Monday, March 23, 2015
Blog Comment for Fully Automated Luxury Communism
I anticipate that many of the students in our class (as well readers of this article) may find that this reading is incorrect. So my “naysayer” will be those that have objections to the text. I strongly agree with the points the article makes with its objections to Capitalism and share its hopeful message. However, many readers might argue that the reading is far too radical and that communism/socialism is directly opposed to the America Ideal. Surely, Capitalists and Americans the like are likely to respond by saying, “A society of shared wealth and resources will never work because those at the bottom are likely to take advantage of the situation, while those at the top who are providing the wealth and resources will react by stopping production. Under Communism, we all fall down.” So is the proposal of the reading realistic? Will it be able to function when we take into account human free will and inclination towards greediness? Yes and yes though the response is justified considering how we Americans have grown to detest Communism in all forms. The argument from the Capitalists does not taken into account the “Fully automated” portion of this type of Communism. With machines providing all wealth and resources, there would be no tainting of the system by human will. Research and development would still occur (believe it or not people do those things without financial incentive) to allow for even more efficient means of production. Besides, the American system is not directly opposed to socialism: consider welfare programs, the push for a larger minimum wage, and financial services for Education. In sum, I do not think the arguments against Fully Automated Luxury Communism are justified, but rather come out a deeply ingrained fear of past attempts of other forms of Communism.