Luxury Communism

[sheffbag 228]

16 hours ago, Anna B said:

I heard the phrase 'Luxury Communism' used for the first time on TV this morning (Jeremy Vine)

 

Interesting, because I recently read a very enlightening book called 'Fully Automated Luxury Communism' by Aaron Bastani, which posits that there are enough resources in the world, enough money, and enough technology, to give everyone in the world a very good standard of living without the need to work or at least work full time, leaving the mind and body free to develop new ideas, and to grow and evolve. 

 

A brief summary of a well thought through and researched proposition, which is entirely possible, if the will to do it is there.

 

The very word 'communism' is enough to send people running for the hills, so I was surprised to hear it used in this way.

I wonder if the idea of 'Luxury Communism' becoming a more popular and gaining ground? 

 

Do we want an equal world, or will the Ego always get in the way?

So you can have a "very good standard of living without the need to work"

So who works to provide the services needed (medical, energy, water, transport)?

So who works to provide the food both growing and making?

So who works to provide the infrastructure to enable this unworkable utopia?

So who works to decide what work is needed or does the whole population of the world get a vote on everything?

So who works to establish boundaries between geographical areas (after all in this brave new world of peace love and harmony and everything for the people there still has to be geographical areas and maintain them?

So who , if all the non working people are busy developing new ideas (isnt that called research today in the real world, which is a job) then who decides that they are good ideas and should be implemented?

So who is working to getting rid of religion as that is historically one of the biggest causes of possession and conflict and also telling others what to do.?

 

Having a brief review of the book your post is false, your claim that Bastani states there is enough resource in the world. This is not accurate view of the book. Bastani in the book claims that space mining and obtaining minerals from asteroids is to be a source of energy and resource.  He also states that robots and AI will be used to take over the majority of the workload form humans

 

So who works to design and programmes the robots.?

So who works to create the AI required to run these operations? 

So exactly how are you going to get minerals from asteroids? 

 

This book came out in 2019, hardly set the world on fire has it and not really "gaining ground".

 

Bastani is an left wing ideologist who has previously set up a digital media company to promote his views

He also has previously claimed that labour can only win under Corbyn (no wonder you like him Anna) and that momentum can help Labour win (well that shows how far reaching and accurate he is)

 

So using his theory then when Covid struck a year after his book was released then if we were living in his vision - who works to create the vaccine?

 

I think the following review in WSJ published recently sums up the book well https://www.wsj.com/articles/automated-luxury-communism-11621185487

At first I thought it was a joke. I still do. A couple of years ago, there was a stir around Aaron Bastani’s book “Fully Automated Luxury Communism.” It’s a manifesto for the “postwork” movement. Technology will “liberate us from work” and automation is “the path to a world of liberty, luxury and happiness—for everyone,” the book advertises. Cue rainbow-belching unicorns. The Atlantic wrote that “the vision is compelling.” The New York Times helped promote it. And it sure feels like the Biden administration is trying to implement it. Naturally, it’s complete baloney.

The idea isn’t even original. It’s the plot of the 2008 Pixar- Disney animation “WALL-E”: Tubby humans in personal mobility vehicles leaving planet Earth on a luxury spaceship as robots like WALL-E clean up the industrial wasteland. Kid-friendly propaganda.

 

 

 

Edited January 5, 2022 by sheffbag

[Delbow 700]

17 minutes ago, sheffbag said:

So you can have a "very good standard of living without the need to work"

So who works to provide the services needed (medical, energy, water, transport)?

So who works to provide the food both growing and making?

So who works to provide the infrastructure to enable this unworkable utopia?

So who works to decide what work is needed or does the whole population of the world get a vote on everything?

So who works to establish boundaries between geographical areas (after all in this brave new world of peace love and harmony and everything for the people there still has to be geographical areas and maintain them?

So who , if all the non working people are busy developing new ideas (isnt that called research today in the real world, which is a job) then who decides that they are good ideas and should be implemented?

So who is working to getting rid of religion as that is historically one of the biggest causes of possession and conflict and also telling others what to do.?

 

Having a brief review of the book your post is false, your claim that Bastani states there is enough resource in the world. This is not accurate view of the book. Bastani in the book claims that space mining and obtaining minerals from asteroids is to be a source of energy and resource.  He also states that robots and AI will be used to take over the majority of the workload form humans

 

So who works to design and programmes the robots.?

So who works to create the AI required to run these operations? 

So exactly how are you going to get minerals from asteroids? 

 

This book came out in 2019, hardly set the world on fire has it and not really "gaining ground".

