[0xbadcafebee]

Sure, but it has nothing to do with Capitalism (other than Capitalism giving us two days off a week rather than 0). I'm sure the good people of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union didn't enjoy going to work again after a few days off.

[o_class_star]

People in the Soviet Union, in general, took a high degree of pride in their work.

Don't get me wrong. There was a lot wrong with the USSR, especially under Stalin. And since they didn't have a tradition of democracy and free speech in Russia, it wasn't a good place for dissidents. For most people, though, they did a much better job of lining people up with positions and careers suiting their wants and talents than our "work for rich people or you starve" system does.

Capitalism is a system that runs on human misery, led by a class of people who are completely unaccountable to anyone but themselves, who therefore have no incentive to make things decent for the workers.

[cpursley]

People in the Soviet Union had to work Saturdays and were also obligated to participate in community activities.

[o_class_star]

As I said, the Soviet Union wasn't perfect.

If I were to live in 1970, either in the US or the USSR, I would have picked the US, no contest. Back then, capitalism actually worked. If you wanted a job, you looked a CEO up in the phone book, called him, and got one. You'd literally get every promotion if you worked two honest hours per day. It ain't like that anymore.

In 2020, capitalism sucks. There are basically no opportunities unless you inherit the connections. (I anticipate downvotes from 20-year-olds who've just read Ayn Rand and think her writing reflects how the world really works.) Would communism have degraded just as fast? It's hard to say. I doubt it, but we'll never know, since we destroyed it.

[0xbadcafebee]

> Capitalism is a system that runs on human misery,

The last two capitalistic organizations I've worked for, all my co-workers were cheery, friendly, helpful, and enjoyed their jobs. The people frustrated were the ones that did their jobs as good as they could and were frustrated by a lack of excellence in the face of large scale and complexity. I wouldn't call this misery. And one of those companies was literally rated the most hated corporation in America. I've also worked for places were people were lazy, bureaucratic, and did the least work possible to collect their paycheck (heck I was that person). Ultimately corporations are made up of people, and there's all different kinds of people out there, so there's also all different kinds of corporations.

> led by a class of people who are completely unaccountable to anyone but themselves, who therefore have no incentive to make things decent for the workers.

They're accountable to shareholders and government regulatory bodies, and in very rare circumstances, to unions. Certainly there should be more accountability within the organization from the bottom-up, but it's fallacious to think they don't answer to anybody. The actual incentives vary, but usually stem from either competition, or seeking to drive quality and efficiency. Business management is more art than science.

[cyberdrunk]

> People in the Soviet Union, in general, took a high degree of pride in their work.

Have you lived in the Soviet Union? I haven't, but have in Communist Poland which had similar work culture. In general, people were slacking off and stealing from the job to the largest extent possible (stealing because the jobs didn't pay a living wage or, if they did, you couldn't buy things you need from stores anyway, so you stole them from the job if possible). The organization of work was often a complete travesty which makes government jobs a paragon of efficiency and common sense. [1] On top of that, higher promotions required being vocal about supporting the communist party, which led to incompetent mediocrities being promoted.

Overall, while I'm sure there were stil some people who took pride in their work (esp. the less smart and informed ones, who couldn't see the sad bigger picture), I can't tell if it was more common than in capitalism.

[1] For example, it wasn't uncommon for people who bought a new car to take it to a mechanic to disassemble and reassemble it completely. Only then you could be sure that the car is put together properly - the workers in the factory who worked on the car just didn't care. Another story - in an apartment in a new building my parents bought in 1979, a 1m x 3m section of the wall was missing. The building company just didn't bother to build it (the same defect was present in all flats), and have put a thin wall of plaster and cardboard in place instead. Of course, that wall provided almost zero thermal insulation in severe winters that Poland had at the time, so everyone who bought these flats ended up DIY-ing the missing wall themselves (usually with stolen bricks, as you couldn't buy them either).

[jokethrowaway]

If you're referring to Stakhanovite, they were just propaganda workers supported by the communist party with the best tools, hence why the increased productivity. They were meant to motivate / allow the communist regime to extort more work out of workers.

[approxim8ion]

So...HR?

[nullsense]

Yeah... Yeah I remember how much better everything was under Stalin.

...not?