The relationship between labor and enjoyment plays an important role in the course of human history. Discussing the relationship between labor and enjoyment can also provide important clues for us to understand history and reality, and even to look forward to the future.

1. The formation of the division of labor and enjoyment

Labor is a unique human activity, an active and conscious activity, which is of course relative to the instinctive survival activity of animals. As Marx said, "We are going to examine the labour that belongs exclusively to man." The activities of spiders are similar to those of weavers, and the ability of bees to build hives is a shame to many of the architects of the world. But where the most clumsy architect outperformed the most dexterous bee from the beginning was that he had built the hive in his own mind before he had built it out of beeswax. The result obtained at the end of the labor process already exists in the appearance of the laborer at the beginning of the process, that is, the existence of the already conceptual. (Marx, Capital, vol. 1, p. 202) Just as man evolved from animals, so labor evolved from animal instincts. From the instinctive survival activities of animals to the active labor, this is the most glorious chapter in the history of human evolution, because all the transformation of nature by human beings begins here. But just as all progress is a regression in another sense, the superiority of human labor over animal instinct lies in the fact that labor is an activity that is consciously self-controlled, but it is precisely because it can be self-controlled that it can decide to be lazy or even not to work, and there is no need for such worries about animals.

What is inherent in labor is the attitude of labor, but what is the attitude of people to work? We know that for human beings today, labor is still a means of livelihood. In other words, if you don't work, you can earn a living and get the same enjoyment materials, and people are more willing not to work. As for the attitude of the people to labor in ancient times, if it is not clear in the primitive society where there is no surplus, and people work together and distribute together, once labor creates surplus, once it becomes possible to earn a living and obtain the means of enjoyment through the labor of others without working. Although the materials left of that era are limited to study, it is sufficient to paint a picture of plunder, as Marx put it: "There is a traditional notion that in certain periods people live only by plundering (Selected Works of Marx and Engels, vol. II, p. 100) and that labour becomes a despicable act that only slaves and the inferior are worthy of." "What can be obtained by blood, if obtained by sweat, is too weak and incompetent. (Tacitus, Agasila Chronicles of Germania, Triptych 58 Edition, p. 67) This sentence fully expresses the attitude of the people at that time, and the Karamoja people who now live in Uganda still use plunder as a secondary production activity. In the plunder, whoever has the greatest merit will be slashed on the left arm, and the more scars there are, the more respected they are. When the young man courted the girl, he had to repeat his exploits in the plunder.

I can't tell when it began, but love of labor has become a common word used by almost all ethnic groups when talking about their ancestors. But what is expressed here is nothing more than the attitude of today's people to work. Just as when a eulogy is given to the deceased, no matter how exaggerated the praise of the deceased, no one will hold it accountable. But to explain the problem scientifically, the conclusion can only be that our ancestors did not love labor but only disgusted it. And the further back we go back in history, the stronger the aversion to labor becomes.

Disgust with labor is an internal requirement, surplus is an external condition, internal and external causes are combined, and the division of labor and enjoyment is formed.

2. The direct result of the division of labor and enjoyment

Plunder is certainly much more affordable than labor, but what is obtained by "bloodshed" must first be created by "sweat". Human society cannot do without labor, but people hate labor, and where there is no consciousness, it is necessary to spontaneously force to open up a way for human society to move forward, so that a social system in which a few people force the majority to work is created, and the implementation of labor is class rule.

The original class society was a slave society, and people usually served the barbaric and cruel slavery system as a disgrace to human society. But as Engels put it: "It is easiest to denounce slavery and other similar phenomena in general terms, and to vent noble righteous indignation at these shameful phenomena." Unfortunately, this only says one thing that is well known, and that is that this ancient system is no longer suitable for our present situation and for our feelings that are determined by it. But how did this system come about, why did it exist, and what role did it play in history. We have not received any clarification on these issues. If we delve into these issues, we will say, however contradictory and bizarre it may sound, that the adoption of slavery was a great step forward under the conditions of the time. (Selected Works of Marx and Engels, Vol. III, p. 220)

Any domination, at least in its ascending phase, necessarily reflects the need for such domination, and the barbarism of the slave society is commensurate with the degree of aversion to labor. In the long class society, along with the development of production, the improvement of labor tools, and the reduction of labor intensity, people's attitude towards labor has changed, and in line with this, the forms and means of class rule are also changing.

3. The confusion brought by the opposition between labor and enjoyment to socialist public ownership

The coercion of labor carried out by class rule has solved the problem of maintaining labor in human society, and its role in promoting the progress of human society must be fully affirmed. However, labor is an active activity in the end, and forced labor under class rule turns labor into a completely passive activity, the so-called alienation of labor. Although this alienation is inevitable under certain conditions of material production and life, when production develops beyond this certain range, the demise of forced labor is as inevitable as its creation. The establishment of socialism, on the other hand, shows that even now the coercion of labour enforced by class rule is not indispensable.

Socialist public ownership put an end to the class rule of the minority over the majority, thus removing the coercion of labor enforced by class rule, and fundamentally liberating labor. However, as we celebrate victory, we must not forget that victory also confronts us with a great problem, that is, the compulsory labor has been lifted, but labor has not yet become a conscious activity of man. Unfortunately, for a long time we have believed that the aversion to labor is caused by forced labor under class rule. It is believed that once the compulsion of labor is lifted, active labor will naturally replace passive labor, and the labor enthusiasm and creativity of the working masses that have been suppressed will be immediately liberated. It is therefore concluded that socialism will inevitably create a higher productivity of labor than capitalism. However, the facts have denied what people expected.

We have rejuvenated people's enthusiasm for labor through political movements and production movements again and again. But enthusiasm doesn't last long.

