So, I feel like certain conversations have been circling around the "Breadtube" project since it's inception: Having an understanding of left-politics through theory vs. watching video essays for lefty talking points, focusing one's efforts on left-unity vs. making sure the "right" brand on leftism wins out in the end, embracing utopianism vs. focusing on "reformism", etc. and so on, I could go on all day.

But, I feel like today's topic intersects neatly with all of those conversations since it offers anyone who has an opinion on any of those topics an opportunity to think critically about the media they consume. And, hopefully, you guys will walk away with a more robust perspective on left analysis than you originally started out with.

Well, let's get into this shit already and stop stalling:

Okay... what's you pet issue for the day ?

One thing's really been bothering me about left-politics in recent years: since I'm a person who's more along the persuasion that "utopia" or "utopianism" is attainable through the means and technologies that exist today, I sorta get the feeling that most left projects have essentially given up on embracing big ideas.

I mean, this mood isn't exactly unfounded. Bernie's campaign has been absorbed back into the zeitgeist of America's unflinching and sclerotic political system. Jeremy Corybn over in the UK lead his party to an absolutely historic defeat through no fault of his own simply because the media slandered his positions and assassinated his character to the point where they public actually started believing the bullshit said about him. Tie all of that with the fact that we aren't moving nearly as fast as we should be to avoid climate breakdown, and, the covid pandemic turning into one clusterfuck of a protracted culture war that's predicated on making personal sacrifices for "the greater good", I can't help but to think that there's this aura of defeatism surrounding any type of "out-of-the box" political project.

Mainly due in part to the fact that fellow leftists aren't exactly making things easy on ourselves in an effort to have the "right" opinion.

Great, bravo, dude. Just get to the reason why you wanna #CANCELRenegadeCut already so you can go back to being irrelevant

A couple of months ago, on August 10th, of 2020, Anarchist youtuber Renegade Cut posted this video using the recent Star Wars trilogy as an allegory to "critique" the concept of Fully Automated Luxury Communism, which, for the uninitiated among you, is the ideological offshoot of the internet meme "Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism". This newest strand of leftism basically says that, by utilizing and reworking the tech that already exists now in the interests of all people, instead of private capitalists, humanity can live a post scarcity society (keeping the definition at it's most basic).

Post-scarcity societies have been theorized/advocated for by people from all along the political spectrum. Yet, it seems like Aaron Bastani and (FALC) get extra shit from critics just cause it's newer, so, is basically seen as more "naive" or "unrealistic". I'd have to say that I feel as if this perception is happily being helped along by critics such as Renegade Cut who aren't really interested in giving the idea a fair shake since it doesn't line up 100% with their specific brand of leftism, or, they literally haven't even done their proper homework on the subject.

You might wanna back that argument up with some evidence, cause it kinda seems like you're just trying to start shit with a content creator for no reason

Thankfully, to help illustrate my point and make this whole process 1000x easier, I have a personal copy of Bastani's book (I mean, since he's the dude who popularized the phrase in the first place) where he fleshes out the concepts he's been boosting since his time as a student protestor in a bit more detail. We'll go through R.C's video and compare his criticisms of the theory vs what Bastani actually says in his text:

5:33 "Fully automated luxury communism gets a lot of criticism from actual leftists, because it seems like Communism as proposed by capitalists. It is not the future based on what we couldn't do to change the world now, but instead, is a future based on a kind of acceptance of capitalism to drive us to that future.

Ton of red flags pop up immediately in your head if you've actually read the text. First off, it's kind of a red flag in and of itself if you take the time outta your day to publish a nine minute video about something but it takes more than half of the video's runtime to awkwardly jump to your point. Red flag #2 that jumps out at me is just the overall fact that it's so blatantly obvious R.C. didn't actually do his homework on the topic before he decided to make a video about FALC, because, Bastani doesn't argue this... like, at all..

In chapter 3 of the book titled: "What is Fully Automated Luxury Communism?", after, explaining some of the basic principals behind the idea, Bastani writes the following, trying to explain how and why capitalists want to prevent a post-scarcity society from arising:

[quoting economists Larry Summers & J. Bradford DeLong] If information goods are to be distributed at their marginal cost of production - zero - they cannot be created and produced by entrepreneurial firms that use sales from consumers to cover their costs. If information goods are to be created and produced... (companies must be able to anticipate selling their products at a profit to someone.

Remarkably, two of the most esteemed economists in the world were conceding a quite remarkable truth: the price mechanism had broken down for what should be the most valuable part of a commodity - it's [data content]. Economics, for so long obsessed with dealing with the issue of scarcity, began seeing glimpses of something beyond it - the only problem being this broke down the system of incentives by which people are meant to create things under capitalism, namely profit.

Their proposed solution - of exclusion and creating artificial scarcity - was sketchy but reveling. This would be achieved through creating closed voluntary architectures (as Apple would later pursue in their products for example), changes to copyright law and the active promotion of monopolies - something previously viewed being at odds with functioning, healthy markets. [The economists] even conceded such a point when they wrote that:

[quoting Summers and DeLong again] temporary monopoly power and profits are the reward needed to spur private enterprise... the right way to think about these complex set of issues is not clear, but it is clear that the competitive paradigm cannot be fully appropriate... we do not yet know what the right replacement paradigm will be.

I really don't understand how someone could read that passage and unironically interpret it as an embrace of capitalism. Well, as I'll show you guys.. as the video goes along, it's increasingly apperent that they didn't actually bother to read the book.

