what too much digital circus, slopaganda, and warhammer 40k memes makes to your brain. at first you go "for the emperor!" when you notice, you are making part of jehova's witness for nerds

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 10 hours ago (9 children)

If you're trying to say this is how some of the capitalists think, I can believe that, but I'd argue the progression of automation is less about a preoccupied strategy to (attempt to) eliminate the working class and more about humans generally trying to improve on what came before, in order to make one or more things easier than in the past. The difference with the capitalists in power is that they use the automation to help maintain/reproduce their power and displace workers in the process, which creates a reaction from workers and subsequent (attempted) crackdown from the capitalists and so on. Socialists, on the other hand, as we've seen glimmers of in China with the one court ruling about a shoddy excuse to replace a worker with AI, they try to use it to solve problems while continuing to respect and value the worker.

The only actual way for a capitalist to solve the worker-capitalist divide is to turn class traitor and help the working class take over, in order to transition to a state where class stratification is no more. They can have whatever delusions they want about how they're going to magic away the material with better ideas, but no matter what form the oppression takes, it will produce contradictions and those contradictions will produce some amount of resistance until such time as their exploitation becomes unsustainable and either implodes into a chaotic power vacuum, possibly producing warlord type stuff, or is subverted by organized revolt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (8 children)

    This is ultimately a question of immediate motivation versus ultimate goals. I agree that increasing automation to replace subsets of workers is the logical choice for any capitalist, because that is obvious. However, I only need to see so many speeches from Sam Altman to know that their claim of replacing massive swathes of workers is only a stepping stone to the ultimate goal of full worker replacement. It is the obvious and logical progression.

    I disagree entirely with your theory that the capitalists must turn class traitor to solve the worker-capitalist divide. I don't understand why this worker-capitalist divide is considered so permanent as to only have one solution: communism. There is no way that Peter Theil considers anything other than the extermination of all the poors a viable solution. Peter Thiel's favorite philosopher has already said as much:

    People who are not 'productive' would best be converted to biodiesel. Barring that, "our goal, in short, is a humane alternative to genocide. That is: the ideal solution achieves the same result as mass murder (the removal of undesirable elements from society), but without any of the moral stigma."

    "The best humane alternative to genocide"...is "to virtualize them. A virtualized human is in permanent solitary confinement, waxed like a bee larva into a cell which is sealed except for emergencies. This would drive him insane, except that the cell contains an immersive virtual-reality interface which allows him to experience a rich, fulfilling life in a completely imaginary world."

    — Curtis Yarvin, with approval/following from Peter Thiel, JD Vance, Marc Andreessen ^[https://newrepublic.com/article/183971/jd-vance-weird-terrifying-techno-authoritarian-ideas] ^[https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/11/patchwork-2-profit-strategies-for-our/]

    If you just kill/digitally lobotomize all of the workers because you don't need them anymore, then it doesn't matter. This process will undoubtedly create resistance from the former workers being replaced and slaughtered, but if your AI can improve the robots doing the slaughtering enough, then you can guarantee your win. The job of US socialists today is to organize to win before the capitalists get to this point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

    but if your AI can improve the robots doing the slaughtering enough, then you can guarantee your win.

    There is a difference between some capitalists have terrifyingly awful ideas for how to control the poors and those ideas having a clear, realistic material path to them that avoids negation of itself. The point I keep trying to make is about how dialectical materialism works. It doesn't guarantee communism and I never said that it does, but communism is the only way we know of to resolve class contradictions. Changing the form of exploitation doesn't resolve class contradictions, no matter how many people you murder in the process; it changes the form of exploitation. This is what I mean when I say, "The only actual way for a capitalist to solve the worker-capitalist divide is to turn class traitor and help the working class take over, in order to transition to a state where class stratification is no more."

    It's not that I think a bunch of capitalists are going to turn class traitor out of good sense. My point is that their ideas about overcoming the contradictions with more and better violence is vary shades of delusions; it is out of touch with how dialectical materialism works and (much of the time) probably wholly unaware that it exists, instead operating from idealism and the belief that better, smarter ideas will overcome the material problems. This allows them to wallow in a pseudo-intellectual "rationalist" haze where they can cogitate and navel-gaze over how this next form of mass oppression will surely be the one that stops the poors from revolting.

    History has had people who have done worse than these modern techbro grifters with far less technology to do it. These modern grifters push ideology that is so far up its own ass, it can't see the light of day. The world got easily ground to a halt by a global pandemic just a few years ago and that was a relatively mild virus compared to how bad it could have been. Climate change keeps getting worse and could reach tipping points with staggering consequences. Meanwhile, these chucklefucks are techbroing about virtualizing people, while data centers for current generative AI alone require hefty resources to create and maintain.

    I fully believe they're terrible people and want to do terrible things. I'm just saying we shouldn't believe the world can work the way they say it does because they desire it to work that way. Identifying threats is not just about reading people's saturday morning cartoon villain aspirations. It's also about working out what the most pressing, realistic threats are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

    I do not know dialectical materialism well enough to be able to respond to your points, but I presume you're addressing similar caveats as what @TabularTuxedo says? Material limitations are absolutely real, but the capitalists hope that AGI will magically solve all of these issues (as I have posted here, and saw that you responded).

    I also don't think this is very realistic, but it doesn't stop them from screwing all of us over in the process. I've noticed we've had this same conversation on previous threads, and I want to make clear that I don't disagree with your points on this plan being much harder to pull off than it seems.

    I just think that this maximalist version of the future that the capitalists want is very good for organizing. It makes explicit all of the psychopathy that they have when they think about dealing with us, and makes clear the two pathways we have ahead of us. The liberals need to realize that if they keep compromising, they will make sure we, the workers, lose forever.

    P.S. do you have good resources on dialectical materialism so I can learn more?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 hours ago (1 child)

    I think I understand what you're going for. We do need to organize, that is for sure.

    As to dialectical materialism, here's some I have bookmarked:

    By Cowbee: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/12214873

    By Yogthos: https://dialecticaldispatches.substack.com/p/the-toolset-of-reality

    Feel free to return to this conversation after reading more on diamat if you think the points I have made don't satisfactorily hold up to how it works. I want us to be grounded in it, but don't pretend to be an expert on it and am open to discussion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (3 children)

    I'm gonna be a little practical right now. Who is gonna build the drones, the surveillance cameras, and gas chambers needed to kill us all? There's not gonna be some day where general purpose AI is built and then everybody dies. Stuff will still need workers in order to build the tools to replace them.

    This is the old historical process we all know and love. The one that kicked off this whole "capitalism" thing: mass automation replacing workers. It can get fast but it's never instantaneous.

    And like, at every step of the way until self-sustaining AI (if that's even possible but let's assume it is), the laws of Capitalism will still apply: every factory that produces components for data centers will want some profit and -- assuming the slow replacement of workers -- will see their rate of profit going down the drain. That will kick off austerity, wage cuts etc. which will accelerate class struggle.

    What I'm saying is that capital doesn't have a grand plan. It's a bunch of enterprises that have their own interests. Even if some rich assholes at the top have a plan, they can't personally plan the entire economy, they can't create killer robots out of thin air, they can't avoid squeezing the workers dry until AI becomes their omnipotent servant, and they can't make every single factory or enterprise stop thinking about profits for a little bit until they don't need labor anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

    I completely agree with these caveats. This is the ultimate question: whether the capitalists can coordinate enough to pull it off, or whether their natural miscoordination will give us enough time to organize against and get rid of them. Which side will win out in the USA? I do not think anybody knows.

    I'm most afraid of us managing to get New Deal 2/UBI-style concessions from the capitalists, which placate the working class while they finish getting to full automation. It will be an unforgivable loss (and probably what U.S. liberals deserve) if they pull the same trick on us again for the 2nd and final time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 child)

    Well, the main point is that capital largely operates outside of bourgeois control. I think it's more useful to treat it as such.

    Like, think about probably the biggest blunder in history: the transfer of the industrial sector of the US to China.

    The Amerikan industrial sector was the defining factor of the US hegemony. It was what allowed the New Deal and the victory over the USSR to happen.

    And they handed it over. Because it was profitable.

    So I don't think treating the bourgeoisie as an organized class is very useful for communists. they are dangerous, sure, but it's mostly because they have the same goal of screwing over the proletariat. Other than that, they have their own struggles between themselves.

    Given these points, a New New Deal probably isn't gonna happen. Again, because they literally handed over what allowed it to happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 6 hours ago*

    I do agree here, and I hope you're right. We have seen much noise from American capitalists about moving manufacturing out of China and, ideally, back to the United States (not happening right now because of labor cost / profit margin issues) or to other Global South countries like Vietnam (with its socialist-oriented market economy, because they learned nothing from their debacle with China's market socialism).

    Again, the magical capitalist dream of AGI is that the fully automated factories will be so cheap to run because of no labor costs that they can bring manufacturing back in the USA. It is the deus ex machina they hope will fix everything and guarantee U.S. dominance forever.

  • source
  • parent