Is Socialism inevitable?

[yetgdhfgh]

Only thing inevitable about socialism is it's own fall.

How so?

When we get to a point where a loaf of bread thanks to automation can be picked, shipped, produced, shipped to your local store and there just rot on the shelf cause noone has a job cause that loaf of bread from field to shop had next to no human labour to make them be able to afford it?

Unless we go back to being luddites and destroy all machines then we just either have to just enjoy the fruits of our wonderful technology that CAN feed and clothe us all or we can just smash it up and go back to the days of us fighting for jobs just to make a few people rich!

[NihilSustinet]

Yes, with advances in automation, unemployment will rise so high that the corporations with have to battle the state. if the state wins: socialism allows the common folk to live peaceful, decent lives. if the corporations win: the top caste will live in a walled security state while the proles kill eachother over the scraps and starve by the millions.

[Dezerte]

No, because even if we reach a state of full on Socialism there will be people saying "this isn't Socialism". Or "Socialism is evil so it can't be Socialism" when automation relieves us from the drudgery of menial work, when people are completely free to pursue their dreams whatever they are without any economic obstacles.

In all seriousness, some form of Socialism seems inevitable but it depends on how much of a cynic you are. Plenty of ways for us screw up, but we've got social democracy making a huge impact so perhaps there is hope.

[turlockmike]

Not really. Even robots need maintenance, design, improvement, etc. Humans also prefer the company of other humans, so things like movies, entertainment, video game design, etc will all be the future work. Will humans stop doing manual labor? Probably. Will capital still drive investments? Yes. What you will likely see, however, is that corporate profits will disappear as profits get close to 0% and instead, individuals will be earning and producing wealth without the need for a central capital organization.

Could welfare help alleviate some problems with people who have low productivity? Sure, but if robots are doing everything, then the cost of subsidizing their lifestyle would be much lower than it is now.

[Nadiru]

No, because even if we reach a state of full on Socialism there will be people saying "this isn't Socialism". Or "Socialism is evil so it can't be Socialism" when automation relieves us from the drudgery of menial work, when people are completely free to pursue their dreams whatever they are without any economic obstacles.

In all seriousness, some form of Socialism seems inevitable but it depends on how much of a cynic you are. Plenty of ways for us screw up, but we've got social democracy making a huge impact so perhaps there is hope.

It just means the definition of menial labor changes. Like it has literally every time machines have replaced humans. Whatever the new bitch work is, I guarantee you people will see it as bitch work.

[May90]

I think socialism is even less likely to exist in a machine production-dominant society, because people will have less reason to rely on the government, when literally any insignificant work will provide a quality of life unimaginable in our generation.

[Dracullus]

How so?

When we get to a point where a loaf of bread thanks to automation can be picked, shipped, produced, shipped to your local store and there just rot on the shelf cause noone has a job cause that loaf of bread from field to shop had next to no human labour to make them be able to afford it?

Unless we go back to being luddites and destroy all machines then we just either have to just enjoy the fruits of our wonderful technology that CAN feed and clothe us all or we can just smash it up and go back to the days of us fighting for jobs just to make a few people rich!

I don't think we share same definition of socialism, so it's pointless to discuss. You are talking about technology progress and automation. Plus some jibberish.

My parents lived large part of their life in socialism. They remember food stamps. They remember empty stores. They remember that fucking banana was luxury good. Finally they remember that all money they accumulated gone to waste when system broke, thanks to hiperinflation. So enjoy your slogans, it have nothing common with reality.

We don't live in 100% free market world, but still I enjoy every bit of that, because I know how much worse it can be.

I think socialism is even less likely to exist in a machine production-dominant society, because people will have less reason to rely on the government, when literally any insignificant work will provide a quality of life unimaginable in our generation.

It's simple, if some process is automated and some jobs for humans are gone, people will invent new jobs. Look how many professions from old centuries dissapeared and how many was born.

[May90]

It's simple, if some process is automated and some jobs for humans are gone, people will invent new jobs. Look how many professions from old centuries dissapeared and how many was born.

One can argue that in a society in which everyone can survive off the automated production without even having to work, people would have little incentive to work, so the employment rates would drop significantly. I am not sure if this is true, but even if that happens, the result will have little to do with socialism. "Anarchy" is a closer word, because when people don't have to rely on the government, the government's positions become very shaky.

[Forogil]

One can argue that in a society in which everyone can survive off the automated production without even having to work, people would have little incentive to work, so the employment rates would drop significantly.

One can also argue that we already live in a society where the production is automated to such a degree.

So far we have always invented news way of work; and not focused on working less and having more leisure. However, that doesn't mean that it will always be the case.

[Dracullus]

One can argue that in a society in which everyone can survive off the automated production without even having to work, people would have little incentive to work, so the employment rates would drop significantly. I am not sure if this is true, but even if that happens, the result will have little to do with socialism. "Anarchy" is a closer word, because when people don't have to rely on the government, the government's positions become very shaky.

