Automation GANG

In Wage Labour and Capital Marx says:

The economists tell us, to be sure, that those laborers who have been rendered superfluous by machinery find new venues of employment. They dare not assert directly that the same laborers that have been discharged find situations in new branches of labor. Facts cry out too loudly against this lie. Strictly speaking, they only maintain that new means of employment will be found for other sections of the working class; for example, for that portion of the young generation of laborers who were about to enter upon that branch of industry which had just been abolished. Of course, this is a great satisfaction to the disabled laborers. There will be no lack of fresh exploitable blood and muscle for the Masters. Capitalists – the dead may bury their dead. This consolation seems to be intended more for the comfort of the capitalists themselves than their laborers. If the whole class of the wage-laborer were to be annihilated by machinery, how terrible that would be for capital, which, without wage-labor, ceases to be capital!

But capital not only lives upon labor. Like a master, at once distinguished and barbarous, it drags with it into its grave the corpses of its slaves, whole hecatombs of workers, who perish in the crises. We thus see that if capital grows rapidly, competition among the workers grows with even greater rapidity – i.e., the means of employment and subsistence for the working class decrease in proportion even more rapidly; but, this notwithstanding, the rapid growth of capital is the most favorable condition for wage-labor

Shouldn't the primary task of communists be then to ensure and accelerate the rate of automation of labour?

Other urls found in this thread:

8ch.net/pol/res/10899332.html#q10899560
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

nuh uh the major existing goal is to establish russia as the major global imperial force becuz anti-imperialism

no shitposts pls

Yes.

This has always been an assumption, plain and simple, which befits the role of modern economists as priests. There is no evidence, empirical or theoretical, that guarantees now jobs will open up.

We had some amusing ideas in past threads about automation and UBI about this. The latter, which Porky is already trying to push centuries ahead of time, is a method through which capitalism could survive after full automation, which would otherwise be impossible (barring another proposal yet to be invented, obviously). Well, UBI, by definition, eliminates wage-labor as it eliminates labor, yet the imagined scenario of a fully-automated society with UBI isn't rosy at all. Wealth gap and class immobility would reach unprecedented levels, and basic logic dictates that UBI recipients would receive just enough to survive plus an extra in order to keep the economy growing. The capitalists, meanwhile, will have (presumably hereditary) money-printing machines, and won't ever even have to deal with plebs. So there's no visible exploitation going on; in fact, the UBI-receiving pleb is the most exploitation-free lower class to have ever existed. Yet there's something horribly wrong with this scenario. What gives?

That's because exploitation should not be reduced to surplus-value-squeezing, which requires non-automated jobs to be done by wage-laborers. The exploitation also presupposes an unequal – extremely unequal – distribution of property of the means of production, which is what creates the need for wage-laborers in the first place, as the owners of property can't work all of it itself. In a way, surplus-value is a side effect of the private poperty. After all, no capitalist State worth its salt will openly enforce a law saying plebs should be exploited. No, it will always enforce laws protecting private property, which itself necessarily creates exploitation. Same effect, much more legitimacy to fool the plebs with.

And that leads us to the use of technology, and information in general, in capitalism. Marx thought industrialization was the best thing in forever because it allowed mankind to finally produce enough to provide for everybody, but capitalism was completely fucking things up. So even tho industrialization is an absolute pre-requisite for socialism (at least at a level beyond tribal proto-socialism), it's stillmisused to great effect by Porky. And here's where full automation comes in. After all, it is just the end result of the historical process that began with industrialization, and Porky can, and will, fag it up at any point if he's able to. So much like basic industrialization, full automation can be used to create a better world for everybody, or unlivable hellscapes surrounding tiny bubbles where the capitalists live.

tl;dr: increasing automation all by itself isn't inherently good because capitalism will misuse it regardless, since direct exploitation itself isn't the root cause of the problems of capitalism and Porky finds a way around it. What is needed is full automation under socialism or communism.

(trips)
This has been the most succint mockery of ☭TANKIE☭ mentality I'm yet to see.

Is Marx not saying the exact opposite? That automation does the worker no good but only serves to increase competition between workers?

There you have it folks, become a engineer for the revolution. Starting a company in silicon valley is the most revolutionary thing you can do

Easier said than done. Increasing automation is one the one hand driven by technological advancement, which is unpredictable. Little other you can do to drive that than free universal schooling and generous research grants.
On the other hand, you can, within technological bounds, increase the proportion of fixed capital in the equation, but here also you can only go so far. Every part of the "surplus" of a capital cycle re-invested in more capital is productive labour that is not meeting people's direct needs. Sacrificing the light industry to serve the heavy industries, which is something people will only put up with to a point. Democratic checks seem in order here, because if your productive forces are not serving the people, what the fuck are they for?

This but unironically.

This is a historical fact wtf are you talking about