose it.
3. Housing
Adequate shelter, a “right” for all enshrined in the United Nations Charter, is still unavailable to millions (billions, probably). There is absolutely no automatic right to housing within the capitalist system. All must pay. To pay, all must work. It is no matter that you work long and hard and that your children work long and hard and don't go to school. All that matters is that you have enough to buy or rent or build. Maybe you did have enough before the housing market bubble burst and the “worth” of your house went down while the interest rates went up. Well, tough! Look around you. See the empty houses and FOR SALE and foreclosure signs. These people must be living somewhere now. There is always housing stock available – if you can pay the going rate.
This is one very obvious benefit of not having money. The recent economic crisis has focussed many home-owners' minds. Why should anyone be secure one month and the next find themselves in queer street? Can anybody justify one individual's multiple home ownership while others live in slums, in cars, in cardboard boxes on the streets? Please! When the majority of us have eventually decided that this scenario is unacceptably obscene we can at last begin to move to a humanitarian way of ordering our societies. Housing for all. Decent housing for all. Materials that are free and belong to all of us. Our architects, builders, plumbers, plasterers, electricians, etc. etc. will all work for free – they also need homes to live in. New housing can be built to the best specifications using appropriate materials, incorporating adequate insulation and services with regard to environmental protection and best use of alternative energy.
Respect for people and respect for the environment. Decisions made democratically as to best use of urban space vacated by the money businesses; by communities wanting to refurbish or upgrade their older stock. The balance between urban and rural will no doubt change. In some parts of the world there will be a mass exodus back to productive farmland, reclaimed for local use and consumption rather than continuing to grow cash crops for export. Decisions will be taken based on the well-being of communities and determined by the requirements of those communities and there will be no constraints or limitations linked to profit for a third party.
4. Health care
As a result of huge stress reduction, no more worrying about salary or wages from the job, no more worrying about keeping up the payments on the house, increased leisure time – all these various factors will surely result in improved relationships all round and, quite soon, a healthier workforce.
At present there are huge variations in standards of health care around the world and also massive discrepancies in availability and monetary cost to the recipients, Universal health care simply dos not exist. Again it is tied in to the ability to pay. Let's remove this barrier to good health and care of the sick by removing the money element and offer all services, treatments, drugs and medicines free of charge. Hospitals and clinics then will be free of top-heavy budget management and will be able to access resources, whether manpower, equipment or drugs, according to their requirements and not limited by financial constraints. Medical researchers, now mostly tied to global corporations and limited by them in the areas of their research, will be able to concentrate on eradicating disease and providing the best remedies for all comers, not just those with insurance. World diseases such as malaria, tuberculosis and polio will soon be a thing of the past when money, too, is history.
Work and training in one of the many varied avenues of health care will be open to those from the pool of post-money redundant sectors. With the shift from a market economy to societies geared to fulfilling human needs there will probably be more priority given to preventive medicine and appropriate information on suitable diet and healthy living, which leads us to consider the topic of food.
5. Food
Currently the growing, processing and distribution of food is largely dominated by transnational corporations solely in the pursuit of profit. The consumer appears to have a huge choice of goods and numerous decisions to make at each aisle of the supermarket but often the choices are superficial, not actually the choices being sought. For instance, notice the difficulty of buying a processed food which doesn't contain soya. The soya has probably been genetically modified and the labelling could be unhelpful. The choice becomes buy in ignorance or acceptance, or do without.
It's well known that products are laced with added sugar, salt, monosodium glutamate etc. to create a certain dependency and craving for more. Last year's problems of melamine-laced pet foods which caused animal deaths in the importing countries were followed this year by melamine-laced milk products causing infant deaths and multiple illnesses in China, spreading fear to importing countries. There can be only one reason for food to be contaminated deliberately (apart from a mass assassination attempt or the desire to spread fear among the population) and that is in the pursuit of greater profit.
Africa, a net exporter of food until the post-colonial days of the 1960s, became a victim again, indebted to the World Bank and IMF. Recipient of highly subsidised dumping of food from rich countries (US and Europe) the result has been that the countries there have to grow cash crops for export in order to pay off some of the growing debt creating food shortages for the domestic population, many of whom had been forced off ancestral lands (for the growing of cash crops) and who were then without the means of subsistence. There have been a number of studies which reveal there is no problem feeding a world population considerably larger than today's. There is an enormous wastage of food in the rich world. The major problem for the hungry in the poorest countries is lack of cash.
