Robotic Communist Society

        Could you imagine a post-work society, one that contains robots doing all of the labor, while humans sit back and live a luxurious life? According to Bryan Merchant in his recent article, "Fully Automated Luxury Communism," he explains how some supporters believe that the idea of a fully automated luxury communism would take the workload off of people and allow them to live a luxurious lifestyle without many work hours, if any at all. For example, Aaron Bastani gave some hints of what this lifestyle could potentially be like, when he said “The demand would be a 10- or 12-hour working week, a guaranteed social wage, universally guaranteed housing, education, healthcare and so on.” Merchant later goes on to mention how this is only the beginning of technology advancements, when he talked about how 35% of jobs in the UK are at risk of being lost, due to automation. Merchant explains how technology is only going to keep increasing and we're barely getting started, claiming that for generations there has always been speculations and thoughts about a utopia society, where labor is minimal and luxury is high. In the end, Merchant explains how this thought process is based largely off of politics. For instance, he used the popular rap group "Migos" as an example, when he stated, “You get these music videos the kids love, where it’s completely outlandish, luxury everywhere. The story of capitalism is that if you work hard and play by the rules you can get this, which is obviously bullshit." The idea is that the government may claim if you obey and do as you're told that you will live a great life with no financial issues; however, for most communist countries, this has never been the case.

03/29 No labor? No thanks.

In Brian Merchant’s article, “Fully Automated Luxury Communism”, he explains the very intriguing belief that eventually, the world will be completely and totally automated, free of human labor which will allow anybody and everybody to experience luxury. With various companies constantly looking for the next way to reduce labor costs, I can see where these “communists” think it is possible. In my opinion though, I disagree. Although this concept sounds as if it will benefit everyone, I can see certain issues arising.  “Recent research indicates that 35% of jobs in the UK are “at risk” of being automated.” Fully automated luxury would mean that eventually most human labor would be obsolete. Humans would only be needed in the case of “quality control”. Imagine a life where people no longer feel the need to better themselves because there is no longer competition for anything. People would no longer feel the need to pursue an education or even learn new things because there would be no real goal in mind. Besides society becoming inherently lazy, a fully technological world would provide means for potential hackers. If a technology as powerful as one like a fully functional robot got placed in the wrong hands, that could mean disaster for everyone. I do agree that technology should continue striving for world where certain things are made more convenient and lighten the burden that labor costs cause for companies, but one that is completely automated weakens human beings as a whole. Humans by nature are the most intelligent animals on the planet and FALC would only lead humans to plateau. This system would cause complete laziness and will eventually cause us to lose the functionality of such an incredible organ like or brain. Although this idea sounds appealing and beneficial to all, I disagree with the idea that there should be a world that is competently free of labor.

Robots welcome!

Brian Merchant, senior editor of Motherboard, VICE’s science and technology channel, introduces an idea of robotic advancement for the benefit of the people. At first, I looked at the title, “Fully Automated Luxury Communism” and thought that the article would be very theoretical. Interestingly enough, Merchant writes about how this type of technological revolution could benefit the entire nation! The sad thing is that businesses have become so greedy that it might be difficult for businesses to transfer to models like this. Plan C is a group that advertises the idea of “luxury for all”. He explains that at our rate of technological advancement, robo-luxury is bound to expand. Things like Phones, cars, computers, and whatnot used to be luxuries and now they are viewed as necessities. My mom used to tell me to do a research paper in college she would have to go to the library and search all day. Now I have the luxury of Google and the other wonders of the internet. I agree with Merchant that this could be an amazing revolution in our lifetime, although the idea of robots doing my laundry and feeding my cat kind of scares the hell out of me, but I think I could get used to it! I just hope we don’t end up like those fat lazy people on the movie “Wall-e” who drive around their automotive chairs and forget to actually use their legs every once in a while… In the long run, if this automated luxury system worked fairly and justly I think we could achieve great things! People wouldn’t have to stress about so many little things that machines could do for them and scientific revelations would occur more frequently. Maybe one day I will live the luxury of having my robot chef make me dinner, but for now I will just be grateful for the luxuries I do have.

Technology Takeover

Brian Merchant’s article “Fully Automated Luxury Communism” (FALC) speaks on a notion that has become increasingly popular. The FALC activists believe that instead of being fearful of technology replacing our jobs, we should let it. Once we cut out human labor eventually the hierarchy will be eliminated and everyone will be able to experience the luxuries of life. While I do understand this way of thinking, because of our natural human ways, I do not think it could ever be accomplished nor do I believe it is a good idea to pursue. The essay states that because the machines will be providing the services, there will be minimal human work like “quality control” but who would be willing to do even the most minimal amount of work without a profit? The skills needed to program and build the machines would take hard labor and possibly educational training; and if there is no personal benefit from putting in the energy, no one would want to do it. I do believe that the hierarchies of the world bring more harm than anything else but I do not believe they will ever be solved. I feel it is in our nature to strive to be better than someone else; no one wants to be exactly like the next person, we want power. While being able to live a life where everyone will have full equality would be nice, it could never happen. Another problem with this idea is that having robots which do everything for us would just make it that much easier for someone to take advantage of the system and use them for oppression. Not to mention how lazy and useless it would make us. Yes, the technologies we have created have made life so much easier than it once was but there is definitely a line we shouldn’t cross.