We have strengthened labor by strengthening labor discipline and strengthening management and other administrative means, but this is nothing compared with the coercion of labor by class rule.

How can socialist public ownership get rid of the confusion?

Human beings once labored and lived in a society without class rule, which is a primitive society. In primitive societies, the condition for maintaining labor was that there was no surplus, and there was no other way for people to obtain the means of subsistence and enjoyment than to work, even if it was only for the sake of survival. Human society will not return to the absence of a surplus, but primitive society can give us a lesson. In fact, the conditions for the existence of any class rule are not only how powerful the class is, but also important to see whether the dominant class can control the conditions of people's existence, that is to say, in primitive society, people have to work for survival and enjoyment, and under class rule, people also have to work under the compulsion of class rule for survival and enjoyment. The difference is that the former is a kind of natural coercion, the latter is a man-made coercion, and what really works is people's vital interests. Knowing this, we have found a way out of the current problem. This is the factor that is indirectly exerted on labour by natural coercion and class domination—the vital interests of men acting directly on labour. In fact, this is what we often say today, linking labor with personal interests, and truly using distribution to attract and encourage labor.

The more labor brings benefits to the laborers, the more the labor will arouse the interest of the laborers. For example, in feudal society, because the peasants obtained an economy based on individual labor, they could improve their lives through their own labor after paying rent or paying forced labor, and compared with slaves who had nothing, it was natural to arouse the peasants' interest in labor and make the feudal system gain

Fourth, the elimination of the opposition between labor and enjoyment human society can enter the communist society

To fundamentally eliminate the division of labor and enjoyment, we must eliminate the opposition between labor and enjoyment, that is, to eliminate labor in the modern sense, so that labor itself becomes enjoyment. Thus eradicating the motivation to get something for nothing.

Marx and Engels, the founders of scientific socialism, had already put forward the idea of abolishing the opposition between labor and enjoyment in their early works, and Marx further pointed out in the Critique of the Gotha Program: "In the advanced stage of communist society, after the situation of forcing people to obey the division of labor like slaves has disappeared, and thus the opposition between mental and physical labor has also disappeared; Only then, when labour has become merely a means of subsistence, but has become the first necessity of life in itself, and after the productive forces have grown with the full development of the individual, and when all the sources of collective wealth have flowed in full, only then can the narrow horizons of bourgeois rights be completely transcended, and society can write on its banner: to each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. (Selected Works of Marx and Engels, Vol. 3, p. 12) Marx and Engels mentioned that the abolition of the slave-like obedience to the division of labor, the abolition of the antagonism between mental and physical labor, the abolition of labor as not only a means of livelihood but itself the first need of life, and the all-round development of the individual, can be said to be related to the abolition of the antagonism between labor and enjoyment. If the antagonism between labor and enjoyment is not eliminated, the motive and behavior of getting something for nothing cannot be eliminated, labor cannot become a conscious activity of human beings, and a communarian society in which everyone does what he can and distributes according to his needs can only be an empty word. Is it possible to eliminate the opposition between labor and enjoyment, and make labor itself a pleasure, the first need of people's lives?

A person with the simplest mind can tell you clearly what kind of activity is labor and what kind of activity is enjoyment. However, it is almost impossible to determine what is labor and what is enjoyment. For for for some an activity may be labor, and for others it may be enjoyment. For example, football is definitely high-intensity labor for professional football players, but it is enjoyable for amateurs; Operating a computer is labor for the computer operator, but for those who play computer games, it becomes a high-level enjoyment; Driving a car is labor for car drivers, but it is a rare enjoyment for those who have thought about addicting to cars; In fact, some Western tycoons would rather pay to go to the countryside to do farm work for a period of time to enjoy the pleasure of farming. However, if we say that operating a computer, driving a car, and working on the field are labor, it is still acceptable to everyone. On the other hand, if we say that these are enjoyment, we will be criticized, because this is what most people know today. It can be seen that the determination of whether an activity is labor or enjoyment does not depend on the activity itself, but on people's perception of the activity. In the final analysis, people's understanding comes from the reality of people's production and life, and is a reflection of certain production and living conditions, and when production and living conditions change, people's understanding will of course also change.

当一个人被强迫做一项自己不甘心做的工作时,工作对他来说肯定不会是享受.当一个人年复一年被长期固定在某项工作时, 工作对他来说也很难成为享受。 When a person does the work they are willing to do, the work is likely to be enjoyable for the person. It's just that in modern society, the vast majority of people are not so lucky. However, in the future of development, when the productive forces of society turn most or all of the people into such lucky ones, the opposition between labor and enjoyment will not disappear.

What kind of productive forces will be created to abolish the opposition between labor and enjoyment? We do not yet know this, but the following conditions must be met.

First, the division of labor in the modern sense must be abolished, as Marx and Engels said: "It turns out that as soon as the division of labor appears, each person has his own special sphere of activity, which is imposed on him, and he cannot go beyond this range: he is a hunter, fisherman, or shepherd, or a critical critic, and as long as he does not want to lose the means of subsistence, he should always be such a person." In a communist society, where no one has a specific sphere of activity, and every man can develop in any sector, society regulates the whole of production, and thus makes it possible for us to do this thing today and that tomorrow as I wish, hunting in the morning, fishing in the afternoon, animal husbandry in the evening, and criticism after dinner, but this does not make me a hunter, fisherman, shepherd, or critic. (The Complete Works of Marx and Engels, Vol. III, p. 37)

Second, compared with modern society, the necessary labor time will be greatly shortened, and the labor intensity will also be greatly reduced.

Third. Under the new historical conditions, the "new generation" has grown up to be able to consciously do what they must do. Any norms and coercion have become superfluous, as we often say, completing the transition from the kingdom of necessity to the kingdom of freedom.

There is no doubt that this society is also the communist society for which millions of communists have fought.