Food, if regarded simply as fuel for the body, should be clean – free from contaminants, chemicals and the like; fresh – the more local the better; and nutritious. Free food for all would come with the bonus of knowing there would no longer be any incentive to adulterate ingredients. The question of “FAIR TRADE” wouldn't arise as all along the line farmers, producers, pickers, packers and distributors would have the same motivation to provide good clean food knowing they have the same access as the consumers. This has to be a win-win situation. Another winner in this scenario would be the environment.
6.
Environment
Bear in mind the aim here is an excursion into the benefits of money
totally disappearing from our lives; for all to have access
to the
necessities of life and in return to contribute their effort for the
common good. Havoc has been wreaked on the environment by corporations
and others with the full consent of successive governments around the
world – for the acquisition of necessary resources but using
unnecessarily harmful methods. Peak oil and climate change are terms on
everyone's lips and the general consensus from Joe Public is that
something needs to be done – and fast.
If we remove the agents for profit (corporations and governments of the
capitalist system) and engage in honest democracy of the people, by the
people and for the people decisions can be made to halt damaging
practices and implement methods of farming, fishing, mining,
extraction, energy production, manufacturing etc. that do no harm to
either man or environment. Safe working practices will be the norm.
Resources can be protected and used carefully when incentive for their
rape and pillage is gone. Energy usage can be reduced drastically in
1001 ways using alternative energies, building using integral
insulation and energy conservation techniques, vastly reducing
transport as work and societal practices change, stopping air freight
of “luxury” and unnecessary goods, producing and
manufacturing locally wherever feasible, etc.
Local communities could have the final say on resources in their area
with the possibility that sometimes the resource will be deemed
off-limits and so remain untouched, and if no one is prepared to work
mining or tunnelling to extract a particular resource then an
alternative will need to be found. With a system of no money there can
be no forced labour or unacceptable working practices. Resources will
be valued for what they are, not what price they can be sold for, and
protection of the environment can be put firmly on the agenda as
demanded by the world's majority.
7.
War and Conflict
Envisaging this newly emerging moneyless world, it is apparent that
cooperation rather than competition will be the driving force to its
development and the glue that will bind communities. Having removed the
profit incentive and made access to resources free, production will be
for use only. There are no losers in this scenario, all are to benefit
from the new world order. It's just that a tiny minority might have
difficulty in coming round to see it that way. As a consequence of this
totally different emphasis – freedom of access and no
monetary
element – it isn't difficult to accept that military forces
will
become redundant.
Wars have always been about control of territory for resources and are
usually promoted in the name of democracy, expansion abroad or
protection of the domestic population from threat of real or
manufactured enemies but which always utilise armies recruited from the
mass of the population and sacrifice workers in the service of the
capitalist cause. Internal conflicts involving government backed forces
against “insurgents”/“freedom
fighters”,
breakaway independence groups/terrorists – when looked at
rationally are (a) about lack of rights for certain sections of the
community, groups deprived of their own self-determination; tensions
deliberately fostered betweens sections of society so the elites can
keep control (divide and rule) and (b) only temporarily dealt with (if
at all) through force. If the causes aren't dealt with the
effects are
sure to reappear. Dealing with the causes, injustices, lack
of access,
etc. needs the pawns in the game to recognise that that is what they
are and to join forces against those
controlling them, putting the
power of decision making into the hands of the majority and ending the
reasons for future conflict.
No need for ownership or use of war material will render a massive
service to the environment, saving resources on a huge scale and
stopping pollution of the planet from the harmful waste created in both
their production and deployment besides avoiding millions of deaths.
Saving lives could become the new unarmed forces raison
d’être. Bodies of fit, well-trained,
well-resourced,
motivated men and women available to deal with the effects of natural
disasters and unexpected calamities would be one of a number of ways to
deploy the willing volunteers, a civil action force for true
humanitarian intervention.
8.
