Basically dress up the economics as futurism instead of tankie shit with its associations.

Marx said we should hold the means of production in common, and follow a socially beneficial plan. But a lot of audiences would roll their eyes and close their ears as soon as I said Marx.

If instead I say, “Artificial intelligence and computerised logistics are becoming so sophisticated we can think about phasing out the human element of management. We can choose democratically what we want the robots to do and they will produce it for us.”

This might sound like subterfuge to some of you, but it’s not actually dishonest. It’s a correct way to describe a Marxian economy. I replaced the phrase “the means of production” with “the robots”.

The real win here is you get around “It’s easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.” People don’t expect a Marxist world revolution. People don’t expect the fall of capitalism. But people totally do expect robots and AI in the coming decades.

  • ComradeSalad
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 months ago

    Marx himself envisioned the workers being replaced by “automatons”, either in pursuit of a communist society, or by force for capitalists in pursuit of profits.

    Automation and robotics are a logical next step in technology for a socialist society.

    People need to be sold on the fact that they will be able to work less. Not more efficiently.