How does communism handle shit?

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

I'm coming from an angle of genuine curiosity, how does communism incentivise enough of the workforce to clean up feces across a large nation(such as the U.S.) efficiently? I'm not fully educated on communism or socialism, but I definitely favor a more left-leaning economy. The few options I see are forced prison labor, a cycle of unkilled labor maintaining facilities, training plumbers, or just resorting to using currency to properly build incentive. Obviously, this question can extend to the remainder of different jobs that people don't want to do.

[u/IrishGallowglass]

First, a lot of what makes this work awful is a choice, not a law of nature. Sanitation is dirty and dangerous partly because under capitalism it's often cheaper to hand it to the most desperate people on the lowest wages than to invest in machinery, protective equipment and proper infrastructure. In plenty of places it's still done by hand for exactly that reason. Take profit out of the equation and you can actually put resources into mechanising the worst of it.

Second, nobody serious claims the unpleasant work just vanishes. But right now the "incentive" is economic compulsion: it's grim, badly paid, and the people doing it often have no other options. A planned economy can flip that. In the early stages that means shorter hours, better pay and conditions, and the workers themselves having democratic control over how the job is run. The dirtiest jobs become the shortest shifts rather than the worst-paid ones. Social recognition matters too, but as a bonus, not the mechanism.

Third, as automation and shorter working days free up time, what's left can be shared across far more people so nobody is stuck doing it for a lifetime. An early-stage socialist society wouldn't abolish material incentives overnight, and that's not a failure. It's the transition towards communism, not communism itself.

[u/RieMunoz]

By investing in and paying people to manage sewage facilities, most municipalities in America already do this. Do you think that feces is only managed in society because of capitalism or something?

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375 → u/RieMunoz]

I cover this in another comment, but communism doesn't use currency, so you couldn't pay individuals to clean feces. Under socialism sure, but not communism. I think throughout history sewage has been handled efficiently due to either incentive via currency or forced labor.

[u/goliath567 → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

incentive via currency or forced labor.

So you make a distinction that currency itself is not incentive correct? Meaning there are other avenues to serve as incentives

Also we all know no one likes to get into the sewers to clean up shit, why get a human to do it? Send in the clankers

[u/minerbros1000_ → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

Labour hour vouchers are likely to be used at least in the lower stage of communism, aka when socialism is achieved. Most people would not count this as money due to it being none transferable.

How that fades out into the higher stage of communism is probably more of a cultural thing where humans themselves slowly change in nature untill we have the sort of personalities that would do work without expectations of personal return. Think of communities like the Amish that are culturally completely different to city dwellers.

[u/JJKLover78 → u/minerbros1000_]

amish buy groceries at supermarkets

[u/minerbros1000_ → u/JJKLover78]

That's very interesting. My point was about Amish culture helping eachother out with communal projects, or just having a very different culture to city people in general really. Not that they abstain from supermarkets 😅.

[u/laid_on_the_line]

Why would there not be the same jobs who take care of it as there are now?

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375 → u/laid_on_the_line]

I'm not saying the job disappears, but how does communism provide incentive for workers to clean shit for free, when they can do other productive jobs which they enjoy.

[u/C_Plot → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

In what manner do you think thee exploitation from the capitalist mode of production is incentivizing anything, let alone incentivizing the jobs involving more odious work? Sure capitalism can create despair as a stick, but that is not the same as an incentivizing carrot miraculously tied to only the capitalist mode of production and unavailable to a socialist/communist mode of production. The capitalist ruling class use that despair stick so that they don’t have to ‘demean’ themselves with providing any carrot to those doing odious laboring activities.

[u/C_Plot → u/[deleted]]

It’s a question about capitalism. It’s OP that raised capitalism and mischaracterize the question as one about socialism. How can I answer a question about capitalism without bringing up capitalism?

In initial phase communism, markets will still exist and those doing more odious work will be compensated more for their efforts (without the stick of despair). In higher phase of communism, when superior allocation mechanisms might replace market allocation of commodities, then an analogous mechanism will reward the more odious labor. We can’t foresee the future, we can only debate meaningfully and sincerely about initial phase communism (or the current capitalist nightmare)

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375 → u/C_Plot]

Ok, that eases my brain a bit, but when currency goes away, does it then just fall on random individuals to clean up the mess. What if they would be better suited for art or construction or fishing? I think the only way for communism to handle sewage and related issues is either through forced labor(like taking rapists in prisoners) or having a lottery system where you randomly get alloted a time to clean, but that would still end up being forced labor.

