Many of the conflict minerals required to produce modern computers, as I understand it, are not currently possible to source ethically. Is this purely about abusive labor practices or are there cultural issues which make the extraction itself the problem? Are there alternatives which could be more “sustainable”, but would make computers slower?
I worry that the idea of “we establish communism and then the exploitation stops” may ignore various microeconomic issues or make invalid assumptions about the cultures of the people who would still be doing that extraction.
And if you don’t give a shit about cell phones or the internet or whatever, what about things like MRI machines? Those supply chains are inherently global. The materials for them do not exist in any single region.
I think a lot of it too would come down to the whole planned obsolescence bullshit embedded in the system. Why do we need a new phone every couple of years? I'm using it to browse the internet and make calls/texts. Those basic functions don't change much, so I keep a phone until I break it. If I could fix the screen on my shitty android instead of buying a new one, I would because I don't need anything better. Same with my laptop. I would love an actual video card instead of onboard graphics, but otherwise I have no intention of replacing it unless it unrepairably breaks. Most of us, at least in the imperial core, have plenty of devices already. We don't need anywhere near as many new ones as are being made, and if we had to turn in old devices to get new ones so they could be recycled/refurbished, the amout of necessary raw materials would be even smaller.
Also, one thing people say is that without capitalism there's no innovation. However, the need to find new, nonexploitative ways to satisfy our hunger for tech would by necessity drive innovation. I have to wonder how many ideas die because it's cheaper to just steal more raw materials from exploited countries than it is to find a new way to do things.
(edit for readability)