The main contradiction, as always, lies in the development of other productive forces that conflict with the established production relations. And what is happening with our productive forces? An interesting metamorphosis is taking place.
Less and less, capital is becoming a tool of exploitation and transforming into a means of self-employment. Robots, machines, and computer technology now allow us to bake bread, sew, publish newspapers, make films, and access knowledge that was previously available only to a select few. For instance, any educated person can now go online and read everything about the medication prescribed to them by their doctor.
MTI has already developed equipment that essentially functions as a mini or even micro-factory, which can be set up at home. You can download designs and manufacturing processes from the internet and create items at home using smart machines—ranging from a 3D printer to a CNC milling machine. We are moving towards a future where a single person or household, either independently or with minimal assistance, will be able to produce all the essential goods needed by society.
Food is now almost entirely produced with the help of modern machinery. A family of farmers can manage virtually any amount of land without much effort. This economic metamorphosis named “Wiki economy” has become a trendy term as people have recognized a general trend. An example is the experience of Boeing, which was able to produce its new, revolutionary airplane by sharing not only production tasks but also all the previously classified documentation with thousands of contractors.
Chinese moped manufacturers are often cited as an example, as they do not concentrate all production under one roof but operate like a “cloud” of small firms, each specializing in a specific component, process, or assembly. As a result, this approach is cheaper, more mass-produced, and even better than what the Japanese offer. One of the most interesting phenomena of wikinomics is social networks and torrent systems, which are also examples of mass collaboration. Signs of wikinomics include companies’ tendencies toward complete outsourcing. When all tasks are performed by third-party firms, the company itself only takes on the functions of managing the system and the brand. Everything is outsourced: accounting, marketing, sales, and production is moved to third-world countries. Employees no longer work for a specific employer but for a company that specializes in leasing personnel or “outstaffing.”
Such fragmentation of productive forces into small specialized enterprises, down to individuals possessing knowledge, skills, and tools, is only possible with a serious information infrastructure in place. This is the very informatization that is being promoted by the ruling class. The effectiveness of the “cloud” economy or wikinomics has already been proven in practice. Compare. Wikipedia и. Encarto Who is more popular, who is more authoritative? Both projects were extremely similar in terms of goals and audience. One was created through mass collaboration, while the other was centralized. And what happened? The second resource ended up being just a link on the first. By the way, a more relevant example is the library Kirill and Methodius. Where is it now, and where are the Moshkov Library or LibruSec?
The idea of wikinomics wasn’t ours. And if you have criticisms of wikinomics, you shouldn’t direct them at us or accuse us of “not understanding the basics of economics.” It just so happens that we do understand the fundamentals. 🙂 The essence of the criticism mentioned in one of the comments was that “home production of aluminum pots will never be more profitable than mass production.” We’ll focus on this remark to explain in more detail what wikinomics is all about.
- Wikinomics doesn’t require everyone to have, say, a 3D printer at home. Look at what’s happening in the photography industry right now. Anyone with some extra money can print photos at home by buying a printer, yet everyone still goes to photo labs, which have long become “mini-factories” operated by a single person. Wikinomics doesn’t necessitate home production. It only speaks to maximum decentralization of production and the most open exchange of information (examples from the book on wikinomics: Boeing 787 and Chinese mopeds).
- In our world, the cost of an aluminum pot and its retail price are two or even three completely different things. There’s no doubt that the cost of mass stamping will be lower than that of custom manufacturing, say, at MIT’s mini-lab described in “Wikinomics.” However, it will be very difficult to determine which option will be cheaper for the consumer—a custom, expensive pot made at home or at the nearest wiki-robot factory, or a cheaply mass-produced pot that comes with the costs of transportation, storage, advertising, shelf placement, and the salaries of everyone from the cashier at the register to the packer on the production line.
- It should be understood that without considering the financial aspects, such as the cost of equipment and its operating time, the production cost of a pot is equal to the cost of the energy and raw materials used. Whether it’s a local robotic factory or a megacorporation, the figures involved are practically the same.
- Wikinomics doesn’t say “no” to mass production. Wikinomics suggests that the main productive forces will belong to the cloud of wiki cooperation. If today, in the era of mass centralized production, we can still find workshops or manual labor, it’s only because they have found their niches and continue to justify their existence. Souvenirs, clothing tailoring, cleaning services, caregiving, janitorial work, tour guiding, beekeeping—these are all “remnants” of the pre-industrial economy that are still relevant and continue to exist today. Similarly, in the context of wikinomics, mass production will still make sense. But it won’t be the primary generator of gross product. That’s all there is to it. After all, how many times in our lives do we buy pots? 🙂
It is interesting to consider the long-overdue problem that has arisen under the current economic model.
