Even if you think like this, socialism would still continuously decrease necessary labour time. “Not working” is demonstrably not an option for everyone
I haven’t bothered to do the math, but with what technology is available, it is damn near everyone. My gut estimate is we’d only need under 100k workers in the US and certainly under 1 million worldwide. That is to maintain our current standard of living and not advance at all of course. Maybe an additional 15-25% to advance at the maximum rate capitalism is capable of.
If every country shared technology, yes, automation would eventually replace the vast majority of jobs, and a socialist system would thereby ensure that most people would not have to work, but that would take many years considering the current geopolitical climate
If every country shared technology
If every technology was shared with everyone. If humans thought in terms of humans. And not countries. Yes, this is the key to the revolution we all desire. It isn’t politics or economics. It’s the free distribution of knowledge.
Of course, that’s the goal. I was mainly thinking of the period before this, where the imperial core stops exploiting other countries and starts paying reparations to help all countries reach the same level of technology and general prosperity
Least entitled anarchist
Demanding that society deal with your shit? I don’t know, seems kinda authoritarian, anarcho-palsie-ol-pal
Stirner is a spook
deleted by creator
Engels probably made him up in his free time just to do a little trolling, and unfortunately people took it seriously.
deleted by creator
In all fairness Stirner never said that shit.
In all fairness, Stirner is very skilled at writing smart sounding things that mean either nonsensical gibberish or nothing at all!
I disagree. Stirner is the inevitable conclusion of idealism and individualism. Egoism and Marxism are the only two ideologies that are internally consistent, at opposite ideological poles. Liberalism and fascism are each two ideologies: One for the capitalists who know what’s going on, and a different one for the proles who must be turned against their own interests. I have more respect for egoism than liberalism or other variants of fascism.
Labor you don’t do, is labor someone else has to. Who’s going to maintain sewage systems or power plants or water systems or thousands of things people need to survive? God egoists and “anti-work” people are insufferable.
I’m super sympathetic to the anti-work movement. Work abolition should be a component of a new society. Our intrinsic motivation to improve society, in part, comes from wanting more of our time to be fully our own. That drives labor-saving innovations and it drives economy (saving and reduced consumption and the like).
Obviously we will have to work to get there. But we certainly won’t have to work the jobs that late stage capitalism provides. And at some point we need to turn our planning efforts to reducing the amount of labor that is socially necessary.
I choose to interpret the anti-work movement this way because it is the most productive way for me to interpret it.
Something that seems paradoxical to me is how people always talk about “losing workplaces” like that’s a bad thing. If the entire amount of work can be done by less people that is certainly positive for me. In capitalism ofc this doesn’t work but that only further proves the intrinsic paradox that capitalism is.
