Originally shared by Miguel Afonso Caetano"To put a stop to any further dreaming of post-work utopias Evgeny Morozov delivered a meticulous diagnosis of the political economy that left little space for designers to imagine alternative political or social orders. Morozov views ‘Fully Automated Luxury Communism’ as an euphemism for ‘full employment for the creative class’ insisting that the audience don’t have the luxury to talk about communism’. Morozov propels the effects of neo-liberalism as the paralysis of ‘what is left of the political left’ and candidly presents an ideology so far ingrained into Western culture that any alternative is simply indulgent fantasy. Admittedly, his forecast for Luxury Communism is probably the most likely, he presents the intrusion of Silicon Valley into state-based welfare and highlights the interest of tech giants into schemes such as UBI. Silicon Valley’s research into UBI and Google’s recent acquisition of Metamind (used to diagnose patients in the UK’s National Health Service) all indicate a dwarfing of state run services to outsourced tech services that, in Morozov’s view, will give way to a Silicon Valley entrepreneurial welfare state. According to Morozov, digital tech companies are attempting to substitute state welfare in order to protect themselves from the instability of their current economic model that relies on the speculative advertising market and provide the freedom to manage citizens without the interventions of governments or as Silicon Valley often nicknames ‘The Paper Belt’. Morovoz claims that as Google and Facebook move towards neo-feudalism and cities become orientated around smart technology and openness, open data style hack labs are futile attempts to frantically prototype alternatives before the eventually engulfing of entrepreneurial welfare. For Morozov, the inevitable narrative for post-capitalism is entrepreneurial welfare, based on a feudalist monopoly that uses citizen data to produce commercial identities and post-border nationalities. This sobering diagnosis punctured much of the excitement towards socialist technological accelerationism and Morozov clearly sees any significant global change originating from within politics, not design. When asked directly for an example of transformative politics he half heartedly indicates support for the 5 Star Movement in Italy. This direct democratic movement is a bottom-up initiative to reform politics from the socialist left. However, as they gain increasing power and reach an electorate majority I wonder how Morozov will sustain his reductive separation between the bureaucrats and tech elites, when if his prediction of entrepreneurial welfare is correct, the two will no longer be distinguishable. His support for 15m movement as the only distinct movement from the left that can grasp the full scale of neo-liberalism is condescending and far from convincing. He seemingly neglects the work done by organisations such as D-cent who have developed digital tools for direct democratic parties (including 15M movement) across Europe. When Morovoz claims that the political right have been the only ones capable of harnessing networked technology to fuel their political ambition, he is referring to a historic trajectory rather than acknowledging recent technological activism. I would argue that there is an increasing movement showcased not only within this conference but in design communities throughout Europe that are attempting to challenge Morozov’s diagnosis with p2p collective organization, open source technology and political power."
http://networkcultures.org/moneylab/2016/06/10/fully-automated-luxury-communism/
http://networkcultures.org/moneylab/2016/06/10/fully-automated-luxury-communism/
MoneyLab: Economies of Dissent | Fully Automated Luxury Communism