Goverment primal function is to keep people safe from inside/outside enemy are create/execute rules how society will work. "Anarchy" would never last long, after some time few people would band together and offer "protection" for money. After some time fighting each other gangs would settle their territories and evolve into goverments.

We are on site about video games people. Imagine "game developer" or "youtube content creator" job century ago - it would sound ridiculous. If people have no income they will always invent something to do for profit - only some people on welfare spend their time doing nothing productive.

[Wildtree]

The answer is yes.
It is inevitable and sooner or later we'll arrive at it.

But don't start slacking, it'll be a good 50+ more years until then.

[Kokolums]

Is Socialism inevitable?

OK if it gets to a point where literally everything can be done by machines and human labour is no longer needed will that spell the end for Capitalism?

Surely Socialism is the end goal of where we are going as a species I mean go and see the civilization on Star Trek The Next Generation where nobody works for capital because machines can produce anything humans need and could ever want so they just work for the sake of bettering themselves.

The days of people working for pieces of paper and numbers on a computer screen must surely be numbered if we get to a point where everything we need can just be manufactured by machines and delivered to us (driverless cars?) or if replication technology ever becomes a thing.

When or where will it get to a point where socialism is the only solution because nobody has jobs cause of automation that makes capitalism viable?

Humans are social creatures and therefore there will ALWAYS be social capital, which will drive capitalism. There will always be a limited amount of social capital (a pecking order). Robots cannot generate more social capital.

[Aeula]

Yes, but capitalism will still exist alongside it, just with significantly less jobs.
Humans will always be needed in the entertainment industry. Whether it's making games or acting for television or script writing for films, there'll always be jobs in that sector. A robot could do it sure, but will that robot have better ideas than a human? Probably not, at least not in every case.

Art, books, porn (Robots might be a turn off to some, even if they don't look robotic): All of these things will still have humans working on them. You'll just have to find something you're good at if you want a job, otherwise you'll be living on whatever meagre living the government gives you.

If that doesn't sound alright then governments could make a 'positive discrimination' law that requires workplaces to hire at least 50% of their staff as humans.

[Deleted]

Nor, however, do I believe in the idea of moral hazard. The vast majority of people will work if given the opportunity, they simply dislike being treated as wage slaves in shitty and menial positions which should have been automated by now.

That's not a moral hazard.

- - - Updated - - -

How so?

because economist determined it was so a few decades ago.

[Girrag]

Socialism works until you have free money. So it might work for some time. And then it will die like USSR did. Because socialism is broken by design.

[Wildtree]

Socialism works until you have free money. So it might work for some time. And then it will die like USSR did. Because socialism is broken by design.

USSR was a form of communism, not socialism.
Every single modern developed nation is in fact socialistic. Every single one.

Government paid road systems: Socialism
Healthcare system: Socialism
Social Security/Pension system: Socialism
Public Utilities system: Socialism
and the list goes on...

Socialism and Capitalism are not exclusive to each other. They function wonderful side by side.

[Bushtuckrman]

Is Socialism inevitable?

OK if it gets to a point where literally everything can be done by machines and human labour is no longer needed will that spell the end for Capitalism?

Surely Socialism is the end goal of where we are going as a species I mean go and see the civilization on Star Trek The Next Generation where nobody works for capital because machines can produce anything humans need and could ever want so they just work for the sake of bettering themselves.

The days of people working for pieces of paper and numbers on a computer screen must surely be numbered if we get to a point where everything we need can just be manufactured by machines and delivered to us (driverless cars?) or if replication technology ever becomes a thing.

When or where will it get to a point where socialism is the only solution because nobody has jobs cause of automation that makes capitalism viable?

That means it becomes China where the majority live in the low class shit hole and the minority are the middle to upper class.

[minteK917]

Socialism works until you have free money. So it might work for some time. And then it will die like USSR did. Because socialism is broken by design.

Socialism does not remove the right to ownership. Please can people pick up history book or at least a political science wikipage before they type stuff?

USSR was a form of communism, not socialism.
Every single modern developed nation is in fact socialistic. Every single one.

Government paid road systems: Socialism
Healthcare system: Socialism
Social Security/Pension system: Socialism
Public Utilities system: Socialism
and the list goes on...

Socialism and Capitalism are not exclusive to each other. They function wonderful side by side.

This, also.

Military: Socialism.

[Vargur]

People still work in socialized countries. That said, it probably offers a cleaner and healthier transition to a post-work world than free market capitalism.

Yeah, that pretty much sums up the answer to the thread.

[minteK917]

Yeah, that pretty much sums up the answer to the thread.

Well since free market capitalism never existed, we are on a decent track. We just dont need to tell some Americans the truth and let them believe the lie that never existed, cuz their freedom.