 

Bastani is an left wing ideologist who has previously set up a digital media company to promote his views

He also has previously claimed that labour can only win under Corbyn (no wonder you like him Anna) and that momentum can help Labour win (well that shows how far reaching and accurate he is)

 

So using his theory then when Covid struck a year after his book was released then if we were living in his vision - who works to create the vaccine?

 

I think the following review in WSJ published recently sums up the book well https://www.wsj.com/articles/automated-luxury-communism-11621185487

At first I thought it was a joke. I still do. A couple of years ago, there was a stir around Aaron Bastani’s book “Fully Automated Luxury Communism.” It’s a manifesto for the “postwork” movement. Technology will “liberate us from work” and automation is “the path to a world of liberty, luxury and happiness—for everyone,” the book advertises. Cue rainbow-belching unicorns. The Atlantic wrote that “the vision is compelling.” The New York Times helped promote it. And it sure feels like the Biden administration is trying to implement it. Naturally, it’s complete baloney.

The idea isn’t even original. It’s the plot of the 2008 Pixar- Disney animation “WALL-E”: Tubby humans in personal mobility vehicles leaving planet Earth on a luxury spaceship as robots like WALL-E clean up the industrial wasteland. Kid-friendly propaganda.

 

 

 

This reminds me of ol' Mary Whitehouse:

 

"This should never have been shown on the television, it's morally corrupting"

 

"Have you seen it?"

 

"No"

[Waldo 96]

16 hours ago, Anna B said:

I heard the phrase 'Luxury Communism' used for the first time on TV this morning (Jeremy Vine)

 

Interesting, because I recently read a very enlightening book called 'Fully Automated Luxury Communism' by Aaron Bastani, which posits that there are enough resources in the world, enough money, and enough technology, to give everyone in the world a very good standard of living without the need to work or at least work full time, leaving the mind and body free to develop new ideas, and to grow and evolve. 

 

A brief summary of a well thought through and researched proposition, which is entirely possible, if the will to do it is there.

 

The very word 'communism' is enough to send people running for the hills, so I was surprised to hear it used in this way.

I wonder if the idea of 'Luxury Communism' becoming a more popular and gaining ground? 

 

Do we want an equal world, or will the Ego always get in the way?

A few problems jump to mind Anna.

 

How would you convince those with more to redistribute resources to those who have less? If they’re unwilling, would you use force, violence, essentially robbing them?

If people have comfortable lives and no economic need to work, how will that effect people psychologically and emotionally? Without a pressing need to work and better themselves, will that effect people’s drive for innovation and development of new technologies or improving efficiency etc.

 

I’m not a fan of a shared even distribution of resources. I feel it doesn’t mirror nature (animal kingdom), which rewards effort, energy, industry, hard work, innovation etc.

 

I am not proud to say it, but recently, I’ve been having a comfortable time of it, resting on my laurels, and not so driven (lack of necessity to be so) as I once was; and it’s not at all a good thing.

[Flanker7 20]

56 minutes ago, Waldo said:

A few problems jump to mind Anna.

 

How would you convince those with more to redistribute resources to those who have less? If they’re unwilling, would you use force, violence, essentially robbing them?

If people have comfortable lives and no economic need to work, how will that effect people psychologically and emotionally? Without a pressing need to work and better themselves, will that effect people’s drive for innovation and development of new technologies or improving efficiency etc.

 

I’m not a fan of a shared even distribution of resources. I feel it doesn’t mirror nature (animal kingdom), which rewards effort, energy, industry, hard work, innovation etc.

 

I am not proud to say it, but recently, I’ve been having a comfortable time of it, resting on my laurels, and not so driven (lack of necessity to be so) as I once was; and it’s not at all a good thing.

1. Robbing the rich?- How did they get to their current position. If they obtained their riches overnight it would probably have been by robbing and stealing. If they did it over generations their methods would have been more subtle. Todays modern evolved British society could not have been created without Income Tax, which some, mostly the rich, characterise as theft. 

2. No one knows how a new system would effect people psychologically and emotionally but gently does it a bit at a time. Work is not the only way to better yourself unless you take a very narrow money based measure. Will it effect people psychologically and emotionally? who knows- Gently does it a bit at a time.

3. The law of the jungle red in tooth and claw. The human race has proved that co-operation and acting in teams has been successful.

4. Having a comfortable time - Me too, I've done plenty and I still feel that I am contributing to communities even if not as much in the past. Chill out and embrace getting older.

 

Just because communism didn't endure in Russia dosn't mean that every Russian would go back to pre revolution times where 4 out of 5 were serfs with no legal status, no rights and a servile obedience to the tsar. Chapter 3 of 'Animal Farm' was better for all the animals.

 

Who knows if a new system would work but will never know if don't try.

[Anna B 1,414]

Hi Waldo,

Nobody is asking the better off to redistribute their resources at all. It wouldn't be necessary.

