Eventually there will be no need for workers, as robots will be far more efficient at literally everything. At that point Socialism will be the only choice.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Eventually there will be no need for workers, as robots will be far more efficient at literally everything. At that point Socialism will be the only choice.
Fully automated luxury communism is the future :)) @cryptohustlin
That isn't Communism. In Communism, Everybody works. In post-scarcity, nobody does. Government ownership of the robots isn't necessary either, just taxation of their productivity proportional to the wages of displaced workers
No, communism is when the means of production are owned collectively by the people. Communism doesn't at all necessarily imply full employment.
Once again, you are wrong in how you define communism. Have you even read The Manifesto or Das Kapital ?
If you had you would know that no actually communist society has ever even been attempted in the modern era and that contemporary examples of 'communism' such as China, the C.C.C.P, the D.K.R.P etc are communist in name only.
Communism is the total collapse in the social hierarchy which accompanies an economy in which the means of production are collectively owned by the people of Mother Earth, and their excess production is shared freely amongst them. Communism is practically synonymous with any post-scarcity social arrangement aimed at a humane distribution of the world's resources.
I mean real world Communism, of the sort which has actually existed. The sort you describe has never existed on a national scale and never will, because the organized hierarchical movement necessary to overthrow the existing government simply steps in and becomes the new government afterwards every time.
Moreover, it remains true that Communism does not mean handouts, but that the Government assigns everybody a job. It is a mystery to me how it became synonymous with free shit in the US, nothing could be further from the truth.
Also, as I said before, government ownership (aka "collective ownership") of the robots isn't necessary. Just taxation of their productivity proportional to the wages of displaced workers. In this fashion, however many workers have been displaced, the robots which did so generate sufficient revenue to support their basic income payments.
Not the only choice. Picture the future war from the Terminator films, except it's the wealthy elite in control of the machines rather than Skynet.
Sadly never seen the terminator films lol. Not much of a tv guy.