For years, the main theory of social evolution has focused on how human power frameworks change in tandem with shifts in production and the economy. In the modern world, the old ideas regarding capitalism, imperialism, and the 'proletariat' bear a rather gloomy reflection. Although the instruments of the trade have changed from steam engines to digital chips, the core principles of power have remained the same.
The development cycle of the 'means of production'
The classical economic paradigm defines "means of production" as the tools, factories, and resources used to meet societal needs. However, the typical capitalist paradigm of privately held means of production produces profit-driven goods and services rather than meeting people's demands.
We are seeing a drastic change in these "means" as algorithmic automation and vast data centres are replacing the factories, and the raw materials are frequently digital activities and personal data. These digital production tools are now owned by a few international IT corporations and some multinational companies. Today's "Platform Capitalism" leverages the intellectual and creative output of a global workforce to create enormous surplus value, just like industrial capitalists used to buy the physical labour of the poor.
The rise of the 'digital proletariat'
The proletariat class has historically had no businesses, cash, land, or other means of production apart from labour, which they must sell in the market to make ends meet. A "new proletariat" is presently emerging as a result of the development of digital technology. In a modified version, traditional difficulties are experienced by members of this class, such as content creators, gig workers, and social media influencers.
We often see machines pushed in the workforce to maximise the output produced in a given period of time. In the past, this often meant more pay for the workers. Now, input mechanisms have a more detrimental role. Not only do the workers use output-maximising machines, but they also must work alongside automated systems that manage employees, creating a globally competitive workforce, designed to pit workers against each other while eliminating entire sequences of activities. These new systems do not create better or more favourable situations for workers. Rather, they push compensation to a bottom-level price floor, reduce guaranteed hours, increase instability, restrict the scopes of work that employees can perform, and keep overall economic output high.
Neo-imperialism and digital colonialism
When domestic markets get filled up, capital seeks “colonies” to dump excess products and get low-priced materials. “Neo-Imperialism” is controlling countries, not with armies, but through economic domination and using debt and trade, which formed Digital Colonialism. Developing countries have become completely reliant on foreign resources, forming a shadow debt. When a country’s digital systems are controlled by foreign companies, that country loses its capacity to freely implement policies of its choosing. It reflects a period of history of colonialism when a dominant country restricted the economic activities of a controlled region.
From a historical perspective, we can see the outline of a society in which the means of production are oriented to human use instead of private profit. In such a society, the focus of production will not be on private accumulation but on the system. We may need to strike a balance between our technology and planning towards the well-being of the general population. We may shift our focus to the necessity of society.
Faisal Al Islam is former research officer, Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies.