Speculation: Robot Labour and Capitalism.

[Oswy]

Among the things capitalism is associated with is the constant advance of technology. However, would the forces of capitalism permit the development of advanced robot labour which could genuinely replace almost all human work (manual and non-manual)?

It seems to me that this scenario would be problematic for capitalism, even bringing it to an end, because there'd no longer be very much of a mechanism by which to exploit human labour. Would advanced robot labour be the ultimate breakthrough for Marxism?

[razboz]

Among the things capitalism is associated with is the constant advance of technology. However, would the forces of capitalism permit the development of advanced robot labour which could genuinely replace almost all human work (manual and non-manual)?

It seems to me that this scenario would be problematic for capitalism, even bringing it to an end, because there'd no longer be very much of a mechanism by which to exploit human labour. Would advanced robot labour be the ultimate breakthrough for Marxism?

capitalism does not need to exploit human labor. the exploitation of human labour by the capitalist is simply by-product of capitalist "logic". should robots be ably to replace efficiently human workers, capitalist production would undoubtedly switch over. in fact many consumer goods are now made in a fully automated way: televisions, cars, etc. this has (as i'm sure you can tell) not brought about the end of capitalism. instead i would argue that the advent of automated means of production could give capitalism a new breath. indeed with no workers in the way the capitalists would not have any problems like strikes or wages or whatever.

what will happen is that most people will go from production of goods to the production and mantainance of services, reproducing the mechanisms of exploitation in other fields.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I wonder about the old discussions regarding the revival of the slave mode of production.

[Oswy]

capitalism does not need to exploit human labor. the exploitation of human labour by the capitalist is simply by-product of capitalist "logic". should robots be ably to replace efficiently human workers, capitalist production would undoubtedly switch over. in fact many consumer goods are now made in a fully automated way: televisions, cars, etc. this has (as i'm sure you can tell) not brought about the end of capitalism. instead i would argue that the advent of automated means of production could give capitalism a new breath. indeed with no workers in the way the capitalists would not have any problems like strikes or wages or whatever.

what will happen is that most people will go from production of goods to the production and mantainance of services, reproducing the mechanisms of exploitation in other fields.

Fair enough, but if mechanised labour was to sufficiently replace human labour where would the consumer base come from to spend money on manufactured goods? Those rendered unemployed by that change wouldn't be buying much.

[Psy]

capitalism does not need to exploit human labor. the exploitation of human labour by the capitalist is simply by-product of capitalist "logic". should robots be ably to replace efficiently human workers, capitalist production would undoubtedly switch over. in fact many consumer goods are now made in a fully automated way: televisions, cars, etc. this has (as i'm sure you can tell) not brought about the end of capitalism. instead i would argue that the advent of automated means of production could give capitalism a new breath. indeed with no workers in the way the capitalists would not have any problems like strikes or wages or whatever.

what will happen is that most people will go from production of goods to the production and mantainance of services, reproducing the mechanisms of exploitation in other fields.

The problem is the value of machinary is fixed, if a capitalists lowers the equivalent of living standards of machinary (maintenance) the machinary becomes less productive, the threat of unemployment does not threaten machinary as machinary are not conscious beings. This means the production potential of the machinary is built into its market value (a.k.a exchange value) thus the capitalist can't extract any surplus value from the machinary.

[razboz]

Fair enough, but if mechanised labour was to sufficiently replace human labour where would the consumer base come from to spend money on manufactured goods? Those rendered unemployed by that change wouldn't be buying much.

You're right in that sense, the unemployed dont buy much. however the main market for manufactured goods are the middle and upper-classes who anyway arent involved in the kind of production that could be easily replaced by robots. with more goods being produced at much lower costs, workers would probably just be absorbed into industries where being a human is still important like much of the services industry: insurance, banks, helpdesks, reatail and so on.

However we're a long way form that. for the moment robots are still more expensive than people and until we mechanize africa, we probably wont see anything like what you're suggesting.