The present contrast between mental and manual work, a contrast that is intensified by the ruling classes, who are anxious to secure their mental superiority also, will, accordingly, have to be removed.
[227] “The great mass of workingmen in England, as in most of the other countries, have so little free choice in regard to their occupation and place of residence, they depend so absolutely upon fixed rules and the will of others, as could be possible under any system with the exception of real slavery.” John Stuart Mill—Political Economy.
[228] A French workingman, who has returned home from San Francisco, writes: “I would have never believed that I would be able to practice all the trades that I have practiced in California. I had been firmly convinced that I was good for nothing except printing. But in the midst of these adventurers who change their trade more readily than their shirt, I did as the others. Since mining was not sufficiently remunerative, I left and moved into the city. Here I successively became typographer, slater, plumber, etc. As a result of this experience of being fit for all tasks, I feel less of a mollusc and more of a human being.” Karl Marx—Capital. Vol. I.
[229] What people may achieve under favorable conditions of development is shown, for example, by the life of Leonardo da Vinci. He was a splendid artist, a famous sculpturer, an able architect and engineer, a military engineer, a musician and an extemporizer. Benvenuto Cellini was a famous goldsmith, an excellent modeller, a recognized military engineer, a good soldier and a capable musician. Abraham Lincoln was a wood-cutter, a farmer, a boatsman, a clerk and a lawyer, before he became president of the United States. It may be said without exaggeration that most people are engaged in occupations that are not suited to their abilities because their career has been shaped, not by choice, but by the force of circumstances. Many a poor professor might make a very competent shoemaker, and many a good shoemaker might become a good professor also.
[6.—Increase of Consumption.]
The above enumerated facts prove that panics, crises, and unemployment will be impossible in future society. Crises arise because capitalistic production, incited by the desire for profit, and without any reliable means of estimating the true demand, leads to over-production and to over-stocking of the market. Under capitalism the products assume the character of goods that their owners indeavor to exchange, and the consumption of goods depends upon the consumer’s purchasing ability. But this purchasing ability is very limited among a vast majority of the population who are not paid the full value of their labor and whose services are not wanted if their employers cannot squeeze profits out of them. Purchasing ability and the ability to consume are two entirely different matters in bourgeois society. Many millions are in need of new clothes, shoes, furniture, linens and articles of food, but they have no money, and so their needs, their ability to consume, remains unsatisfied. The market is over-stocked, but the masses are hungry; they wish to work, but cannot find anyone willing to purchase their labor-power, because the employers can derive no profits from employing them. Perish, become a vagabond, a criminal, I, the capitalist, cannot help it, because I cannot use goods that I cannot sell at a profit. In his position the capitalist is entirely justified in taking this attitude.
In the new society this contradiction will be removed. The new society will not produce “goods” to be “bought” and “sold,” it will produce commodities for consumption, not for any other purpose. The ability to consume will not be limited by the purchasing ability of each individual, but by the common ability to produce. If there is sufficient labor-power and sufficient means of production, every want can be satisfied. The social ability to consume knows no bounds except the satisfaction of the consumers.
If there will be no “goods” in the new society there will ultimately be no money, either. Money appears to be the counterpart of goods, but is goods itself. Yet, at the same time, money is the social equivalent, the standard of value for all other goods. But the new society will not produce goods, it will produce commodities whose manufacture will require a certain measure of social working-time. The average time required to produce a given commodity is the only standard by which it will be measured for social consumption. Ten minutes of social working-time at one commodity equal ten minutes of social working-time at another commodity, no more and no less. Society will not wish to “earn,” it will merely wish to bring about the exchange of commodities of the same quality and of the same value among its members, and eventually it will not even be necessary to determine the value. Society will simply produce what it needs. If it should become evident, for instance, that three hours of work daily are necessary to produce all the required products, three hours will be the fixed time.[230] If the means of production should be improved to such extent that the supply can be furnished by two hours of work, it will be two hours. If, on the other hand, the demands should grow and the increased productivity of the process of work would not suffice to satisfy these demands, the working-time would be lengthened.