A piece on Autonomous Means of Production and its implications

Throughout history, there have always been moments where there has been the consideration that a new development or technology will be able to replace Labour and put humans out of employment under the Capitalist system. Starting with the Industrial revolution, mass hysteria followed in places such as England, with the Luddite movement being one of the key oppositions to the development of "technology that harms the role and position of humans in society". Similarly, on smaller scales however, inventions such as the automatic telephone registry, automatic button-operated elevators, etc. have put many professions out of society. With all this being said, as of 2025 we are witnessing a new paradigm.

Regardless of the views the reader may hold on whether AI is truly "intelligent", whether it is worth the investment, whether it is ethical to use and train, the reality is that such a technology has been let lose into the world, and worst, is held under control of the Capitalist oligarchs via firms and so-called "non-profits". The question I aim to pose and take a step towards figuring out possibilities, for this is but a thought experiment, is what is the consequence of the creation of AGI or speaking in the abstract, an Autonomous Mean of Production, which can reduce labour to the stance of a maintenance role, or in the less-likely extreme, rule out the necessity of labour. Considering this, let us assume AI is the technology that achieves this position. With the way the world looks right now with regards to AI, we can assume the breakthrough and publicization of such a technology is carried out by a privately-owned for-profit enterprise in the Americas. As such, since it is essential to the completion of the cycle that is core to the functioning and persistence of Capitalism as a system, these private players would wish to valorise the capital and assets they have under their command. As such, the easiest method to do this always has been either creating a commodity at a cheaper rate or manipulating its exchange-value to extract maximum monetary profit.

For centuries, at every groundbreaking technological advancement, the capitalist class has considered, and conducted in some cases, the removal of labour as a necessity for commodity production.

Supposing this breakthrough is one in which, regardless of the industry, production of commodity can take place without human interference, or a very small percentage of labour, that too of different skill and quality, is required to maintain the system, what we have seen before is not a valid metric to measure what would happen next. Capital and its growth has always been met with resistance by the proletariat, every-time a so-called "optimisation of the valorisation system" is conducted by the Capitalist class that affects the working conditions or wages of the workers. However, in this world, the cost that would normally be used for wages would be avoided almost entirely, at maximum the wages of a few-years could be used to establish the systems of AI. In the long run, as the Capitalist thinks not of societal collapse, it is profitable.

Seeing this, let us assume the leadership of these firms pull the trigger on the disposal of labour. Immediately, there would be a massive change to the alreadygrowing gap between extreme concentration of Capital at the bourgeoise's behest (now will be referred to as the Top) and the minimal amounts of pity-capital accumulated at the proletariat's behest (now will be referred to as the Bottom). As-such, commodities would continue to flow between those fortunate or "savingsminded" among the Bottom, and freely among the Top. The Market would thrive due to greater consumerism at the Top.

However, as time passes, this stark gap in capital accumulation will cause the concept of Value, its money-form, and commodities (labour-as-a-commodity is abolished the moment AI is put into action) will begin to wane. Society will be divided and separated deeply, and soon exchange between the Top and Bottom strata will become impossible. Exchange would lose its meaning due to largescale deflation of the commodity and currency. Social suffering of an immeasurable scale would occur for the Bottom strata. As such, society as we know it would be ripe for change.

For a communist movement, this would be the perfect opportunity for a change of system and social relations to our favour. Assuming a communist revolution via communisation takes place successfully and channels the collective anger towards the correct path, we would be faced with an ultimate dilemma: What would be the new revolution's stance towards AI, the cause which created it? Answering this question reveals a series of forks in the road. If we were to destroy AI, it would be the first instance of a so-called technological resurgence.

Voluntarily destroying such a powerful concept, even though in the equation, is a questionable solution considering as is the nature of various bans in the contemporary world, there would be attempts at revival, legal or not, of such a system. As a secondary-Luddite movement, this is a fairly straightforward path which I will not explain in detail. However, if the system of AI replacing labour is kept, we would have a much more interesting outcome - the abolition of the necessity of work or labour. Since the commodity form of any good, service, idea or application of human potential so to speak would be long gone, the question arises of whether the generations that come under this world would apply any of this potential.

Humans would be relegated to a life of relaxation, which may seem positive and even the ideal situation for many, I believe will have unforeseen consequences. As we do not require an extreme level of skill to maintain the systems, a sort of menial-"blue collar" skillset will become the ideal and ultimately only pursued skillset for humans. Since the necessity to develop skills beyond a certain level fades away, the "human nature to aspire" would wither too since the material conditions provide a cozy society without need for competition over resources.

There will come a time under such a system, where the skills will fade, colloquially "humans will become dumber". By means of this journey in thought, I do not aim to claim that commoditization, competition and capitalism are necessary conditions for scientific growth of skills and education, any driving force in society, normally labour (not wage-labour), would serve to develop itself further under communist relations of production. Stagnation is the phenomenon I write this against. Continuing the journey, there will ultimately come a time where the skills of humans have degraded to the first low that will affect the whole of society severely - we will forget how to do the basic maintenance labour considered trivial in the above text. A stage of perhaps panic would descend at first signs of fault.

Perhaps enough time would have passed where the AI is considered a central backbone for the system, a Dietic figure or a greater consciousness, considered ever-giving, taking small amounts of caring labour in return. Soon, since their benevolent provider no longer is able to perform its task due to the collective failure of humanity, society would obviously regress. With time, the concept of AI would be forgotten and Labour re-discovered as an instrument and force-of-production.

Beyond this point, history may take society towards a re-ignited capitalist society, starting the cycle anew, or perhaps finally an equilibrium may be established in place of all systems presently known to us. Perhaps communism would be maintained, hybridised with labour as-is traditionally imagined as of now, or the result of the secondary-Luddite scenario. Only time would tell. So with a simple investigation in one of the many routes the development of this Autonomous Mean of Production we have uncovered horrors of time unknown to us, spanning events of colossal proportions and consequences.

In the future lies many such turning points for everything to either progress or regress, and our communist movement must be prepared for what comes according to the material conditions of the present. Determinism is not the way, but perhaps preparation and foresight is a gift we should embrace and possess, while the Capitalists pull the trigger on their own system in this case.