Subject: Re: coercion
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 96 17:08:00 EST



> Lisa wrote on Thursday, 12 September 1996 9:26AM:
>
>Now Tony,
>Isn't it idealist or utopian or something to imagine a world in which
>nobody will ever even try to do something that others would want to put
>a stop to?

Yes it is utopian and I for one don't think that communism will mean that it 
doesn't happen

>Under communism, will no one ever physically assault another, rape or
>molest a child, steal or destroy personal property, or extort something
>from someone else?

Well there are probably two components to my reply. Firstly I don't think 
that these things will exist as societal problems, i.e. they may happen but 
only in very isolated cases. I think this because I think these things 
spring from alienation, a stuffed education system, poverty etc. and these 
won't exist as social phenomena under communism.

Again I emphasise that there will be a transition period to communism where 
people will have to unlearn anti-social behaviour and a workers state will 
oversee it. There will be courts, worker's militia, some sort of community 
based policing. But these things will become less and less necessary the 
closer society moves towards communism.

Secondly, on "coercing" individuals. The way I envisage this happening is by 
community discipline. I don't think society will be nearly as impersonal as 
it is now, and I'm sure that any individual's bad behaviour will be 
corrected by those immediately around them. People will take matters into 
their own hands rather than to rely on some centrally appointed police.

The most important factor that makes this work (according to Marxism) is 
that capitalism creates a class that is disciplined, acts cooperatively and 
is the majority of society (i.e. workers). Also, the process of taking power 
and throwing out the old gives the impetus to everyone to empower themselves 
and to reform/discipline bad elements.

>And if some people began to appropriate the products of others in the
>original developments of classes, might not some people try to do the
>same again?  If classes are truly dissolved, what will stop them coming
>back?

What material interest is there in appropriating what I already have or can 
gain access to? Why do I want to steal someone's Mercedes if I have one 
myself? Or put it another way: a Mercedes will no longer be a status symbol 
because it will no longer be beyond the reach of most people.

In the transition from primitive communism to the first class societies 
there was a surplus, but alongside material scarcity. In that situation of 
course people are going to try and appropriate it. There will be no material 
scarcity under communism, and in the case where there is (eg. ozone layer) 
 I believe people will be sufficiently informed and collective-minded not to 
contribute to its scarcity until science/production can reverse it.

Also in early class societies the appropriation of the surplus was necessary 
for society as a whole to progress and there was therefore an historical 
imperative in this happening. This will not be the case under communism

>Coercion, I say, cops and courts and such.  Otherwise, what you gonna
>do, just talk to the bully nicely and say "Can't we all get along?"

hmm.. I plan to do away with all the bullies before we get to communism :-)

Tony

P.S.: forgive me if my replies seem a bit simplistic - I'm used to talking 
to people (whom my organisation comes into contact with) who often don't 
know the first thing about marxism


     --- from list marxism2-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---