Fully Automated Luxury Conservativism
A while ago a group of lefties came up with this idea of "Fully Automated Luxury Communism" (FALCom )
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/mar/18/fully-automated-luxury-communism-robots-employment.
Thinking about this, and what society could look like in 100 or so years, I began to wonder what would happen to right wing ideas in a highly advanced "post scarcity" society and ask the question, what about a "Fully Automated Luxury Conservativism"? (FALCon), and what such a society would look like and would it be feasible or/and desirable?
I'd be interested to hear peoples thoughts , in particular
@Louis IX
@TCA2b
@Rakas21
And
@DSilva
@anarchism101
https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/mar/18/fully-automated-luxury-communism-robots-employment.
Thinking about this, and what society could look like in 100 or so years, I began to wonder what would happen to right wing ideas in a highly advanced "post scarcity" society and ask the question, what about a "Fully Automated Luxury Conservativism"? (FALCon), and what such a society would look like and would it be feasible or/and desirable?
I'd be interested to hear peoples thoughts , in particular
@Louis IX
@TCA2b
@Rakas21
And
@DSilva
@anarchism101
So what would this look like?
Well it would obviously share many similarities with FALCom. There would almost certainly be UBI, mass nationalisation of Industry.
Where there would be differences would be that the state would still exist: there would be a hierarchy, borders , private property, police, armed forces, laws and constraints on society.
Why should there be this?
Well, without going too deep into human nature I think people basically need things that a state provides more than just material benefits and collective security. I think that the FALComs believe that in their society without any constraints will freely choose to live wholesome lives studying or something when I think the reality is they'll end up like the people in WALLE and die of drug overuse in their thirties in a sex robot fuelled orgy.
As opposed to what?
So I think we could have a UBI that would be enough to live off of. But we can have a (voluntary) national service scheme that guarantees employment which would pay more. You could also attend free university or educational workshops.
The government could also subsidise things to encourage people to make positive choices - eg a one time only wedding bonus and a bonus for every child conceived of by wedlock. People that choose to work in elite roles such as the military would be paid handsomely as well as other privileges perhaps such as being able to vote..
Well it would obviously share many similarities with FALCom. There would almost certainly be UBI, mass nationalisation of Industry.
Where there would be differences would be that the state would still exist: there would be a hierarchy, borders , private property, police, armed forces, laws and constraints on society.
Why should there be this?
Well, without going too deep into human nature I think people basically need things that a state provides more than just material benefits and collective security. I think that the FALComs believe that in their society without any constraints will freely choose to live wholesome lives studying or something when I think the reality is they'll end up like the people in WALLE and die of drug overuse in their thirties in a sex robot fuelled orgy.
As opposed to what?
So I think we could have a UBI that would be enough to live off of. But we can have a (voluntary) national service scheme that guarantees employment which would pay more. You could also attend free university or educational workshops.
The government could also subsidise things to encourage people to make positive choices - eg a one time only wedding bonus and a bonus for every child conceived of by wedlock. People that choose to work in elite roles such as the military would be paid handsomely as well as other privileges perhaps such as being able to vote..
I see the main obstacle being the corporations who are at the forefront of advancing robots, AI and automation. Why are they going to invest in developing technology whose financial benefit is shortlived? I guess a government could just swoop in unannounced, but I can imagine the USA government in particular getting quite grumpy about that.
Another issue is what would people do instead? While it's pointless doing work just for the sake of being busy, people will get bored, stupid, etc. Currently we have STEM subjects struggling, and most people these days don't know how to fix their phone themselves if restarting it doesn't do the trick, but arts still making so much noise you'd think that Youtube, TikTok, Twitch etc. weren't giving a huge number of creative people the best platforms and reach of any time in human history. I think society stagnates unless there's a continual push for scientific research, as recording yourself playing video games is so much more appealing to kids than studying.
Another issue is what would people do instead? While it's pointless doing work just for the sake of being busy, people will get bored, stupid, etc. Currently we have STEM subjects struggling, and most people these days don't know how to fix their phone themselves if restarting it doesn't do the trick, but arts still making so much noise you'd think that Youtube, TikTok, Twitch etc. weren't giving a huge number of creative people the best platforms and reach of any time in human history. I think society stagnates unless there's a continual push for scientific research, as recording yourself playing video games is so much more appealing to kids than studying.
Original post by ThomH97
I see the main obstacle being the corporations who are at the forefront of advancing robots, AI and automation. Why are they going to invest in developing technology whose financial benefit is shortlived? I guess a government could just swoop in unannounced, but I can imagine the USA government in particular getting quite grumpy about that.
