By J. Gibson

Karl Marx famously predicted the displacement of workers by technology; in the 1800s millions of people were being forced onto the streets as machinery and automation made them redundant. Similarly, in 2014, new technology poses an equally concerning threat to almost every single waged worker in Europe – cashiers, mechanics, clerical and call center workers, and administrators all face redundancy as new computerised techniques take over. New technologies can no doubt lead to greater efficiency and output in production, yet at the same time – technology poses a serious existential threat to at least two thirds of the workforce. This growing struggle between automation and manual labour is manifested quite clearly in the ongoing London Underground dispute; Boris Johnson wants to close down ticket offices in place of more automated gates, leading to job losses and potential poverty for hundreds of workers. Like the 19th century industrialists, London’s Mayor is promising that the changes will mean the City’s tube network will become more efficient and cost-effective, however he offers alternative for the workers who’d be made redundant.

As outlined in the ‘Future of Employment’ report published by Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne, the jobs most at risk of computerisation are those held by lower middle-class, white-collar workers in sales, administration and service. In contrast, the upper middle-class jobs in business and finance are predicted to be largely unaffected by computerisation. In class terms, this undoubtedly means that middle Britain will become further fragmented as automated technologies deprive them of their skills and experience. The fate bestowed on the working classes between 1850 and 1970 will be transferred onto the historically stable middle classes. Of course, there are certain workers in IT and the fields of innovation that will escape devaluation – but it is highly unlikely the IT sector alone can recuperate job losses in the service sector. Even if the UK does manage to train up an army of skilled programmers and engineers, any newly qualified IT workforce would also face the threat of redundancy as parts of computer technology become self-automated.

The power of technology has substantially increased the productive capabilities of our society, yet ordinary people have not seen their living standards rise in proportion to the advances in automation and computerisation. This is partly due to the administration, bureaucracy and development costs of the technologies themselves. However, for the most part, society’s potential gains have been stolen by a minority of profiteers, corporations and investment bankers. Our country has never been richer – yet the real wages of ordinary workers have been stagnating for decades. Trade unions, the Labour Party and the wider UK left-of-center need to start challenging the unfair distribution of profit – and offer mechanisms to protect workers from technological competition.

The long-term answer is not to abandon technological pursuit, or not even to limit automation. However, we do need to come to terms with the idea of a universal basic income – a wage paid by the government to every person unconditionally. A basic income wouldn’t be a safety net or welfare payment, but an entitlement of every single person for contributing to decades of technological growth. As a country, millions have been denied the fruits of productive technology – a government directed redistribution scheme is the only way to go forward. The case for a basic income has never been stronger in Switzerland, to the point at the Swiss have planned a referendum on the idea. Britain’s left needs to revolutionise the idea of welfare, and replace it with a promise of a universal living standard.

Technology is a force of production, yet it is also a force of great destruction. A basic income will ensure the productive gains of technology are enjoyed by the many, not the few.