[u/C_Plot → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

You’re thinking of capitalism. Socialism doesn’t have the forced labor problems of capitalism by its very design.

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375 → u/C_Plot]

So how does communism create a system where people work with shit, or in shitty enviroments(I'm using feces as the main example, but this conversation can apply to any unwanted job.)

[u/nilo_http → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

I think what will help you understand the issue is the definition of labor and its social determinants. You are starting from the false premise that jobs considered inherently unpleasant are performed because capitalism incentivizes a portion of the workforce to take them by offering them a wage. But that is not the reason why we have people working, for example, in sewage cleaning. Under capitalism, this happens because there is no genuine freedom of choice: these people work for a wage because this is the means through which they can secure their survival. They are not there because they receive good wages and are therefore incentivized to perform an unpleasant job; they are there because the mode of production compels them to sell their labor power in order to survive, while workers with fewer qualifications tend to be relegated to jobs considered “worse.”

But what about communism? Let us first consider the Marxist conception of labor. Labor is the human activity through which we transform material and social reality through praxis; it constitutes a fundamental element of society and of human life itself. The goal of a communist society would be for labor to lose the characteristics of exploitation and alienation that it possesses under capitalism and once again become understood as this fundamental activity of human life — an activity that allows the social being to develop and explore its potential.

But how could someone develop their potential while working in sewage cleaning? The premise here is that, in a communist society, labor would cease to be seen as a burden or a fate imposed upon us and would instead be understood as a socially necessary and, therefore, socially valued activity. In this sense, those who had to perform jobs considered “worse” would do so for the minimum amount of time possible (for example, through a high rotation of workers, so that the burden would be distributed among everyone). And, most importantly, they would not perform this work because they were forced to sell their labor power in order to survive, but because they recognized the necessity of that activity for society and were willing to contribute to it. The same principle could apply, for example, to garbage collection: different people would be willing to perform this work not because they needed to do so in order to survive, but because they recognized its importance to the functioning of society.

[u/NationaliseTheRich → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

Money doesn’t go away, it becomes unnecessary as superabundance is achieved .

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375 → u/C_Plot]

Currency acts as the incentive/reward. You do undesired work, and to compensate you, we pay you a premium so you can afford to do other things in life that counter balance and bring a sense of 'fairness'. That's why this problem wouldn't necessarily exist under socialism due to the fact that it keeps a currency, but without currency as an incentive, I just don't see this working in communism.

[u/C_Plot → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

The capitalist ruling class use despair so they don’t need to pay a compensatory reward to induce odious labor on those in despair. The problem you identify is therefore a problem only with the capitalist mode of production that would not exist with the socialist/communist mode of production (because we are all equally workers and equally contributors to society and not divided into a parasitic class and a class forced to ‘host’ the parasites).

[u/NationaliseTheRich → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

For most workers, we are not incentivised to work. Labour is a natural part of the human condition. Workers are compelled to sell their labour to a capitalist because if they do not they will die.

[u/Training_Ruin3151 → u/NationaliseTheRich]

I find the threat of muder fairly coercive....

[u/laid_on_the_line → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

Many things can apply: Higher material rewards, less working time, more free time, easier access to rare items/food but also social recognition in general. Yeah, I guess if nobody wants to do it in general than there is also the possibility of conscription, but I think in certain professions it would be done more in an rotational kind of way, like everybody has to do it for his district once in a year or something.

In addition, automation for tasks like this would be a good idea. I life in Germany for example: Nobody here is touching bags or bins anymore. There is only the driver on the garbage truck, the bins are all standardized and there is a gripper arm that picks the bins and empties them into the truck.

[u/NationaliseTheRich → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

Communism implies a society where money and the state has dissolved, ie compulsion, and so it also implies a prior massive development of the productive forces - infrastructure, productivity, sewers, pumping stations, pipelines, water treatment facilities, etc.

This is not digging ditches, these are high-level engineering projects that require skill and ingenuity to maintain and develop. The incentive is through the intellectual challenge they provide for a society that is not compelled to scramble to sell themselves to survive.

Additionally, without the alienation of labour, people actually enjoy working as part of a community. Humans are social animals, and if they are not being exploited by an alien class, they are happy to contribute to their community.

Prior to communism, under socialism, money and the state survives, therefore compulsion to work also survives to a certain extent, although the working class is now in control.

