
IN 2016, the UK voted to leave the European Union. Since then, the country has been in crisis. Talk has been of virtually nothing else. Then there is the talk about the talk. âTo say the present era is one of crisis borders on clichĂ©,â writes Aaron Bastani in his polemical manifesto Fully Automated Luxury Communism.
What else could he say, given the situation? This grim picture is expanded on in two more books. In Measuring Poverty Around the World, Anthony Atkinson wrestles with the fact that even as countries become wealthier, poverty remains entrenched. And David Blanchflowerâs central theme is the crisis of underemployment and underpayment, yet his title Not Working expresses a more general failure of the global economy as well.
Since the end of the cold war, Atkinson writes, âthe attitude of Western democracies has been that their view of the worldâs political organisations has triumphedâ. Bastani calls this âcapitalist realismâ â the idea that capitalism is the only plausible system â and cites political scientist Francis Fukuyamaâs influential argument about reaching the end of history. Yet, in 2008, history returned.
Advertisement
As Blanchflower puts it, âsomething horrible happenedâ. All three authors agree that the current malaise derives from the financial crisis of 2007-8, and the cataclysmic mishandling of its aftermath by those in power.
Blanchflower was among those who were tasked with handling the crisis. He was serving on the Bank of Englandâs Monetary Policy Committee and told everyone that austerity would make things worse. Nobody listened.
Instead, George Osborne, then the UKâs chancellor of the exchequer, âa reverse Robin Hoodâ, seized a âunique political opportunity⊠to reduce the size of the state and never mind the social and economic consequencesâ. Internationally, a perverse illogic prevailed, as US talk show host Stephen Colbert pointed out at the time: âWe have to keep cutting government budgets and laying off people until those people get jobs.â
More than a decade on, people are still hurting. They often canât find employment, or the scant work they can find offers little security or pay. They have no prospect that their living conditions will be ameliorated. Rightly, many of these people blame the âlearnedsâ who failed to predict the crash. For example, a limo driver told Blanchflower that people voted Brexit because âordinary people had no hopeâ. How can we have hope when policy-makers havenât learned from their mistakes?
Worse, as Blanchflower says, these policy-makers ânow have little firepower to deal with the onset of the next economic crisisâ. If you are already despondent about the situation, I guarantee this book will make you feel worse.
Atkinson, too, refused to sugar-coat his subject. Sadly, he died before finishing this book, but it has been brought to publication, at his request, by his colleagues John Micklewright and Andrea Brandolini. With its unfinished chapters explored in afterwords by economists François Bourguignon and Nicholas Stern, it is at the very least a worthy successor to Atkinsonâs 2015 study Inequality: What can be done?
Atkinson became an economist in the 1960s after working with deprived children in Hamburg, Germany, and published major works, beginning with The Economics of Inequality in 1975.
Five decades on, says Atkinson, poverty remains âone of the two great challenges facing the world as a whole today, along with climate change, with whose consequences poverty is intimately connectedâ.
Atkinson considers various definitions of poverty, but his fundamental argument is that the free movement of capital, combined with governmentsâ failure to regulate and tax multinationals, has led to the loss of employment and to insecurity among workers and their families in many countries.
He agrees with Blanchflower and Bastani that this is a failure of the learneds: âOur governments have lost sight of their obligation to act on behalf of all their citizens; they have allowed them to become subservient to economic forces.â And he argues that âwe need to return to a situation where âthe economyâ is a means of fulfilling the life hopes and ambitions of people, not vice versaâ. Wise words, but is anyone able to listen?
Atkinson and Blanchflower find that people want to work to earn money, and that having decent, fulfilling jobs makes people happier. Bastani argues that people would be even happier if they didnât work at all. He proposes that we need to move from crisis to utopia â to âa world beyond jobs, profit and even scarcityâ. This is the âfully automated luxury communismâ of his title.

âHow can we have hope about the future when policy-makers havenât learned from their mistakes?â
Bastani evokes Karl Marxâs idea that automation will create âa society in which work is eliminated, scarcity replaced by abundance and where labour and leisure blend into one anotherâ. Robots will do physical tasks such as driving and delivering things. We will âmine the skyâ thanks to Elon Muskâs innovations in conquering the final frontier. Life expectancy will be enhanced by gene therapies. Our expanding population will be fed by cultured meat. The new populism will be âluxury populismâ: socialist and environmentally aware.
In Bastaniâs view, Marx was let down by the technological insufficiencies of every era prior to ours; this is the first time our technology has been sufficient to give rise to a post-scarcity economy, if we want it, and a realm of plenty âbeyond imaginationâ.
What Bastani doesnât quite imagine, however, is a world in which people might actually enjoy their work. Where in Bastaniâs utopia is the place for someone whose version of socialism is more William Morris than Karl Marx, someone who values work as an end in itself?
Like Blanchflower and Atkinson, Bastani identifies elite learneds as the source of our ills. And for his luxury communism to work, these elites have to agree not to pocket the trillions they stand to make but, instead, to share the profits.
What happens if Musk doesnât âwant itâ? Maybe he is happy with the way things are. Regardless, there will be no storming of the Winter Palace in Bastaniâs utopia, because, he writes, his politics ârecognises the centrality of human rights, most importantly the right of personal happinessâ.
Bastaniâs future is interesting: âa figurehead of possibility forged for a world changing so rapidly that new utopias are needed â because the old ones no longer make senseâ. It is a dream to replace the bankrupt capitalist dream, and to counter the dark fantasies of non-luxury populists.
These authors understand that there has been a lot of talk already. They believe we need better talk. They are all highly intelligent people who are trying to understand why the situation in which we find ourselves is so stupid. Their books all have virtues, but if you can only face one, then, for mea culpas and an honest if demoralising insider view, read Blanchflower. For devastating statistical analysis, read Atkinson. For riotous techno-optimism, read Bastani.
It is a wonder Bastani missed the opportunity to call his theory Totally Automated Luxury Communism, or TALC. TALC, which we could liberally sprinkle across our broken world. TALC to mitigate all the TALK.
Princeton University Press
Verso
Princeton University Press