Communism reloaded?

Traditional socio-economic models are being reassessed in an age defined by connectivity and innovation and by the exponential emergence of artificial intelligence. The concept of the sharing economy or collaborative economy (peer-to-peer platforms, etc.) has been consolidated for over a decade and has evolved. It has emerged from a combination of social, economic and technological factors. However, specific individuals and platforms have played significant roles in popularising and shaping the concept.

These early innovators and their platforms have helped catalyse the growth of the sharing economy, inspiring a wide range of industries that facilitate collaborative consumption and resource sharing. As a result, the sharing economy has evolved into a multi-faceted concept that continues to shape how people access goods and services.

On the other hand, Schumpeter's innovation theory is still widely discussed and relevant in economics and innovation studies. Schumpeter's view, often called the 'Innovation Theory of Entrepreneurship' or 'Creative Disruption', proposes that innovation drives economic growth and development. Schumpeter argued that innovation is not just about incremental improvements but can lead to creating entirely new products, processes or business models. He called this process "creative disruption", in which innovations disrupt and replace existing industries and economic structures. So we don't have to worry if jobs disappear because new ones will replace them. Will they?

The speed at which jobs disappear and will disappear, primarily through the increasing implementation of artificial intelligence, seems to be faster than the speed at which new jobs appear. In addition, the pandemic has been a phenomenon that has dramatically accelerated the re-alignment of many values in parallel with the exit of the "baby boomer" generation from the labour market and the emergence of a generation that does not consider equity, environmental protection, equality, social inclusion as "politically correct" values. This new generation (or a part of it) seems to have been born with values that seem normal for the world they want to live in. This generation (or a part of it) ?did not live under national Communism and is not influenced by the repulsion that my generation (a part of it) has towards collectivism. On the contrary, it considers (for the most part) that equality, sharing and environmental protection are fundamental values of tomorrow's world.

In June 2016, Switzerland held a referendum to decide whether to introduce a guaranteed universal basic income for all citizens, known as the "Unconditional Basic Income Initiative". The majority of voters rejected this initiative, but an important part of the Swiss people voted in favour! ...and Switzerland is far from being a state with a socialist ideology. Doesn't the idea of this guaranteed minimum income (in Communism's utopian dream: "from each according to his possibilities, to each according to his needs") risk appearing again if the erosion of jobs will be greater than the creation of new jobs? And what "if" the latest technologies can produce enough welfare by accelerating productivity and excluding man from many repetitive processes? Then the work will disappear?

Unlikely. But the disappearance of wage-based work (a relatively new invention in human history) is not a utopian hypothesis. The question is how this fair distribution of wealth will be achieved, given that the "surplus value" that Marx spoke of is in the hands of a tiny fraction of the population that I don't think will be ready to share with the rest of the world. How will innovation, connectivity, and the exponential emergence of artificial intelligence mentioned in the introduction to this article change traditional socio-economic patterns? By force? By revolution?

In the early 1990s (and still today), we often hear that no market economy is without democracy. Whether we like it or not, many Chinese do not seem to agree with this idea. Even though Beijing's regime is considered very authoritarian, this does not mean technological progress and entrepreneurship are not booming in China. It will surprise you (and some will even be outraged) that I have not seen a strong revolt against the regime in their country in talking to many young Chinese. It seems that as long as they see their country develop and their incomes rise, they abide by the principle of "no politics, all are free". Nevertheless, I think that few young Europeans would want to live under Chinese rule.

When we hear most of the criticism of today's unequal society, it is the shift more and more towards the far right due to ideological or purely materialistic discontent. Suppose we add to this terrible cocktail the war in the heart of Europe, the dangerous division of American society, the Neo-Marxist trend, the emergence of illiberal economies, the tensions between the US and China, the shift of the North-South paradigm to East-West, the social media impact of the unbounded amplification of voluntary and involuntary manipulation, we can only conclude that we are or have entered a period of profound socio-economic change, a period driven by the exponential growth of technological change. In this new era, nobody has a clue where we'll go. The Crystal ball is broken.

And if history repeats itself but never in the same way, Is it unbelievable to see arising a technology-driven "Communism Reloaded"?? Could this be an answer to the historical criticism of conventional Communism? Is a commitment to shared ownership of resources and the means of production with a "contemporary twist" of paradigm a utopia? This vision would attempt to bridge the gap between traditional ideals and current realities by embracing individual rights, technological innovation and environmental consciousness. Wouldn't "Communism Reloaded", emphasising decentralised decision-making, ecological sustainability and a fair distribution of wealth, find many supporters? Ironically, in this "Communism Reloaded", direct democracy would be the cornerstone, reflecting the shared economy ethos of user-driven platforms and collaborative decision-making.

The synergy between the shared economy and Communism Reloaded has its challenges. Finding a balance between individual autonomy and collective prosperity, ensuring transparent governance and navigating potential regulatory hurdles can be more than an intellectual challenge if it lacks..semantic emotions. If our democracies have enough power to correct the big problems of today's world, Communism Reloaded will be science fiction. If not, I let you think..