“It can be statistically proven that three hours’ work a day, at most, is sufficient to feed, shelter, and clothe the world and supply it not only with necessities but also with all modern comforts of life. The point is that not one man in five is to-day doing any productive work. The entire world is supported by a small minority of toilers.”Quote from Alexander Berkman’s “What is Communist Anarchism.”
Alexander Berkman's assertion that three hours of work per day is adequate to sustain the world, providing not only necessities but also modern comforts, remains a compelling and thought-provoking perspective in contemporary society. Let's delve into Berkman's vision and explore how its relevance echoes through the complexities of our modern world.
Berkman's Vision:
In "What Is Communist Anarchism?" Berkman challenges the prevailing notion of extensive work hours as a requisite for societal prosperity. He posits that a small minority of toilers sustains the entire world, emphasizing the disparity between productive contributors and those not engaged in productive work. The essence of his vision lies in redistributing labor more equitably to enhance collective well-being.
Statistical Validation:
The statistical claim that three hours of daily work can meet the world's basic needs may have evolved since Berkman's time, but the core principle remains striking. Technological advancements and increased efficiency have altered the landscape of productivity, making the notion of shorter work hours for a comfortable life more feasible than ever.
“The capitalist employer does not care to spend money, if he can help it, to make the toil of his employees pleasanter and brighter. He will introduce improvements only when he hopes to gain larger profits thereby, but he will not go to extra expense out of purely humanitarian reasons. Though here I must remind you that the more intelligent employers are beginning to see that it pays to improve their factories, make them more sanitary ant hygienic, and generally better the conditions of labor. They realize it is a good investment: it results in the increased contentment and consequent greater efficiency of their workers. The principle is sound. To-day, of course, it is being exploited for the sole purpose of bigger profits. But under Anarchism it would be applied not for the sake of personal gain, but in the interest of the workers’ health, for the lightening of labor. Our progress in mechanics is so great and continually advancing that most of the hard toil could be eliminated by the use of modern machinery and labor saving devices. In many industries, as in coal mining, for instance, new safety and sanitary appliances are not introduced because of “because of the masters’ indifference to the welfare of their employees and on account of the expenditure involved. But in a non-profit system technical science would work exclusively with the aim of making labor safer, healthier, lighter, and more pleasant.” Excerpt from “What is Communist Anarchism” by Alexander Berkman.
Technological Advancements:
In the contemporary context, technology has streamlined many aspects of production and service industries. Automation, artificial intelligence, and innovative work processes have increased efficiency, raising questions about the necessity of maintaining traditional work hours. Berkman's vision gains resonance as we witness how technology can potentially free individuals from unnecessary toil.
The Reality of Modern Work:
Despite advancements, the modern workforce still grapples with longer working hours, job insecurity, and economic inequalities. Berkman's critique of the existing labor structures is reflected in concerns about overwork, burnout, and the concentration of wealth among a select few. His vision prompts reflection on how societal benefits could be more equitably distributed in a world where many are overburdened while others contribute minimally.
Workers today find themselves toiling long hours for what can only be described as valueless paper. There's little doubt that their compensation falls far below 1/10 of the actual value they generate, especially when considering both the efficiency gains from labor-saving machinery and the devaluation of their wages in what can be seen as Monopoly money – essentially, worthless paper. In comparison to 1929, when scholars demonstrated that the proletariat received only a fraction of their produced value, the situation has worsened.
Take, for instance, the implementation of self-checkout systems at Walmart. Two employees now oversee the operation of 15 self-checkout stations, a testament to the significant advancements in labor-saving technology. While the output has increased exponentially, the question arises: Why aren't these employees remunerated accordingly? Despite being responsible for the productivity of what once required 15 cashiers, they continue to receive a wage that doesn't reflect the magnitude of their contributions. This disconnect between increased productivity and fair compensation underscores the need for a reevaluation of the relationship between labor, technology, and just wages.
“Learned men have figured out that the worker receives as his wage only about one-tenth of what he produces. The other nine-tenths are divided among the landlord, the manufacturer, the railroad company, the wholesaler, the jobber, and other middlemen.” What is communist anarchism by Alexander Berkman.
Challenges to Implementation:
While the idea of shorter work hours for all is appealing, practical implementation poses challenges. Societal norms, economic systems, and the resistance to change create barriers. However, Berkman's vision encourages critical examination of these barriers and prompts discussions about creating more humane and equitable work environments.
Societal Impact:
Adopting Berkman's perspective could lead to transformative shifts in societal values. Emphasizing the quality of life over the quantity of work challenges the prevailing ethos of perpetual growth. It prompts us to question the purpose of work and consider alternative models that prioritize well-being, leisure, and fulfillment.
Conclusion:
Alexander Berkman's vision of a world sustained through shorter work hours challenges the conventional wisdom surrounding labor and productivity. In our era of advanced technology and evolving societal values, his insights resonate strongly. Revisiting Berkman's ideas invites us to reconsider the nature of work, question existing norms, and explore possibilities for creating a more balanced and fulfilling future for all.
Comentarios