Another issue is what would people do instead?
While it's pointless doing work just for the sake of being busy, people will get bored, stupid, etc. Currently we have STEM subjects struggling, and most people these days don't know how to fix their phone themselves if restarting it doesn't do the trick, but arts still making so much noise you'd think that Youtube, TikTok, Twitch etc. weren't giving a huge number of creative people the best platforms and reach of any time in human history. I think society stagnates unless there's a continual push for scientific research, as recording yourself playing video games is so much more appealing to kids than studying.
Another issue is what would people do instead?
While it's pointless doing work just for the sake of being busy, people will get bored, stupid, etc. Currently we have STEM subjects struggling, and most people these days don't know how to fix their phone themselves if restarting it doesn't do the trick, but arts still making so much noise you'd think that Youtube, TikTok, Twitch etc. weren't giving a huge number of creative people the best platforms and reach of any time in human history. I think society stagnates unless there's a continual push for scientific research, as recording yourself playing video games is so much more appealing to kids than studying.
Well this would happen in the future over a gradual process of decades.
Well that's why I talked about incentivising a guaranteed national service where they could earn extra money etc and do training courses and do a variety of jobs even if it's just getting fit.
Also with science and research, they would be subsidised and rewarded by society.
A "post scarcity society" is a pipe dream.
If we pretend that one gets created then the answer would probably look like GK Chesterton or Fulton Sheen's ideal society - there's a pretty large welfare state, but people can own their own businesses and the state enforces social conservatism.
If we pretend that one gets created then the answer would probably look like GK Chesterton or Fulton Sheen's ideal society - there's a pretty large welfare state, but people can own their own businesses and the state enforces social conservatism.
Original post by Louis IX
A "post scarcity society" is a pipe dream.
If we pretend that one gets created then the answer would probably look like GK Chesterton or Fulton Sheen's ideal society - there's a pretty large welfare state, but people can own their own businesses and the state enforces social conservatism.
If we pretend that one gets created then the answer would probably look like GK Chesterton or Fulton Sheen's ideal society - there's a pretty large welfare state, but people can own their own businesses and the state enforces social conservatism.
Sure it is: now. Who knows what the future will hold. Of course on our current trajectory I doubt Society will be anything but "post scarcity" particularly as it becomes more "diverse and inclusive"
Yeah I agree to an extent although I don't necessarily think business will play quite as big a role as it does now.
Original post by Starship Trooper
Sure it is: now. Who knows what the future will hold. Of course on our current trajectory I doubt Society will be anything but "post scarcity" particularly as it becomes more "diverse and inclusive"
Yeah I agree to an extent although I don't necessarily think business will play quite as big a role as it does now.
Yeah I agree to an extent although I don't necessarily think business will play quite as big a role as it does now.
Yeah, I don't see our woke overlords managing to solve the problem of hunger.
True, although big business not playing a role in society is one of the main features of distributism.
Original post by Starship Trooper
Well this would happen in the future over a gradual process of decades.
Well that's why I talked about incentivising a guaranteed national service where they could earn extra money etc and do training courses and do a variety of jobs even if it's just getting fit.
Also with science and research, they would be subsidised and rewarded by society.
Well that's why I talked about incentivising a guaranteed national service where they could earn extra money etc and do training courses and do a variety of jobs even if it's just getting fit.
Also with science and research, they would be subsidised and rewarded by society.
Mm not sure thats a particularly good reward to be honest, whilst its always nice to feel warm and fuzzy its not so good at being converted into fiat currency and used at your local department store
Original post by Napp
Mm not sure thats a particularly good reward to be honest, whilst its always nice to feel warm and fuzzy its not so good at being converted into fiat currency and used at your local department store
No I literally meant physical rewards not a pat on the back. So things like status, bonuses, additional privileges...
Although we've hit on the most likely outcome (some kind of credit system) it's worth saying it does not need to be universal.
The most difficult thing to see is how the consumer economy survives in anything like its present form. If the world of automation and space mining renders the cost of production close to naught then the outcome would be persistent deflation which provides an incentive to defer consumption. While the service economy, marketing and innovation will still exist (the masses being unemployed in essence will also allow a larger business owning class of people offering such), there would certainly be losers in this new economy (albeit the marketeers would probably try counter with more holidays to the moon and such).
There are certainly societal difficulties to consider which see the need for strong conservative (small c) maintained. Allowing the population to be post-employment will expand the owning class as people have the freedom to persue their interests but it will also make the stupid half of the population very difficult to control after the initial pleasure of being able to relax. Employment in long, menial labour is a good way of controlling the masses albeit conscription is a good alternative. Maintaining law and order would be a difficult task.
