Episode Details
Back to Episodes
Does AI Make Communism Feasible? (A Far Right Debate)
Description
In this episode of Based Camp, Malcolm and Simone Collins tackle one of the most provocative questions in the age of AI: Does artificial intelligence finally make communism feasible?
They explore the structural failures of historical communism (incentives, power consolidation, information problems, and catastrophic mismanagement), why small-scale communism works (families, kibbutzim) but large-scale versions collapse, and whether AI-driven post-scarcity could solve these issues or simply replicate the same human problems of bad actors, bureaucracy, and distorted incentives.
Topics include:
* The Sam Altman UBI study and why unconditional cash transfers often fail
* Why Soviet science succeeded in some areas but governance always failed
* Power vacuums in anarcho-communism vs. centralized systems
* The future of “techno-fiefdoms,” AI-managed communities, and human reserves for those left behind by AI disruption
* Demographic collapse and the likely rise of religious/techno-puritan movements
A raw, nuanced debate that challenges both right-wing and left-wing assumptions about economics, human nature, and the coming AI era.
Show Notes
Why Implementations Fail
* Economic calculation problem (Ludwig von Mises, 1920):
* Without private property and market prices, planners lack information on relative scarcity/costs.
* You can’t rationally allocate steel, labor, or grain.
* Attempts at “material balances” or cybernetic planning (e.g., Soviet OGAS—an attempted nationwide information network) failed repeatedly.
* HOW AI CAN FIX THIS
* Adequately and dynamically track supply and demand
* Incentive and knowledge problems (Hayek):
* People respond to incentives.
* Common ownership dilutes responsibility (”tragedy of the commons”).
* Local knowledge is dispersed; central decrees can’t match it.
* AI can just more adequately monitor dispersed local knowledge
* Innovation and maintenance collapse without profit/loss signals.
* If AI becomes like a mother and just “handles” everything, then it’s not an issue
* Power dynamics:
* Enforcing abolition of private property and markets requires massive coercion.
* With AI, we’re approaching a place where the majority of the population won’t have anything (or anything to lose), property-wise.
* This concentrates power in a vanguard/party, which becomes a new ruling class (see Milovan Djilas’ The New Class).
* We might see a bifurcated society: One ruling elite doing their own thing, then AI-led/governed communist societies for everyone else
* The state doesn’t wither; it entrenches (Orwell, Animal Farm).
* This is more of an issue when the state is fighting over something desirable, but what we’re looking at is a society largely abandoned by the elite.
* Human nature (loaded with self-interest, status-seeking, family preferences as it is) doesn’t vanish.
* Not a problem if a non-biological mind is governing.
* Repeated patterns:
* Initial revolutionary fervor lead to…
* purges of “wreckers”/kulaks, which lead to
* Shortages, which lead to…
* blame external enemies/capitalism, which lead to…
* more controls, which lead to…
* corruption/black markets, which lead to…
* reform or collapse
* This is