Media
and Advertising
Media without money? In today's system we buy newspapers and magazines,
a licence to watch television plus payments to a provider for umpteen
other channels and subscribe to internet providers for access to the
world wide web. If something arrives at your house for free, it has
been paid for by advertising and advertising gets its money from
services provided to businesses, and businesses get their money from
customers buying the products and services.
Without the profit motive it would be possible to watch a film or
interesting documentary uninterrupted by advertisements that always
intrude at a higher level of decibels. Junk mail would be redundant;
another positive for the environment. Ugly advertising hoardings
crowding town spaces and roadsides would give way to more thoughtful
and aesthetically pleasing additions to our visual surroundings. Many
talented artists would be freed up to turn their expertise in more
socially acceptable and useful directions. Media, in general, could
become what the people want, not what they're told they want. Real
choice, real variety, true information and not warped by an individual
proprietor's view. This could be such an exciting area with much more
community involvement from planning to production. Released from wage
slavery and with the intellect free from worry about unemployment,
housing, health care etc. etc. the capacity for individual personal
development will expand considerably.
9.
Education
In
its broadest sense education is just that – individual
personal development. The most fulfilled individuals are those who can
reach the end of their lives knowing they have spent their time
exploring to the limits the areas that most interest and motivate them.
These individuals are not satisfied by or limited to an eight-hour day,
they continue willingly for extended hours because they enjoy and are
motivated by what it is they are doing. Conversely, of the various
officially recognised systems of education available in the world today
none come close to encouraging youngsters to pursue their own
individually chosen path in life. Institutional education is about
fitting young children to become compliant teenage students who can
then be steered in one of the very limited directions on offer. This is
called choice. The best time to learn anything is when the individual
is motivated to do so at whatever age. The best way to learn is usually
by doing – a combination of observation and practice. Sitting
at a desk in a room with 20, 30, 50 or so others for several hours a
day is not conducive to good learning and not conducive to producing
free thinking adults, but it is a good preconditioning for adult life
in a money-oriented world which requires both a compliant workforce and
passive unemployed.
To hear a nine-year old's response when asked what he would like to do
when he leaves school, “Well, I'll go and get my
Giro” is a shocking indictment of a system which by its very
nature excludes many people. Whether in the examination system or later
in the work situation, a certain percentage every year must be expected
to fail. How humiliating and degrading is that? But that is how this
system works; there is only room for so many to achieve.
When the work situation changes so that all are contributing regularly
to the common good by the work they perform and all are freely taking
their daily needs from the common store youngsters will experience a
totally different example from today's. Education will be embraced as
offering ongoing opportunities for all to succeed in their chosen areas
in societies which value all members regardless of their so-called IQ.
10.
Quality of Life
In a world of money “quality” is equated with cost.
A quality item costs more than a shoddy or mass produced one, e.g.
Rolls Royce v a standard Ford. “Quality” chocolate
costs the consumer more but doesn't give more to the grower. Quality is
a term used to convey superiority and status, something better than the
rest, better than the others. Unfortunately when coupled with time most
families have little of it and the cost can be great. Quality of life
is talked about as something desirable, to be aspired to and implies a
certain level of income but, in fact, everyone has a quality of life, a
comparative quality which could be measured against many different
yardsticks. Most people would admit they are looking for ways to
improve their own.
In order to achieve the positive changes to be gained by the
disappearance of money, power has to be taken away from the elites and
placed firmly in the hands of the people. None of the proposals posed
above could become reality without the will of the majority –
but what is the will of the majority, the popular perception of the
“system” today? Active consent for the system is
generally lacking and people have allowed themselves to become resigned
to it instead of opposing it, believing that there is no alternative.
Surely it is within the capacity of this miracle of evolution to reason
its way back from the headlong rush to condemn billions of its own to
degradation and misery, whilst destroying its own habitat with the
philosophy that money can solve all problems? With money gone the
generally accepted meaning of “quality of life” can
become a reality for all to contemplate and world citizens will be free
to aspire to achieving goals worthy of humankind.
JANET
SURMAN
From an original series in the Socialist Standard December 2008 and January 2009
$
| Money must go read| Could we organise things without money? read | A Time for Evolution read |
| 10 Benefits of Not Having Money read |
| Heads or Tails: The Poetics of Money ( Book Review Philosophy) read. |
$
"from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs"
No comments:
Post a Comment