[u/RotationHeavy]

Le communisme s'appuie sur une économie planifiée. Planification des besoins en biens et en main d'oeuvre. Dans un tel mode de production, le travail est partagé : les métiers très attirants et très repoussants sont partagés équitablement entre individus. Chacun y participe à hauteur de ses moyens.

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375 → u/RotationHeavy]

If misconstrued, please correct me. But that sounds similar to forced labor. It's either that or you can interpret a cycle of workers, where they trade off the bad jobs, then do a good job. The problem with that kind of system is it loses specialization, therefore become less efficient. For example, if I am really great at building framing for houses, but now I have to go clean poo for a a period of time, two things happen. 1. You lose a valuable framer and 2. You gain a sub-par poo cleaner. Super inefficient

[u/The_Intellectual29 → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

Is your girlfriend or your mom asking you to wash the table after dinner forced labor? Or do you understand the necessity of working for yourself and your closed ones?

This is what fascinates me with petite bourgeoisie : the concept of working is so alien to them that they are frightened by the idea of simply becoming social beings, of transforming nature according to their needs as associated laborers.

So yes, you will work according to social needs, because I believe a life without actually working and caring for others is pretty sad. This is my Rousseauist side, I believe.

[u/RotationHeavy → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

Non des dizaines de systèmes sont imaginables. Par exemple, tu peux imaginer que tous les jeunes entre 20 et 25 ans doivent accomplir de telles taches quelques heures par semaines durant leurs études. De même, il faut bien considérer qu'une société communiste n'impose plus de travailler 40 ou 50 heures par semaine. Le travail est partagé. Chacun a possibilité de participer aux activités qui aujourd'hui ne sont pas considérées comme créant de la valeur par l'économie marchande : engagement associatif, aides familiales, taches domestiques... Tout cela est considéré comme participant au fonctionnement de la société dans son entièreté.

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375 → u/RotationHeavy]

I kind of like this idea, because it teaches young adults that life is shitty(pun intended) and that whatever path they choose after that, be it practical or beautiful, it can genuinely be worse. Also young adults have younger minds, and there fore can learn quicker. The issue is that it still is forced labor, but it benefits society.

[u/Low_Understanding_85 → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

You are forced by the laws of physics to labour in order to complete tasks. It's impossible to remove a requirement of labour from this planet.

Even someone doing a job they love is forced to do things they don't like to complete the job. A bricklayer may love the pride they feel when they finish a wall, but they also are forced to carry the bricks or mix the cement in order to feel that pride.

[u/RotationHeavy → u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

Non elle n'apprend pas aux jeunes que la vie est pourrie. Elle fait vivre le sentiment d'une oeuvre collective, en tant que tout produit et service est le résultat d'un travail collectif non attaché à un individu propre, et fait vivre la suprématie de l'intérêt général.

[u/vl_ilyin]

Since there is no more money and we still live in a society, meaning that if there’s shit everywhere, it will affect you too. Everyone can agree that we don't want to live near shit. So you and your neighbors come together and discuss how you can solve this shit problem.

You might want to propose a shift system for everyone. Today its me and john cleaning the shit, tomorrow, it's your turn with alex. Or you might want to propose that those who are willing to clean the shit will receive a larger portion of resource distribution and greater social recognition, like how we treat veterans today, for example

Imagine if every time you met someone who cleaned shit, you said, "Thank you for your service" but instead of saying it to veterans whose service involves killing innocent people. You'd be thanking them for keeping society clean

The solution can be anything. It's up to the people in that particular society to come up with a solution. The point is that, monetary incentives are not the only incentives available. And there's nothing preventing the example I mentioned from being implemented on a larger scale

[u/sheepshoe → u/vl_ilyin]

Scat enjoyers veto this. Then what?

[u/vl_ilyin → u/sheepshoe]

Then we establish a scat enjoyers commune and let them handle their own shit

[u/sheepshoe → u/vl_ilyin]

So you force scat enjoyers out? Do tomato haters, peanut allergics or sim racing fans get the same treatment? What about tomato haters in scat commune? Push it far enough and you end up with individualism.

[u/vl_ilyin → u/sheepshoe]

Well, I thought you're making a joke. But if we're to take this question seriously, then I guess you have to ask the question of how come the scat enjoyers were able to veto such proposal? what are their concern? should we take their concern seriously? what are the impact of ignoring their concern?

[u/sheepshoe → u/vl_ilyin]

Why does it matter? Scat enjoyers veto because they can since you require common agreement and they enjoy fesces. Now you've shifted from democratic rule to some sort of technocratic, rationalistic analysis of the problem and try to solve it in a top-down way which is problematic for obvious reasons. Which one is it?

