Weekly Worker on disappearance of money
- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Recent article here by Mike Mcnair of the Weekly Worker on the transition (as they see it) to a moneyless society:
http://weeklyworker.co.uk/worker/1058/socialism-will-not-require-industrialistion/
He envisages a sort of gradual withering away of money after the working class worldwide wins control of political power rather than the fairly rapid abolition of capitalism (and with it of "value" and "money") as we (and some others) do. Although he himself conflates Marx's "dictatorship of the proletariat" with his "early phase of communist society" (so allowing him to envisage a continuing if constantly dimishing role for money in "socialism" as opposed to "communism" where there'll no longer be any money) — after all, he is a Leninist — he at least recognises that another interpretation is possible. He also shows how in some ways capitalism has already prepared the basis for a moneyless, communist society.
I sometimes resort to quoting James Cannon in debates with Trotskyists to show that socialism is a moneyless society although he too advocates the "withering away" of money via intermediate stages.
Quote:the accounting arrangements automatically registered by money wages based on gold will at a certain stage be replaced by labour certificates or coupons, like tickets to the theatre. But even that, eventually, will pass away. Even that kind of accounting, which would take up useless labour and be absolutely purposeless, will be eliminated. There will be no money, and there will not even be any bookkeeping transactions or coupons to regulate how much one works and how much he gets.https://www.marxists.org/archive/cannon/works/1953/socialistamer.htmAnd when they counter Cannon is talking about communism, i refer them to this statement by him.
Quote:Q: Is there socialism in the Soviet Union?A: No—well, I would like to clarify that now. Socialism and communism are more or less interchangeable terms in the Marxist movement. Some make a distinction between them in this respect; for example, Lenin used the expression socialism as the first stage of communism, but I haven’t found any other authority for that use. I think that is Lenin’s own particular idea. I, for example, consider the terms socialism and communism interchangeable, and they relate to the classless society based on planned production for use as distinct from a system of capitalism based on private property and production for profit.https://www.marxists.org/archive/cannon/works/1941/socialism/ch02.htm Cannon was moreorless repeating Trotsky on money
Quote:Only when socialism succeeds in substituting administrative control for money will it be possible to abandon a stable gold currency. Then money will become ordinary paper slips, like trolley or theater tickets. As socialism advances, these slips will also disappear, and control over individual consumption – whether by money or administration – will no longer be necessary when there is more than enough of everything for everybody! Such a time has not yet come, though America will certainly reach it before any other country.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.