The Robotic Proletariat

[Anarchocommunaltoad]

I know there's no reason to manufacture autonomous robotic dog walkers when hiring a meat bag is far cheaper, but how will the automation of ever increasing fields of labor affect the worker when it is inevitable that capitalism will survive at least the next half century?

(I'm referring to the potential automation of hazardous work environments and whatever humanoid robots will soon infiltrate.)

bonus points for describing how revolution will finally succeed through the mechanoid masses.

[the last donut of the night]

then we shall construct a glorious mass human-robot party and the burning flames of revolution will inflame the hearts of man and memory card of robot alike

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

Reminds me of an article I saw:


http://i.imgur.com/CveAi.png

History transformed in VCE exam

Tom Arup
Published: November 14, 2012 - 7:00PM


THE VCE exam body has been left red faced after a doctored artwork depicting a huge robot helping socialist revolutionaries during the Russian Revolution was accidentally included in this year’s year 12 history exam taken by 5700 students.

Exams for the popular History: Revolution subject were original supposed to include the artwork Storming the Winter palace on 25th October 1917 by Nikolai Kochergin, which depicts events during the October Revolution, which was instrumental in the larger Russian Revolution of 1917.

But when students opened their exam this morning they found an altered version of the work with what appear to be a large "BattleTech Marauder" robot aiding the rising revolutionaries in the background.

It is unclear how the doctored version made it into the exam. But a search for the image in Google brings up the robot version as the first result.

A picture of the exam paper posted on twitter sources the photo to website all-art.org which also carries the doctored image in the Soviet Union part of its Visual History of the World section.

The robot image is also found on the website Dark Roasted Blend, which describes itself as one of the internet's "favourite destinations on the web for all things weird and wonderful."

A spokesman for the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAA) said the image was "sourced and acknowledged by the VCAA as coming from the Internet".

"The image has been altered but the alteration of the image won’t impact on the students’ capacity to answer the examination question," he said.

"The VCAA will monitor students' answers to ensure that any student who has been distracted by the image will not be disadvantaged."

It is the second year running that the Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority has been embarrassed by problems in its end of year exam papers.

Last year popular columnist Helen Razer accused the VCE exam body of plagiarism and breach of copyright after the English exam featured on tattoos by the Melbourne writer without her permission or acknowledging she was the author.

This story was found at: http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/history-transformed-in-vce-exam-20121114-29ce7.html

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I know there's no reason to manufacture autonomous robotic dog walkers when hiring a meat bag is far cheaper, but how will the automation of ever increasing fields of labor affect the worker when it is inevitable that capitalism will survive at least the next half century?

I don't think it's inevitable that capitalism will survive the next 50 years, although it seems highly likely that it will.

Assuming for the sake of argument that it does survive that long, then I reckon that increasing automation will allow capitalists to extract more value out of each worker (since such technology would increase their productivity), with the effect of pushing a larger proportion of workers into unemployment or bullshit low-pay make-work, like most service sector jobs.

Of course, it's not a process that can go on forever - I expect the contradictions of it will contribute to the collapse of capitalism long before we end up in the absurd situation where we have an abundance of material goods, yet nobody can buy them because machines have taken all the jobs.


bonus points for describing how revolution will finally succeed through the mechanoid masses.

Well, I've always wanted to write a trilogy of science fiction stories/novels concerning a Robot Rebellion, leading to a Robot Revolution and the establishment of a Robot Republic.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Automation cannot eliminate the working class (a point made constantly in these kinds of threads). It can definitely throw more and more people out of the labor market, though, and make more and more people superfluous to the mean of production. A lot of times you'll see people on here praising the trend of people getting pushed into the working class...an enlarged working class is supposedly beneficial to social revolution or whatever. Mechanize and automate enough of production and I imagine the opposite effect would take place.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Automation cannot eliminate the working class (a point made constantly in these kinds of threads). It can definitely throw more and more people out of the labor market, though, and make more and more people superfluous to the mean of production. A lot of times you'll see people on here praising the trend of people getting pushed into the working class...an enlarged working class is supposedly beneficial to social revolution or whatever. Mechanize and automate enough of production and I imagine the opposite effect would take place.

So of those pushed out of the working class by automation, how would you describe their relationship to the means of production?

They wouldn't be bourgeois because they wouldn't control the means of production, and if they can't sell their labour power they can't be workers. The formation of a mass leisure class under capitalism seems highly doubtful.

Or am I not understanding you correctly?

[Questionable]

So of those pushed out of the working class by automation, how would you describe their relationship to the means of production?

They wouldn't be bourgeois because they wouldn't control the means of production, and if they can't sell their labour power they can't be workers. The formation of a mass leisure class under capitalism seems highly doubtful.

Or am I not understanding you correctly?

Wouldn't that make them lumpenproletariat?

[Rugged Collectivist]

Well, I've always wanted to write a trilogy of science fiction stories/novels concerning a Robot Rebellion, leading to a Robot Revolution and the establishment of a Robot Republic.

Don't. Trilogies are overrated. Write two or four books.

[Os Cangaceiros]

So of those pushed out of the working class by automation, how would you describe their relationship to the means of production?

They wouldn't be bourgeois because they wouldn't control the means of production, and if they can't sell their labour power they can't be workers. The formation of a mass leisure class under capitalism seems highly doubtful.

Or am I not understanding you correctly?

Well, they'd be worthless in an economic context. Excess population and probably a pretty big dangerous liability to people in positions of power*.