The most difficult thing to see is how the consumer economy survives in anything like its present form. If the world of automation and space mining renders the cost of production close to naught then the outcome would be persistent deflation which provides an incentive to defer consumption. While the service economy, marketing and innovation will still exist (the masses being unemployed in essence will also allow a larger business owning class of people offering such), there would certainly be losers in this new economy (albeit the marketeers would probably try counter with more holidays to the moon and such).
There are certainly societal difficulties to consider which see the need for strong conservative (small c) maintained. Allowing the population to be post-employment will expand the owning class as people have the freedom to persue their interests but it will also make the stupid half of the population very difficult to control after the initial pleasure of being able to relax. Employment in long, menial labour is a good way of controlling the masses albeit conscription is a good alternative. Maintaining law and order would be a difficult task.
(edited 2 years ago)
Fully Automated Luxury Conservativism, I think involves the provision of goods and services that the general public desire and have traditionally had but which, either due to the cost of labour or for another reason have ceased or are ceasing to enjoy.
Let us look at a few examples.
Between the 1920s and the 1980s, huge numbers of large country houses went out of residential use or were subdivided. That has virtually stopped and many are coming back into single private ownership. If one asks why, the answer is that it has become more practicable to live in large houses again because people aren't living in them in the way folk did in the past. I was at a large stately home a couple of weeks ago and the owner was discussing (not with me) his new under-gardener:-
https://www.sam-turner.co.uk/products/husqvarna-automower-450x-robotic-lawn-mower?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7bbWt_3J8wIVVODtCh3glAyPEAAYASAAEgLMJ_D_BwE
I suspect the owner's grandfather was having the lawns outside his windows mown every morning but my guess would be that this had dropped to once a week in recent decades.
Most women until 1960 and most men until 1970 had some made to measure clothes. Between then and say 2010, it was quite unusual to do so. Since then made to measure menswear has expanded hugely mostly based on Asian manufacture but how soon will it be that the first couture house starts offering womenswear based on robot cutting and stitching?
There is only one growth area in Church attendence in the Church of England and that is Cathedral worship. Most parish churches offer a very poor worshipping experience; poor music, poor singing and poor preaching because of the makeup of the congregation and demands on the clergy to take too many services. On the other hand for those who attend, sparsely attended, mosly elderly congregations have a high level of social engagement. But what if you don;t want that? What if you don't want to be cross-examined by nosy neighbours about your doings and do want high quality music, high quality singing and preaching? I suspect that we are going to find vicars who don't have a 30 voice choir and a Royal College organist at their disposal and who can't pursuade guest preachers to come to the middle of nowhere are going to look at technology (holograms one day) for an answer. Most rural churches before 1860 had no organ. Their music was supplied by rural musicians. Organs were a reaction to those bands disappearing.The pandemic has shown sports clubs looking at virtual spectators.
Let us look at a few examples.
Between the 1920s and the 1980s, huge numbers of large country houses went out of residential use or were subdivided. That has virtually stopped and many are coming back into single private ownership. If one asks why, the answer is that it has become more practicable to live in large houses again because people aren't living in them in the way folk did in the past. I was at a large stately home a couple of weeks ago and the owner was discussing (not with me) his new under-gardener:-
https://www.sam-turner.co.uk/products/husqvarna-automower-450x-robotic-lawn-mower?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7bbWt_3J8wIVVODtCh3glAyPEAAYASAAEgLMJ_D_BwE
I suspect the owner's grandfather was having the lawns outside his windows mown every morning but my guess would be that this had dropped to once a week in recent decades.
Most women until 1960 and most men until 1970 had some made to measure clothes. Between then and say 2010, it was quite unusual to do so. Since then made to measure menswear has expanded hugely mostly based on Asian manufacture but how soon will it be that the first couture house starts offering womenswear based on robot cutting and stitching?
There is only one growth area in Church attendence in the Church of England and that is Cathedral worship. Most parish churches offer a very poor worshipping experience; poor music, poor singing and poor preaching because of the makeup of the congregation and demands on the clergy to take too many services. On the other hand for those who attend, sparsely attended, mosly elderly congregations have a high level of social engagement. But what if you don;t want that? What if you don't want to be cross-examined by nosy neighbours about your doings and do want high quality music, high quality singing and preaching? I suspect that we are going to find vicars who don't have a 30 voice choir and a Royal College organist at their disposal and who can't pursuade guest preachers to come to the middle of nowhere are going to look at technology (holograms one day) for an answer. Most rural churches before 1860 had no organ. Their music was supplied by rural musicians. Organs were a reaction to those bands disappearing.The pandemic has shown sports clubs looking at virtual spectators.
