Re:Where our economy is, for the young
by nanomonkey on Friday October 02, 2020 @01:18PM
(#24664788)
When early socialist/communists were researching cybernetics they latched on to the idea of predictive production management, to "guide" the collective workforce. I believe they should have used their new computation capabilities to capture the bits of workforce innovation and value addition to create positive feedback loops, to reward innovative and value added behavior.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Where our economy is, for the young
by jackpirate on Friday October 02, 2020 @01:55PM
(#24665158)
Soviets certainly tried to create these positive feedback loops, although it's arguable how successful they were. The standard example is the Stakhanovite Movement [1], which rewarded workers for more productive output.
Re:Where our economy is, for the young
by AlexTWithBeard on Friday October 02, 2020 @03:55PM
(#24666446)
The Soviet Union had planned economy. The problem with it required constant manual intervention. So the "state projects" worked reasonably well. The defense industry worked well. Whatever was left to develop on its own quickly lost quality and only stayed competitive because of locked borders and total deficit of goods.
Socialists and communists have always fixated on capital accumulation as the reason for productivity increases; thus it would be somewhat unnatural for them to reward individuals for what they see as a collective effort.
Marxism, at least, centers on the idea that the worker should be compensated fairly for the labor/value that he or she produces. It’s in the first chapter of Capital, after all. Communism I think is about how the workers can bring about this fair compensation through politics (by the proletariat banding together, for example).
That's Marxism's initial redistributive aspect, not the core principle.
Capital was the foundation for Marxism's development, not the final stage. It's more a case of critique of laisez-faire imperialist capitalism, than anything else.
Re:Where our economy is, for the young
by HarryHirsch on Friday October 02, 2020 @01:57PM
(#24665170)
What do you make of the Hero of Labour award then? They not only went to particularly productive labourers but also do engineers and scientists (Sakharov is probably best known). Engineering and science is an individual effort, although of course you belong to a greater collective that supported you.
Hero of labor was a rare award, only given out 20812 times (according to Wikipedia); I'd be surprised if less than 20k Americans received a bonus on any given week under the current status quo.
Please remember that I was responding to a comment, not making an abstract statement that communists never give out awards. The grandparent had said that it would be good if communists and socialists were more generous with awards than capitalists, and I was making the case that it would be antithetical to the typical communist ideology.
Re:Where our economy is, for the young
by HarryHirsch on Friday October 02, 2020 @06:24PM
(#24667661)
The fact that the award was rare is precisely the point, it's a highly politicised decision to give it, comparable to a military award for exceptional valour. At a lower level, 5-year plan medals were handed out like candy. So, yes, individuals of all kinds were recognized at all levels.
In Soviet Russia you worked for people. At Amazon you work for the Machine.
I am not really sure what point you're trying to make. There was an old saying in the Soviet Union: "we pretended to work, and they pretended to pay us". Everything that you're saying is compatible with the notion that the Soviets didn't actually reward innovation and productivity, they just pretended to.
Your offhand comment is pithy, but ridiculous on its face.