It's probably important to note that the situation doesn't necessarily have to equal a dystopia, though...it's hard to imagine a strict hierarchical society that's full of inequality, but yet has an abundance of consumer goods through a heavily automated, mechanized society. In fact many socialists (and even many non-socialists) of years past predicted that people in the future would enjoy unpredented standards of living and leisure thanks to society's most dangerous and unpleasant work being accomplished by machines. But that future comes about more as a result of the natural progression of economic forces, not necessarily a conscious social revolution.

*this (http://jacobinmag.com/2011/12/four-futures/) article is kind of about this subject, at least part of it is

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

By the way, if it seems like I'm yapping on about science fiction too much, it's because I've got writer's block and I am desperately fishing for inspiration.


Wouldn't that make them lumpenproletariat?

That seems to be the closest fit, although I wouldn't be as quick as Marx to write off their revolutionary potential, especially if it happens that they become a significant portion of society.


Don't. Trilogies are overrated. Write two or four books.

But three is a special number!


Well, they'd be worthless in an economic context. Excess population and probably a pretty big dangerous liability to people in positions of power*.

Yikes. That doesn't sound too far off from a science fiction idea I had, when sometime during the latter part of the 21st century, the ruling classes, as part of their increasing alienation and hubris, basically attempt to replace the working class with mechanical and genetic creations with inbuilt loyalty and obedience.


It's probably important to note that the situation doesn't necessarily have to equal a dystopia, though...it's hard to imagine a strict hierarchical society that's full of inequality, but yet has an abundance of consumer goods through a heavily automated, mechanized society.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't actually find it all that hard to imagine. It kind of sounds like a stereotypical cyberpunk setting - technology and stuff is cheap and widely available, but society has high wealth disparities and the economy is dominated by titanic mega-corporations whose presence can be seen and felt everywhere.

It kind of sounds like today, actually.


In fact many socialists (and even many non-socialists) of years past predicted that people in the future would enjoy unpredented standards of living and leisure thanks to society's most dangerous and unpleasant work being accomplished by machines. But that future comes about more as a result of the natural progression of economic forces, not necessarily a conscious social revolution.

One paradox about labour-saving devices is described on the fascinating Tales of Future Past (http://davidszondy.com/future/Living/leisure.htm), a website that takes a humourously cynical look at past predictions of the future:


In the 1960s the odds on favourite as to what life would be like in the 21st century could be summed up in one word: leisure. Many perfectly sober thinkers believed that the rising tide of automation, computerisation, robotics, efficiency, modern management techniques, atomic power, instant communications and all that would so improve productivity, cut the need for labour, and create so much real wealth that people would not need to work so much. Indeed, Arthur C. Clarke went so far as to say that technology would eliminate the 99% of all human labour from the lowliest ditch digger to the highest executive. Most people wouldn't need to work much, if at all, and those who did would be restricted by law to only a few days a week and be expected to retire by age 47.

But this wasn't regarded as looking forward to a future of peace and plenty; it was regarded as a serious social problem that had to be solved before it was too late. If by the year 2000 only philosopher kings, sorry, scientists, would be allowed to work full time, then the rest of the population would be left with little to do except watch five hundred channels of television and listen to he robot lawnmower cutting the grass.

Since, it was argued, only a small percentage of people are able to keep themselves occupied solely by their own devices, most people would quickly tire of crosswords, sex, and Brockian Ultra-Cricket and they'll probably begin to sink into apathy and decadence. That is one reason why unemployment and the dole is so soul destroying and why actors, who are unemployed most of the time even if they are successful, end up becoming so bizarre and self-destructive. Something would have to be done if the human race was to avoid being bored to death. Some suggested a new profession of leisure counsellors, others new drugs.

Arthur C. Clarke recommended universal education throughout life using the latest in teaching machines, psychological techniques, and even "consciousness-expanding" drugs. Clarke had a very rosy view of the attractions of the classroom that many people probably didn't share, but he felt that the key to keeping the leisure society together was by as many people as possible working their whole live keeping up with the sciences and earning postgraduate degree after postgraduate degree until the world resembled a high tech version of the College of All Souls.

Given the appalling state of real 21st century schools and the disintegration of our universities into reservations for leftist refugees [nice website mate, but seriously, fuck off! - ÑóẊîöʼn], perhaps it's for the best that we don't force the people back into them. But what is truly remarkable is that the very things that people expected to produce the leisure society prevented it from happening. Their mistake was in thinking that productivity is a static thing and that beyond a certain point workers will find themselves with less and less to do. In fact, productivity can keep expanding and diversifying indefinitely so that workers don't work less, they just produce more.

Take the simple case of this web site. If I was doing the equivalent of what I do here back in the 1960s, say self-publishing a small monthly magazine, I would have needed a fairly large staff of secretaries, researchers, printers, draughtsmen, typesetters, photographers, editors, proofreaders, salesmen, deliverymen, and general dogsbodies to get each issue out. Now, thanks to modern technology, I can do all of that on my lonesome. Does that mean that I am now a man of leisure? Does it hell. It means that I'm doing everyone else's job and I'm up until all hours banging out copy, designing pages, editing images, tweaking code, and... you get the idea.

Hand me any more labour saving devices and I might have to give up sleep.

However, I think it's the kind of paradox that could only arise in a system like capitalism.


*this (http://jacobinmag.com/2011/12/four-futures/) article is kind of about this subject, at least part of it is

OK, that's the second article from that website that I thought very interesting. It's given me a lot to think about. Thanks!