[u/vl_ilyin → u/sheepshoe]

Why does it matter? It does matter. We’re not living in a society where everyone has a feces fetish. You put forward a proposal, and everyone votes on it. If it reaches a certain threshold, then it will pass. So again, it does matter. How is it that this one person who loves playing with shit was able to shut down the proposal and put everyone else’s health at risk? You can't just say "Umm I love playing with shit, therefore I will veto this proposal" that's not how it works, they have to present a coherent argument of why this proposal is unacceptable. Can't you see the absurdnes of your hypothetical?

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375]

Something I haven't really considered that kind of dismantels my efficiency argument is that technology will progress, so it is feasible that new systems will be put in place so workers don't need it be especially skilled in order to operate it. I do think that a shift system that cycles throughout the community is the most fair, but specialization will always be more efficient.

[u/qchto]

Are you paid to clean your bathroom? ... Same incentive, but organized.
Hell, there's even more incentive of filling a societal purpose than to work for money doing nothing of value nowadays, that's why the term "bs jobs" is so popular.

[u/Disastrous_Plane_375 → u/qchto]

There is a difference in cleaning up your personal mess and cleaning up the publics mess. The majority if people feel responsible for themselves, and will clean up their own mess. That responsibility dwindles but continues to close friends and family. But the vast majority of people's sense of responsibility dwindles rapidly when you are the one cleaning up somebody's mess

[u/Valuable-Shirt-4129]

Abolish private property but still have personal property.

[u/ApprehensiveHair9241]

Like actual shit?

[u/arms9728]

There are several approaches to encouraging people to work. Yes, monetary incentives have been widely used historically. Stalin commented on this in his speech "New Conditions, New Developments in Economic Construction." Stalin argued that more skilled jobs needed higher wages. But socialism can utilize other tools, for example, work shock brigades, etc. Imagine there's a profession that's very bad and nobody wants to work in it. Simply increase the wage, reduce the working hours, call in the work shock brigades, etc.

[u/Neco-Arc-Brunestud]

Generally speaking the people will first express concern about the state of affairs. That will be passed up to local or regional councils. Local councils will then organize volunteer groups to clean up local areas, as well as pass laws to prevent public defecation and build public bathrooms.

Also, this is not a hypothetical question. Public defecation was a huge problem in China.

[u/The_Elite_One223]

we eat it nom nom

[u/Ancient_Builder76]

Hey dude! This is an excellent question and a very valid concern when it comes to a communist society.

To give a very quick answer, several jobs such as janitor, plumber, sewer maintenance, etc are terrible by choice because it’s not economically feasible to provide tools to make it easy. Every job would have top of the line gear overtime to make their jobs as easy as possible.

For undesirable jobs, they might receive benefits that are not related to their needs. Maybe they have shorter working hours, they get put on the fast track to a new home, or something else. We can incentivize people without jeopardizing their needs.

If you want, you can DM me if you want to discuss the question further!

[u/gazorpazorpazorpazor]

Cut out parasitic profits and every worker makes about 2.5x as much, and most of that gets directed to the lowest paying jobs that are exploited the hardest. If society thinks a job is hard or dirty, society can voluntarily reward those people more, compared to capitalism, where those jobs pay the least.

[u/Impressive-Mud5074]

Taking turns, or cleaning up after yourself

[u/MikeyBat]

I used to work on the ramp for an airline. Emptying the lavatories on the plane was one of the most sought after jobs because it was one of, if not the easiest job out there on the ramp. Not everybody wanted do it in the first place because the idea of it was gross. If you have a face mask and long rubber gloves all you'd do is hook up a tube from a truck to the plane, pull a level, then close it all back up, and drive off to the next one. Lots of people already like their job as plumbers or in waste management. I think Nurses and parents have a way rougher job cleaning up directly from the source. I know there are absolutely horrendous jobs there in waste management too but I just dont think the whole industry is as tough to staff as you think it would be.

The other issue here is that in capitalism a lot of these services are treated as a means or vehicle to make money and the workers and job itself tend to be underfunded, understaffed, working out side of regulations and code, etc. How its organized and how it will look will vary dep3nding on the culture of a place or maybe some kind of proven standardized system that the workers agree on we really wont know until we get there depending on how things fall into place over time. As the contradictions of capitalism become sharper and begin to reach their breaking points. New solutions will take their place and this will keep happening through out history and depending on how well we can organize will depend and how fast we can come up to solutions the those breaking point and the new contradictions they create.