 

It's not about having no work, just less work and more choice. giving people more time to do the things they find fulfilling, improve themselves and the world they live in. 

 

This would lift us out of the 'kill or be killed' struggle for survival mindset of the animal kingdom with enough resources for all, allowing people to get more out of life.

 

Why would you not feel proud/ content of confortable living. This is about all people having that.

 

Basic needs would be taken care of, but that doesn't mean people would just vegitate. The mental aspect would still be about striving for improvement and enlightenment. Many pensioners for example say they don't know how they found time to work.  

 

Edited January 5, 2022 by Anna B

[Flanker7 20]

Anna we posted at the same time.  .. . . . . . .More power to your elbow

[sheffbag 228]

29 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Hi Waldo,

Nobody is asking the better off to redistribute their resources at all. It wouldn't be necessary.

 

It's not about having no work, just less work and more choice. giving people more time to do the things they find fulfilling, improve themselves and the world they live in. 

 

This would lift us out of the 'kill or be killed' struggle for survival mindset of the animal kingdom with enough resources for all, allowing people to get more out of life.

 

Why would you not feel proud/ content of confortable living. This is about all people having that.

 

Basic needs would be taken care of, but that doesn't mean people would just vegitate. The mental aspect would still be about striving for improvement and enlightenment. Many pensioners for example say they don't know how they found time to work.  

 

How? by robots, AI or the dust off an android which just happens to be whizzing by earth at that time?

[Waldo 96]

Your position Flanker, seems divergent from Anna’s with regards taking resources from the rich and giving to the poor?

 

Advocates of wealth redistribution should be equally as eager to give what they have to the poor, as they are to take from the rich. Else, it appears they’re more interested in wealth accumulation (at the expense of the rich), and less interested in wealth redistribution.

 

I’m never going to a fan of communism, that doesn’t mean I don’t feel our current system isn’t severely flawed. I think the main issue we have is focus of control being in the hands of relatively few people (who are sometimes inept); this is in my view highly dangerous and leads to many problems. We need a new decentralised paradigm.

 

16 minutes ago, sheffbag said:

How? by robots, AI or the dust off an android which just happens to be whizzing by earth at that time?

You give people everything they need; I doubt they’re just going to go out and work for the hell of it.

 

What is it they say about necessity, mothers and invention?..

Edited January 5, 2022 by Waldo

[Flanker7 20]

1. It ain't necessarily so. I mentioned "more subtle methods" over decades. Government can do that. Indeed it has been doing that for about 100 years. Dare I say 'Levelling Up'

2. I've no problem with giving to the poor. So long as we all do it.

3. All Governing systyems are flawed as the famous Churchill quote illustrates. Localisation is good for many things but not all. 

[Anna B 1,414]

27 minutes ago, sheffbag said:

How? by robots, AI or the dust off an android which just happens to be whizzing by earth at that time?

Basically, yes.

We are talking about the future with the exponential growth of AI etc.

It's not going to happen overnight, but is something we could/should be working towards

It's possible

Read the book.

Watch BBC 'Click'

But I think you've already made up your mind....

Edited January 5, 2022 by Anna B

[Anna B 1,414]

25 minutes ago, Waldo said:

Your position Flanker, seems divergent from Anna’s with regards taking resources from the rich and giving to the poor?

 

Advocates of wealth redistribution should be equally as eager to give what they have to the poor, as they are to take from the rich. Else, it appears they’re more interested in wealth accumulation (at the expense of the rich), and less interested in wealth redistribution.

 

I’m never going to a fan of communism, that doesn’t mean I don’t feel our current system isn’t severely flawed. I think the main issue we have is focus of control being in the hands of relatively few people (who are sometimes inept); this is in my view highly dangerous and leads to many problems. We need a new decentralised paradigm.

 

You give people everything they need; I doubt they’re just going to go out and work for the hell of it.

 

What is it they say about necessity, mothers and invention?..

Indeed. 

And we all have to want/need a better future for all, and work towards it.

I thought that was a given, but apparently not.

Star trek or Star Wars?

Edited January 5, 2022 by Anna B

[Delbow 700]

38 minutes ago, Waldo said:

 

 

I’m never going to a fan of communism, that doesn’t mean I don’t feel our current system isn’t severely flawed. I think the main issue we have is focus of control being in the hands of relatively few people (who are sometimes inept); this is in my view highly dangerous and leads to many problems. We need a new decentralised paradigm

In a broad sense that is communism, in my view. Decentralised decision making where us proles have much more involvement in how things are run and what decisions are made. Then replace private land ownership with common land ownership and that is more or less communism.

Edited January 5, 2022 by Delbow