Degradation of quality.
Since the 16th century (roughly speaking, during the transition from feudalism to capitalism), the abolition of the biblical prohibition on interest introduced a new understanding of money as “time is money,” which significantly contributed to the faster development of technocratic civilization.
This is a model of an economy based on CONSTANT growth, where marketing (i.e., sales) determines the need for production (according to Kotler), rather than the other way around. The necessity to sell MORE and CHEAPER in a competitive environment inevitably drives manufacturers to produce goods with increasingly shorter lifespans, and consequently, of lower quality.
At the beginning of the 20th century, industrial (manufactured and artisanal) goods, due to their significant cost resulting from considerable labor input, also lasted a long time. Some of them could even be described as “lasting a lifetime.”
In this case, the moral and ethical aspects are irrelevant, as a producer who consciously creates a high-quality, long-lasting product cannot offer a competitive price and will inevitably “go down the drain.”
This model reaches absurdity, where the manufacturer, in the face of fierce competition, is cutting the branch they are sitting on—destroying the consumer by lowering the quality of their products.
The main problem during the transition period is the INSUFFICIENT AWARENESS of consumers when choosing products, which is in turn determined by an imperfect advertising model (INFORMATION about product quality). The “economy” models are again defined by a model of unconsciously growing consumption. Many products are created specifically to “create new needs,” and so on.
Simply put, it is in the consumer’s interest to purchase a product, even at three times the price, if it has at least a tenfold increase in its lifespan. And to avoid buying any product that will ultimately require maintenance costs exceeding its original price.
In this regard, the new developments of network marketing campaigns like AMWAY or similar ones are interesting, where a community of consumers, based on communication and experimental data, compares various product parameters, demonstrating the superiority of quality over quantity in practice))). We will overlook potential abuses and simply note that, in the absence of a necessity for increasing sales, the issue of abuse will significantly decrease.
What is wikinomics for the ruling class? It represents new production relationships to which the existing methods of exploitation are completely inapplicable. The ruling class cannot physically control, without harming itself, the cloud of individuals who, as long as cash remains or even thrives in non-cash forms of payment (like electronic money), operate “in another universe” in relation to the state. Mass collaboration, in general, disregards any existing class superstructures. It is indifferent to borders, written laws, and the officials themselves. Wikipedia is written by the whole world. Boeing assembled its 787 with contributions from around the globe, exchanging information across borders. People are already organizing mutual travel clubs, ignoring travel agencies; clubs for mailing packages, receiving goods from other countries that are unavailable in their own; media in the form of blogs, which are minimally controlled (or, if desired, not controlled at all) by the ruling class, and so on.
The ruling class is doing everything it can to hold back the movement in this direction. We hear that downloading music and movies is illegal, we observe the actions of the Russian Authors’ Society, and we understand that the trials against thepiratesbay.org or sanctions against torrents.ru are unjust. We are baffled by attempts to license Skype, and we struggle to understand why it’s not so simple to import a batch of computers bought online from China. We are told about democracy, even though we don’t really know who we are voting for or if we are voting at all. For a long time, we have been buying what others recommend to us rather than what advertising shouts about.
More and more types of businesses require licenses and permits. Although technically anyone can bake bread or publish books. We hardly notice that the most valuable brands and the wealthiest individuals are becoming key players in the information technology industry or sectors where information (such as design features, for example) is a key differentiator from competitors; especially when these design features have been conceived, tested, and produced using information technology (IKEA, for instance, as a seller of information-rich “wooden” products).
Over time, the contradictions between the information-based superstructure and the “cloud” information foundation will accumulate and intensify.
Both resources for ensuring access to information and opportunities for that access will accumulate. The government, businesses, and citizens will increasingly employ new methods to eliminate information asymmetry for their own security. to pull the informational blanket over oneself Текст для перевода: ..
We will see more and more victims of this contradiction, victims of the ruling class’s struggle for power. Meanwhile, we will continue to be told that sharing information is piracy, appointing professionals to positions of power is undemocratic, allowing everyone to bake bread is dangerous, and that we can’t do without advertising on television. The question is, how long will we continue to believe this?
The main conclusion of this section: The existing trend in society towards mass collaboration. does not correspond to the existing production relations and is a key contradiction that must be resolved in some way. in this way Текст для перевода: ..