Do we already have the technology...

[Entrails Konfetti]

I think we already have the tecnology for an adcanced form of socialism, but it's not widely accessable to everyone, and for reasons of todays market it's not widely used. For instance if everything back-breaking and menial were to automated that would place alot of people out of work, and that means alot less people to buy commodities. Also in some cases-- such as sugarcane fields, it's more expensive for the capitalists to replace workers with precision machines. They could use cheaper machines, but due to its imperfectations it would destroy capital in the process, so the precision of cheap labour is more effective.

To be honest I don't really know exactly what technologies we have, but even just by reading a magazine on robots and stuff it would seem pretty obvious the technology does exist.

What do you think?

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Well, there are some who claim "advanced socialism" could be realized without machines...

I personally don't. I think we have more help than we realize, but not enough to eliminate all unwanted labor. Cashiers aren't needed anymore, other than maybe one overlooking the process. Manual labor on the fields could be replaced, but at a great cost to capitalists.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by Ge[email protected] 10, 2007 02:17 am
Manual labor on the fields could be replaced, but at a great cost to capitalists.
Oh, well I'm talking about when the proletariat takes over society and rearranges it to their own needs. Sure it will take time to replace the horrible jobs with machines and technology, but the point I'm getting at is that we do have the technology, it does exist.

[Janus]

I think that socialism can be realized at this point with the level of technology that we have. However, I believe that the possible critical point and catalyst for the development of socialism or communism will probably be nanotechnology which is widely regarded as the next industrial revolution. As with most scientific transformations, the "nano age" will usher in a new era of technological development with serious and major implications for our society and societal views as a whole.

[Raúl Duke]

We might be reaching at the point of technological level in which we can head to communism rather quickly.

Like the new nanotech, molecular engineering, etc.

[LSD]

I think we already have the tecnology for an adcanced form of socialism

Well that's the question, isn't it? Because absent that level of technology, no form socialism is possible.

That's the lesson learned from all the miserable "socialist" experiments of the past centuries. No amount of good intentions or "glorious leaders" can make up for the fundamental need for sufficient economic and technological development. Just like capitalism required a certain degree of development to manifest, so will communism.

Read this thread (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=62344&hl="first+world") to see what I mean in greater detail.


Well, there are some who claim "advanced socialism" could be realized without machines...

They're wrong.

[Entrails Konfetti]

Originally posted by Janus+--> (Janus) As with most scientific transformations, the "nano age" will usher in a new era of technological development with serious and major implications for our society and societal views as a whole. [/b]

What is exactly nano-technology? Besides smaller Ipods with bigger memory?



LSD
That's the lesson learned from all the miserable "socialist" experiments of the past centuries. No amount of good intentions or "glorious leaders" can make up for the fundamental need for sufficient economic and technological development. Just like capitalism required a certain degree of development to manifest, so will communism.

Technology can smooth over, or possibly get rid of the divisions of labour.

With the expiriments of the past, yeah the division of labour wasn't smoothing over, and these expiriments gave up world revolution and declared to be socialist in a capitalist world-- which made them in practice be capitalist economies under a dictator with some socialist inspired laws.

With reguards to Communism being a first world movement:
Communism is a world revolution, a technologically advanced country like France or Japan can't be Communist without all of the other countries. Communism is not a first-world movement, but a world movement.

Revolution won't occur because one country started it, it will happen when capitalism (a world system) is in a large crisis-- however it is possible that the majority of the proletariat in a given country is more socialist-conscious than another. It is not Russia's, Spain's, Mexico's, or China's revolution spreading over, it is the worlds revolution-- but a proletariat in a country might be influenced by a socialist-conscious neighbour.

[Janus]

What is exactly nano-technology?
Nanotechnology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanotechnology)
Essentially, it's a new way/mode of constructing materials and assembly which has major implications for much of the science and applied science sphere.