07-31-2021, 02:46 PM
The transition to the age after scarcity will not be easy. Scarcity itself creates some certainties, and not only for monopolistic gougers. Some people are conditioned to fit the norms of an early-industrial society in which severe, unmet need structures all reality including the class interests of economic elites. Think of the reality of K-12 education as the conduit of children from working-class home to factory. As the factory jobs disappear, K-12 education often becomes something cynically described as a preparation for incarceration as the "school-to-prison pipeline).
Marx' prediction of the future of economic relationships may be an oversimplification (hunter-gatherer world >> classical, agrarian slavery >> feudalism under rural magnates >> capitalist plutocracy >> socialism >> Communism. Marx contends that Socialism, as government ownership and operation of productive capacity, is essential to ensuring that the boon of ever-increasing productivity go back into plant and equipment instead of into the sybaritic indulgence of economic elites of the plutocrats so that Marxist Socialism be more effective in creating prosperity for all than capitalism which serves only capitalists.
We need remember that Karl Marx was not a good historian; for example, feudalism did not evolve out of Roman conditions but instead came into being as a defense against barbarian invasions. He was also terribly naïve about human behavior and motivation (for human behavior and motivation one can turn to the likes of Freud, Maslow, etc.)A reminder to Einzige: Karl Marx did not give us the whole picture of human nature any more than Freud did. Marx was not a psychoanalyst and Freud was no economist. I might also suggest Malcolm Gladwell, who explains much about human achievement. Excellence does not come easy, and there are no "naturals" at any field.
Revolution or not, people in the advanced industrial world are headed to the post-scarcity age. Maybe people who truly enjoy their work will spend extreme hours on their work because their work defines them, as is so with artists, musicians, actors, writers, attorneys, journalists, scientists, engineers, academics, teachers, physicians, veterinarians, and accountants. (Accounting is an excellent career for many on the autistic spectrum). I question whether such is so with the convenience-store clerk or farm laborer, who may be delighted in working far fewer hours to meet the productive needs, let alone to sate monopolistic landlords and other profiteers. There would still be room for small-scale entrepreneurs... they typically spend long hours for modest pay to keep a business going.
We will not need the monopolists, the mobsters, the shysters, and the bureaucratic elitists to meet our needs. Such people have done more to retard human progress than to promote it. They will fail. For most people, doing twenty-five to thirty hours of work will be adequate for survival. So what do people do with the rest? That will take some imagination and determination to achieve.
Marx' prediction of the future of economic relationships may be an oversimplification (hunter-gatherer world >> classical, agrarian slavery >> feudalism under rural magnates >> capitalist plutocracy >> socialism >> Communism. Marx contends that Socialism, as government ownership and operation of productive capacity, is essential to ensuring that the boon of ever-increasing productivity go back into plant and equipment instead of into the sybaritic indulgence of economic elites of the plutocrats so that Marxist Socialism be more effective in creating prosperity for all than capitalism which serves only capitalists.
We need remember that Karl Marx was not a good historian; for example, feudalism did not evolve out of Roman conditions but instead came into being as a defense against barbarian invasions. He was also terribly naïve about human behavior and motivation (for human behavior and motivation one can turn to the likes of Freud, Maslow, etc.)A reminder to Einzige: Karl Marx did not give us the whole picture of human nature any more than Freud did. Marx was not a psychoanalyst and Freud was no economist. I might also suggest Malcolm Gladwell, who explains much about human achievement. Excellence does not come easy, and there are no "naturals" at any field.
Revolution or not, people in the advanced industrial world are headed to the post-scarcity age. Maybe people who truly enjoy their work will spend extreme hours on their work because their work defines them, as is so with artists, musicians, actors, writers, attorneys, journalists, scientists, engineers, academics, teachers, physicians, veterinarians, and accountants. (Accounting is an excellent career for many on the autistic spectrum). I question whether such is so with the convenience-store clerk or farm laborer, who may be delighted in working far fewer hours to meet the productive needs, let alone to sate monopolistic landlords and other profiteers. There would still be room for small-scale entrepreneurs... they typically spend long hours for modest pay to keep a business going.
We will not need the monopolists, the mobsters, the shysters, and the bureaucratic elitists to meet our needs. Such people have done more to retard human progress than to promote it. They will fail. For most people, doing twenty-five to thirty hours of work will be adequate for survival. So what do people do with the rest? That will take some imagination and determination to achieve.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.