5:53 One counterargument to the futuristic promise of fully automated luxury communism is that the rise of technology has not been paralleled by the diminishing of income inequality

I'll emphasize, again, the fact that, if R.C. actually did his homework he'd know that back in chapter 1 of the book literally titled: "The Great Disorder" Bastani touches on similar themes scattered throughout the chapter. While he doesn't touch upon technology just yet, he compares the few hundred people killed attempting to cross the Berlin Wall, which existed as a symbolic symbol of division during the Cold War, he compares that figure to the countless thousands of men, women, and children who've died trying to cross the Mediterranean attempting to flee war torn countries or climate breakdown. He then goes on to illustrate the contrasts of our times by outlining how in "rich" countries like the US & UK, 1 in 9 Americans collect food stamps and food bank use in Britain has increased 74% between 2015 and 2020 respectively.

R.C. is literally arguing some of the same points Bastani is, yet, he's portarying his comment as some sort of critique that Bastani doesn't address... Are you guys starting to think that they maybe didn't actually read his book yet?..

6:22 Another criticism of the theory of fully automated luxury communism is that such a future is so far away and that capitalism is literally destroying the world right now!

  • Importantguy123 [comrade/them]
    ·
    4 years ago

    POST CONTINUED

    By far one of the biggest faux "criticisms" that C.A. makes in the entire video by far. The entire point behind FALC is to illustrate how post-scarcity inducing tech isn't some far-off pipe-dream, It's achievable and attainable right now. Capitalists are building legal frameworks to allow their companies to engage in off-earth mineral extraction NOW. We have the technology to potentially eliminate/cure life threatening diseases NOW. Advanced forms of automation and AI is poised to cause mass unemployment NOW, (all of these examples, and more including post-scarcity potentials in energy and food production, are highlighted in the book's section of chapters titled "New Travelers" starting on page 67).

    They aren't even trying at this point, why are they talking down on the subject with such authority when they don't even understand the argu-

    6:36 Yet another argument to this hypothetical future is the fact that the hypothetical capitalists purveyors of this "remarkable future" do NOT want to eliminate the socioeconomic hierarchies that keep them in power. Relying on corporations to set us free ignores their goals, and pretends that the rich have solidarity with the workers of the world

    *internal screaming*

    On top of being a rehash of criticism one, as I've illustrated with my extended quote from the first chapter of the book, and, as Bastani has said himself in the video I linked to this post HE. IS. NOT. SAYING. THAT! It this point it should be pretty clear than R.C. sat in front of his microphone with a bunch of unresearched notes on the topic and decided to vibe out, with not a fact in sight.

    Okay... they might have gotten their video a little wrong, but it's not like you're offering any constructive criticisms on FALC, you basically just sound like a butthurt fanboy right now

    I do actually have criticisms of the book, and there are valid criticisms to be had of the book's concepts. For example: while the section chapter dedicated to outlining post-scarcity in resources sees the solution to the prospect of near-term mineral depletion in asteroid mining, it doesn't exactly go into too much detail about how space travel could be made more sustainable. That's on top of not really getting into the exploitative practices that take place in Congo or Bolivia.

    When the book talks about the possibilities of medical tech like CRISPR to cure disease, it's largely silent on how it would be practically implemented and how the tech needs to be used in a way that doesn't enable eugenics or new forms of medical racism against historically harmed communities.

    Pretending as if renewables will solely take care of our energy needs while not tackling nuclear power is a little dishonest.

    The section about the need to socialize the capital markets, while being some of the most radical ideas in the entire book by far, is probably one of it's shorter sections, which, is kind of a shame since having the financial means to implement all of these ideas is where the rubber of theory meets the road of practicality.

    It emphasizes the need for electoralism, but, doesn't go into what the game plan is if wealthy capitalists do (or, did, in the case of the UK's 2019 election) rally together to crush any political movement that broke with neoliberalism. Nothing about direct action on agitation in general.

    On top of all that, unlike thinkers such as Bookchin or Kropotkin, Bastani actively avoids illustrating what life would be like after the revolution/in a post-scarcity society, hiding behind a bit of a cop-out quote from Marx about how "it's not my job to make recipes for the chefs of the future", or something.

    I mean, even Bastani's comrades at Novara Media have expressed their reservations about the idea, Ash Sarkar even lamenting how the rebrand of FALC took the "fun" of the topic

    With all that being said, I'd still recommend anyone curious in the ideas of FALC, whether supportive, or critical, to take a look at the book.

    Well, that's fair... but, what's your purpose in typing up 14k+ characters on some youtuber being wrong? literally what's your point?

    Look, I like Renegade Cut's videos and I'm subbed to their channel and everything. But, how they carried themselves while talking about the topic, I think, is a microcosm of the problems that the online left faces. You can't really have a discussion on whether or not it's better to read theory or consume video essays when there's vids out there who pretend like they're covering lots of theory that the content creators themselves don't seem to understand, on top of just being sectarian. In the past, I've been more than a little abrasive about how I felt about the people who prefer video essays to theory, but, now I kinda see the fact that my frustration is targeted at the wrong people. Content creators wishing to give their opinions on a topic should know better and to do their homework before they release their works out to the public, or risk giving out a false impression of the subjects their commenting on.

    For those of you still skeptical of the concept of FALC though: I'll just give you this quote and go about my day:

    The only thing that may be wanting to the Revolution is the boldness of initiative.

    With our minds already narrowed in our youth, enslaved by the past in our mature age and til’ the grave, we hardly dare think. If a new idea is mentioned-before venturing on having an opinion of our own, we consult musty books a hundred years old to know what the ancient masters thought on the subject.

    • Peter Kropotkin, The Conquest of Bread

    Dunk on me if you want, libs