Home
To each according to his contribution is considered by some Marxists and other socialists as a characteristic of society directly following the transition to socialism, but preceding the final step to communism. This essentially means that people are rewarded based on the amount they contribute to the social product.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 Definition and purpose
* 2 Elaboration in Gotha
* 3 Use by later Marxists
* 4 See also
* 5 References
* 6 External links
[edit] Definition and purpose
To each according to his contribution was a concept espoused by many members of the labor movement. Examples would be found of this in Ferdinand Lassalle's and Eugen Duhring's statements to Leon Trotsky. However it was Vladimir Lenin who claimed the principle to be a fundamental element of socialism within Marxist theory.[1]
The term means simply that each worker in a socialist society receives wages and benefits according to the quantity and value of the labor that he or she contributed. This translates into workers of high productivity receiving more wages and benefits than workers of average productivity, and substantially more than workers of low productivity. An extension of this principle could also be made so that the more difficult one's job is - whether this difficulty is derived from greater training requirements, job intensity, safety hazards, etc. - the more one is rewarded for the labor contributed. The purpose of the principle, as Trotsky would later state,[2] is to promote productivity. This is done by creating incentives to work harder, longer, and more productively. The principle is ultimately a stowaway from capitalism that, according to Marx, will vanish as work becomes more automated and enjoyable, and goods become available in abundance.
[edit] Elaboration in Gotha
The principle has its roots in the way that capitalism manages its affairs. That is, each is rewarded according to how much he produces. Remuneration increases as the amount of labor contributed increases. However within capitalism, the means of production are owned by a small minority who does not produce, but rather lives off the labor of others. Socialism is said to remedy this by putting the means of production in common hands and rewarding individuals according to their contributions.
In the Critique of the Gotha Programme, while criticizing Lassalle's ideas, Marx elaborates on the theory. According to Marx's analysis of the Programme, Lassalle suggests that "the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society." While he agrees that the citizens of a workers' society should be rewarded according to individual contributions, he claims that giving them the "full product" of their labor is impossible as some of the proceeds will be needed to maintain infrastructure and so forth.[3] He then explains the nature of a communist society in its lower phase ( socialist society, that does not emerge from its own foundations "but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges." And so "accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society -- after the deductions have been made -- exactly what he gives to it." He explains this as:
POS receipt printers
web hosting
Contents
[hide]
* 1 Definition and purpose
* 2 Elaboration in Gotha
* 3 Use by later Marxists
* 4 See also
* 5 References
* 6 External links
[edit] Definition and purpose
To each according to his contribution was a concept espoused by many members of the labor movement. Examples would be found of this in Ferdinand Lassalle's and Eugen Duhring's statements to Leon Trotsky. However it was Vladimir Lenin who claimed the principle to be a fundamental element of socialism within Marxist theory.[1]
The term means simply that each worker in a socialist society receives wages and benefits according to the quantity and value of the labor that he or she contributed. This translates into workers of high productivity receiving more wages and benefits than workers of average productivity, and substantially more than workers of low productivity. An extension of this principle could also be made so that the more difficult one's job is - whether this difficulty is derived from greater training requirements, job intensity, safety hazards, etc. - the more one is rewarded for the labor contributed. The purpose of the principle, as Trotsky would later state,[2] is to promote productivity. This is done by creating incentives to work harder, longer, and more productively. The principle is ultimately a stowaway from capitalism that, according to Marx, will vanish as work becomes more automated and enjoyable, and goods become available in abundance.
[edit] Elaboration in Gotha
The principle has its roots in the way that capitalism manages its affairs. That is, each is rewarded according to how much he produces. Remuneration increases as the amount of labor contributed increases. However within capitalism, the means of production are owned by a small minority who does not produce, but rather lives off the labor of others. Socialism is said to remedy this by putting the means of production in common hands and rewarding individuals according to their contributions.
In the Critique of the Gotha Programme, while criticizing Lassalle's ideas, Marx elaborates on the theory. According to Marx's analysis of the Programme, Lassalle suggests that "the proceeds of labor belong undiminished with equal right to all members of society." While he agrees that the citizens of a workers' society should be rewarded according to individual contributions, he claims that giving them the "full product" of their labor is impossible as some of the proceeds will be needed to maintain infrastructure and so forth.[3] He then explains the nature of a communist society in its lower phase ( socialist society, that does not emerge from its own foundations "but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges." And so "accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society -- after the deductions have been made -- exactly what he gives to it." He explains this as:
POS receipt printers
web hosting