I'm new to the concept of anarchism, at least as a vision of society that actually has had thought put into it, so my apologies if this question seems stupid of self centered.
Risking losing context as I ask this, I'm curious about how advanced medicines like insulin (things that aren't small molecules, require rDNA, multinational logistics, supply chains and quality assurance, etc) would work and be distributed. What about advanced medical devices like insulin pumps, subcutaneous glucose monitors, etc?
I know there are some types of anarchist who would say those things wouldn't be needed without industrialization (im not going to gratify that take with a reaponse), but I suspect most still recognize the need for things like this, since millions of people would die without them.
I guess the root of my question is what the motivation would even be for someone to work on projects like that. Type 1 diabetics make up ~0.1% of the population at the highest, and a major hurdle from my perspective would be getting people to work on something needed by so small a population, but requiring such intensive resources to produce. And especially in any kind of transition period, I find it basically impossible to imagine the able bodied revolutionary actually giving a shit whether people like me live to see the "after."
I've done some looking and it seems like broadly, the attitudes range from "you'd make it yourself and its okay because you'd have time to if all your basic needs are met" to "well surely someone would do it altruistically." I also found a few people who just said "people die, get over it," and "the real problem is you should've died when you were 7 but we played god," but I have to assume (hope?) that such ideas are fringe. I'm hoping especially to hear from someone who actually understands why insulin (and pumps and CGMs and all that) are complicated, hard things that probably won't get made purely by volunteer labor at the huge scale needed. Like, it's not one of those things you can whip up at a local pharmacy, its far too complex for that.
I guess in all, I like the idea of a society without hierarchy, where self determination and community engagement become the de facto environment...but from my admittedly novice perspective, it sure doesn't feel like much thought has been given to how those of us with extremely short expiration dates should stability evaporate actually survive the transition.
Over the last week that I've been reading and thinking about this, I keep coming back to the inherent (though hopefully temporary) loss of stability that comes with any revolution. In that kind of scenario, I just...die. Along with millions like me. Either from supply chains failing during transition, or my own bullet because I'm staring down the barrel of an agonizing final week that ends with me dehydrated, starving, vomiting blood and gasping for air. From here it's really hard to see a place for me in an anarchist future.
Sorry, I recognize thats a little dark. But its something im finding myself having to think about more and more as collapse seems to draw ever closer.
Just hoping anyone has insights to share. And if i respond in the comments and i seem a little forceful, I promise I'm not trying to be a dick, its just that this is kind of existential for me, so I am probably going to be prone to pushing back or really pressing on certain aspects. If im being rude, please dont hesitate to tell me and I'll try to reframe to avoid that. It's neither the goal nor the intended process.
The same way it already does, just without big pharma deciding who dies and who gets treatment. Doctors already work in unions and syndicates. It's a matter if people want to continue the parasitic relationship with capitalists.
I suppose I should clarify, I'm not really talking about the doctor end. People want to be doctors. Even in a future where being a doctor is not "lucrative" in the current sense, the life satisfaction, social prestige and genuine desire to help people work in tandem to ensure that absent capitalist abuses, the world would not want for doctors. In fact, I suspect that doctor to patient medical care would improve considerably for most people. I'm really thinking about the unsexy parts of medicine. Someone has to work in a factory to get the insulin made after it's researched and designed and before doctors prescribe it. Someone has to be in a plant that produces teflon tubing. I fully don't believe that factory work (and especially factory work that can expose you to toxic chemicals like plasticizers) is something anyone actually wants to do. It's not classic dream job material. And unfortunately, the production of some medications is too complex to have people just do a weekend in rotation to share the load like you might with say garbage collection. And to put it plainly, my worry isn't "nobody will want to work anymore," it's "what stops people like me from being forgotten when the incentive structure to do the dirty work of keeping us alive is gone?" The answer might be great, but I just don't know what it is.
To be clear, this isn't me saying "the current system is great!" it's me asking "yes, but in a practical boots on the ground way, how would this part work?"
Sorry, no. I work in a medical school, these students just want money, and the social prestige is only because they get rich.
That's unfortunate to hear. I have a couple friends in the medical field (nurse, PA) and a few who are teachers, and they do these things because they find them fulfilling and meaningful despite the pay not being extravagant and the work being hard. I assumed that was not uncommon.