Twitteretter

A common feature of the utopias and dystopias depicted by science fiction from the 60s and 70s was that, through technological success, humans were freed of work, which was carried out by machines. Humans freely explored their artistic and personal interest, free loving and carefree (I use free 3 times intentionally). This was also the consensus of predictions from most futurists in those days, Arthur C. Clarke, Aldous Huxley et al. Today’s reality is very different. We work longer hours than most of the population have at any time since the 1930s, chained by continuously growing demands on our time as labourers and consumers. We have exchanged citizens freedom for corporate profit, which grows exponentially as the anticipated benefits of technical progress concentrate in a few hands. We must go back to the original entente, we did not consciously forsake a realisable utopia for the profit of the few and we should not accept it willingly. We have the power to return to the old course...

Universal income is one of the most interesting current social concepts. This is the idea of paying a salary to every citizen, sufficient for the basics of a dignified living, just because of being a citizen. The concept is particularly well researched and explained by the brilliant historian Rutger Bregman in, amongst others, ‘Utopia for realists’. Universal income is vehemently resisted by most of the population. This is surprising, as it would seem to benefit the great majority, whose standard of living would rise and whose long term security and work choices would be enhanced. The reasons are many. Some regard it as unaffordable, although Bregman’s analysis may tell you otherwise. I think, however, that the biggest reason is your belief, or lack of it, in human nature, and a generous or mean spirit. Acceptance of universal income hinges on your answer to the question: ‘What do I prefer, having honest unlucky people starve or lazy people taking advantage of society’s generosity’ Len...