Luxury or Laziness?

In Brian Merchant's article, "Fully Automated Luxury Communism," the idea of a future in which technology leads services in our society is envisioned. According to the article this dream has been around for centuries and is on it's way toward becoming a reality. As much as it sounds like the ideal position for citizens, this utopian demand for complete automation is going to be the exact problem that causes poverty in our nation. The robots and machines described are doing all of what would have been the blue-collared work that our working and lower class citizens survive off of. In turn, this would leave the blue-collared workers without jobs, without income, and without any ability to climb the social ladder as most do not have the skill levels to advance. This dramatic progression in technology would widen the wealth distribution gap by filling the middle class jobs with robots that do not get an hourly wage. The rest of the work available would be either the dirty work or the corporate owners. Merchant says that this mental image would not focus on the profit, but instead on the people. By this, he implies that it is purely to benefit people's lives and make them more efficient. However, no where in his article does he explain the economic difference it would make on the nation nor attempt to disprove this. The reader is not able to understand how this would affect them more personally in the long run. It seems to be more an immature dream that just emerged and has not yet developed. The author goes on to depict "The demand would be a 10- or 12- hour working week, a guaranteed social wage...," but does not describe or even touch on the subject of how this would properly and successfully get done. This "social wage" has to come from somewhere and if the companies are making as much profit as they are minimally paying laborers, who's to say they would want to pay them any more for less of their time?

Automated Luxury Communism 3/29/17

Brian Merchant’s article “Fully Automated Luxury Communism” focuses on the belief of a small but growing political group that predicts that the world is headed towards total automation and luxury for all. While this seems like an interesting point of view and I can see how it would sound appealing to live a life of luxury while machines take care of everything for us I can’t help but disagree and say that I do not believe that is where the world is headed, and if it is I don’t believe it is such a good thing. Without work people often find themselves bored or without purpose. Think simply about how so often people cant wait to retire, but as soon as they do they have no idea what to do next. I cant imagine an entire world of people who have nothing to do, and nothing to achieve. The removal of purpose and schedule from peoples lives could have tremendous negative impacts. The old saying that idle hands are the devils playground is no joke, some of the worst decisions that individuals make would not be made if they had been given a purpose beforehand. Yes a relaxing future where cars drive themselves, robots make our food, and no one has any stress sounds like an ideal situation it is one that does not consider all elements of human life. 

March 29th: Luxury Communism?

Brian Merchant's article "Fully Automated Luxury Communism" describes communist ideology in a unique manner by highlighting the inevitable path ahead for technology within our society. Luxury communism is described as sharing the benefits of automated labor force to everyone, and removing private ownership rights for these new technologies that replace the work of humans. Using Uber as an example, luxury communist supporter Aaron Bastani argues that due to the company's projected future goal to use only driverless cars, there is no reason this network of cars should be run by a private company with a goal to generate profit. The motto behind this ideology is "Luxury for All", meaning that as technology progresses there should be "common ownership of that which is automated." They believe in a utopia in which machines do all the heavy lifting for the people instead of a profit. Along with common ownership of basically everything, luxury communists' utopian society also has free health care, housing, education, etc. I understand why this ideology has come into existence; their utopian society sounds pretty appealing. However, the ideas presented in this essay neglect a fundamental aspect of communism; The government has all control. The authors methods of explaining this belief make it seem like luxury communism would result in a happy world where everyone owns an equal amount of everything, but the author doesn't include the fact that every single aspect of this projected "utopia" would actually be controlled by a single, all powerful Government. The main issue the followers have with capitalism is corruption within the corporate world, yet their presumed better option is to live in a society run by a government larger and more powerful than any corporation that has ever existed. The thought process behind this seems to be neglecting some key factors. Another thing that truly bothers me about the presented ideals of luxury communism is how ready these people are to enter this world where technology and robots control the entire workforce, and then proceed to credit everyone equally for the inventions of the brilliant engineers who worked incredibly hard to develop these advanced technologies. Luxury communism is based upon being lazy and having work done for you. Their projected utopia and this article in general reminds me so much of the society in the Disney Pixar film, WALL-E, which if you're aware of the events that occur in this film, isn't a very good state of humanity that anyone should want to strive towards.

Automated communism

“What about the other perspectives?” talks about mainly having an open-mind and always acknowledging every other counter-argument that you encounter. Which is important to know and do with the article, “Fully automated luxury communism.” Having read through the article and thought about it, the idea of replacing labor done by humans by machinery and technology still seems a bit wicked to me. Whether you are in favor of the ideology of communism, or in favor of having machines run a part of the productivity labor for a higher efficiency and probably a better profit or not, the fact is that it will leave a lot of people without jobs. The article states that “35% of jobs in the UK are “at risk” of being automated.” That is approximately a third of the whole available jobs. Finding a job may take you months or even a year nowadays, now imagine how difficult it would be if all the jobs available be reduced to approximately forty percent. Taking away the opportunity for people to have a job and being able to provide for their family for machines is immoral. We are trying to reduce the unemployment rate not increase it.  Increasing the automated workforce will only lead us to almost complete dependency on machinery and technology, abolishing almost all of our drive to thrive manually.