How are you planning to deal with automation that is going to destroy (or should I say replace?) the working class?

This will be the long-awaited revolution of the LeftComs, where capitalism literally collapses under its own contradictions. This will cause massive unemployment, drop the rate of profit to fuck all whilst simultaneously making it so that no one has any money to even buy the goods the capitalist produce and basically just collapse the whole system. This is when even the most reactionary worker will realize this system cannot sustain him any longer and join us in seizing the machines from the capitalists by force, thereby finally destroying the system through a bottom up revolution of the proletariat, as Marx already predicted so long ago.

Not if they kill us all first.

Honestly the advent of true economic automation will be the test where the future of mankind is decided for good. The working class can either win or die.

Automation is not going to destroy or replace the working class

Massive education drive
Could still happen if Democrats took power (if a non-corporatist did anyway)

Socialist solution: seizing the (automated) means of production.

SocDem solution: universal basic income and/or shorter working hours.

That, or regression into barbarism.

Automation cannot replace the working class within capitalism.It must be transformed if the capitalist system is to continue.

Firstly, machines do not produce extra value, as they are not subject to exploitation so the more machines displace workers in capital invested the less total value is generated by capitalism.

Secondly, goods and services have to be, consumed by someone. Maybe services will decline into further servitude and that will replace production.Either way you need to extract value from the many by having them expend back into you their already unfair wages.

I mean it could end with the rich eventually distancing themselves from the workers into feudal-like societies enforced technologically , where the unprivileged are dominated by centuries worth of technology development and iron-fisted robotic enforcers. But I doubt that will happen in my lifetime, and without significant opposition.

That first point seems more based on semantics than economic reality. A machine is just a worker which has a fixed wage (energy/maintenance costs) and doesn't demand raises. The whole LTV is based on the assumption that humans are necessary to do useful work.

Lament the death of man.

Programmer user here. Im going to construct automated riot bots which will loot and protest on behalf of the prole until classes are dissolved.
Fight fire with fire.

Cyborg upgrades when?

It's probably more effective to develop an AI to exploit internet-connected systems. Physical security tends to be better than network security.

This is an interesting point. The value is still generated though, even with machines, there is just a lessened cost to the manufacturer.
A self driving truck transporting goods does not create any inherent value in the product
But a McDonalds kiosk which puts together your sandwich does create the same value in the product as a human would. Thus, the machine has been exploited for its capital

You would be surprised. Besides weak passwords and stupid people, network security is a fairly tough thing to crack.
Although, if you have a bank with security guards and a Anarchobot with no fear of death, it would have no problem walking in the bank and setting fire to it.

Physical security only seems weak now because there are no serious physical threats. If unemployment hit 30% you'd see much more militarized private security equipped with weapons which would put any civilian-made anarchobot to shame.

Also developing military hardware is slow and expensive. The test and improvement cycle can be much, much faster in software, and it's a much more natural environment for a computer to interact with.

What if the ruling class have enough of a self-preservation instinct to institute a basic income? A future of basic income and ultra-cheap manufactured goods (without labor costs prices would get driven way down) doesn't sound so bad. It would be hard to make any profit on manufacturing so the capitalists might move on to trying to make all their money from artificial monopolies on "intellectual property" whose creation they fund, and might not even resist particularly if the voters wanted to nationalize the robotic "means of production" (they could earn some royalties each time someone orders one of their designs to be built by a public robot factory or 3D printer).

As for intellectual property, if everyone was earning a liveable basic income then the creators of intellectual property, like software designers and engineers and artists, might become more interested in working on projects where there won't be any capitalist paying them a salary, but they will earn a share of the sales once the project is complete–so you could get a natural evolution to something close to market socialism, with capitalists maybe still existing but becoming less central to the economy.

The only choice is the revolutionize the means of production.

If a UBI existed I think copyright would die overnight. There are a lot of people who'd love to just work on open-source designs and art, but can't due to financial constraints. The non-free content would face massive competition from free content.

Capital will always find a way to pay people less no matter how educated they are. If everyone became a software engineer their salaries and benefits would drop down significantly.