First attempt at posting:
It should be "ō-nomics", not "ē-nomics." Easier on the ears.
Also, I'm not sure I like where this is going.
From Asia Times, March 12:
AI-led economy will be oriented toward war in a geopolitical contest for tech resources, raw materials and minerals
The economist Paul Samuelson noted that the Second World War was the “economists war.” The US came to realize that economic planning, the role of the Federal Reserve and mobilization of the civilian sector were crucial in times of war.
What the role of geoeconomics, and also automation, signals now is the complete triumph of “total mobilization.” That is, that scarcity and economic wealth become the de facto drivers of foreign and domestic policy. The culmination of this realization is the triumph of Donald Trump’s “realpolitik.”
What the new world now offers is a maximization route of capital and resource accumulation. All regimes have effectively abandoned liberal democracy and exist on a sliding scale of authoritarianism: the most efficient model for the implementation of “Deathenomics.”
This, incidentally, is not a value judgment on whether liberalism is right or wrong – it is a de facto genealogy of history.
The new world order rests on the diminishing importance of labor as seen in its traditional mode. Robotics and AI will replace human labor. In fact, in the not-so-distant future, human beings will be peripheral to world economies.
Imagine the cost savings of a robotic workforce. According to Techcrunch:
Broadly speaking, robotics benefited from the pandemic. Staffing shortages led to an influx in investments and a kind of renaissance in industrial automation. More recently, an explosion of interest in generative AI has further accelerated the industry and the push toward “general-purpose” robots.[2]
In this brave new world, Elon Musk estimates there will be demand for 20 billion robots. Considering a one-off price of US$20,000-30,000 per unit, this is a win-win for capital.
Yet what of labor? Whilst initially robots would be the workforce of factories and automated processes, the future will abandon labor in all areas such as administration, retail, nurses and even agriculture.
The problem with Keynesian ‘Deathenomics’ is that it will ultimately eradicate the consumer. The laborer was traditionally a consumer. What prolonged advanced capitalism was the constant re-creation of consumer demand, what Marxists call the “fetishization” of the economy characterized by endless needs.
The future of this new world will mean a dichotomy between tech/machine-owning elites and a surplus lumpen proletariat. In a world where surplus value of the worker is eliminated, value is replaced by machines. Human beings will thus become dependent on the state for sustenance.
The trajectory, already underway, will be a massive increase in indolent populations without work. National economies will be effectively irrelevant to the majority.
The new economy will be oriented towards war in a competition for tech resources, raw materials and minerals. Disputes as to extraction and rights will lead to war and a Keynesian cycle of demand. War and economy will become intertwined in “Deathenomics.”
In Russia, a dead son is worth a $130,000 payment. According to a BBC report this is called “coffin money”; it is enough to transform family lives from poverty[3]. Widows of dead husbands have developed a vogue for expensive hair dryers.
Putin has instituted a program called “Time for Heroes,” wherein returning soldiers are fast-tracked into governing and business positions. Keynesian war is one of the few remaining growth areas....
....MUCH MORE