(edited 2 years ago)
IMO it raises lots of questions because of all the different permutations it can take. Just a mash of buzzwords and art but interesting to contemplate:
Depending on the degree to which AI is able to supplant human labour, it may be the case that humans elect to fuse with it, heading in the direction of transhumanism, which if properly managed could be the next step in our evolution, augmenting their capabilities significantly, or that might remain a pipe dream for a long long time (although I do think technologies to reverse and halt ageing will eventually come about and are very worthwhile in pouring money into as opposed to some other nonsense causes that attract funding.) In any case, putting aside the possibility of significant technological augmentation of human capabilities, it will mark the elimination of labour as an economic category since it will just be subsumed into capital, alongside natural resources. Capital resources, plus time, will remain scarce, even if some are driven down to close to zero in their marginal value production due to sheer efficiency gains.
I am not sure I really consider a measure like UBI to be a good remedy for the masses who become unemployable, except maybe in exceptional cases. It would result in total state dependence, and while that might be fine if the state is a benign one, it may not always be so, and I dislike the notion of such dependence regardless. So I would think the better outcome would be to transition to a more distributed model of capital ownership under such circumstances. As to what would people do with all that free time? I struggle to believe we'd run out of ideas for that and I think technology already provides ample distraction and if will only continue to grow in the sort of experiences it can provide, to the point the might become transcendent. People already engage in work that fulfils their own interests and I suspect for many people, time will flow in that direction.
Will be interesting to see if we even come near post-scarcity or if civilization collapses into a radical scarcity situation before then.
Depending on the degree to which AI is able to supplant human labour, it may be the case that humans elect to fuse with it, heading in the direction of transhumanism, which if properly managed could be the next step in our evolution, augmenting their capabilities significantly, or that might remain a pipe dream for a long long time (although I do think technologies to reverse and halt ageing will eventually come about and are very worthwhile in pouring money into as opposed to some other nonsense causes that attract funding.) In any case, putting aside the possibility of significant technological augmentation of human capabilities, it will mark the elimination of labour as an economic category since it will just be subsumed into capital, alongside natural resources. Capital resources, plus time, will remain scarce, even if some are driven down to close to zero in their marginal value production due to sheer efficiency gains.
I am not sure I really consider a measure like UBI to be a good remedy for the masses who become unemployable, except maybe in exceptional cases. It would result in total state dependence, and while that might be fine if the state is a benign one, it may not always be so, and I dislike the notion of such dependence regardless. So I would think the better outcome would be to transition to a more distributed model of capital ownership under such circumstances. As to what would people do with all that free time? I struggle to believe we'd run out of ideas for that and I think technology already provides ample distraction and if will only continue to grow in the sort of experiences it can provide, to the point the might become transcendent. People already engage in work that fulfils their own interests and I suspect for many people, time will flow in that direction.
Will be interesting to see if we even come near post-scarcity or if civilization collapses into a radical scarcity situation before then.
Some interesting thoughts/ ideas guys.
Worker owned co-operatives? Gasp!
The future is a strange place!
Original post by TCA2b
So I would think the better outcome would be to transition to a more distributed model of capital ownership under such circumstances.
Worker owned co-operatives? Gasp!
The future is a strange place!
It seems to me that the big divide in the future will be between something like "right wing totalitarianism" and "left wing anarchism"
We can perhaps see some glimpses of it today...
We can perhaps see some glimpses of it today...
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Tenancy Takeover Coventry!
- Tenant wanted
- ICP-MS Semiconductor Method Development
- My car got vandalised
- Are there any robotics engineering apprenticeships available in the UK?
- Students Earning
- Coventry tenancy takeover
- Transferring University
- Offering booked accommodation, University of Liverpool. One Islington PlAZA £162 pw
- Is there anything wrong about renting?
- Looking for student to take over my tenancy contract
- Marketing degrees are they useless?
- Seeking Your Expertise: Complete Our Dissertation Survey on Blockchain Automation
- STEM is not the future !
- english language paper 2 question 4
- 5 ways how AI is improving cloud computing
- Is Big 4 audit still worth it?
- Rejected from Santander student account despite "excellent" Experian score
- Guys whose parents didn't show intimacy or affection
- The LPC - your questions answered!
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
