The era of digital transformation of the economy and the development of artificial intelligence (AI) marks an enormous potential to meet the needs of society. Many workers are indignant as they compare this potential with their own condition. They learn, for example, that thanks to AI people who were blind can gain sight, and they make the comparison with the current state of public health systems.

The bourgeois rhetoric attempts to conceal the real culprit that hinders the utilization of this immense technological potential in the interest of social prosperity. Bourgeois analyses present the development of technology either as a danger or as a miraculous solution to our problems.

Both the demonization of technology and the utopian, deterministic expectation of social prosperity that will supposedly result automatically from technological progress, are two sides of the same unhistorical and erroneous theoretical approach.

The main question is who and for whose interests determines the orientation, development and utilization of new technologies. Behind AI lie the choices of human intelligence and the particular class interests it serves.

In general, there is no such thing as neutral technological applications that are developed regardless of which class holds the reins of power and the keys to the economy. Powerful monopoly groups and imperialist centres today decide in practice which data is collected in the data centres, according to which criteria and procedures, which information is extracted and for what purpose.

Methodologically and essentially, we cannot examine the age of AI outside the context of the specific mode of production in which it is historically developing, namely the capitalist mode of production. Under capitalism, the connection of the social collective labourer with the means of production takes place through the capitalist market. The capitalist relations of production determine the purpose, the motives, the extent and the rate of development of the means of production. At the same time, capitalist relations develop, mature and decay in a dialectical interaction with the development of the productive forces.

 The Marxist analysis [1] of the real subsumption of labour by capital retains its importance and relevance. The productive force of living socialized labour is incorporated into the production process as variable capital. All its organizational features (the division of labour, the coordination and cooperation of workers, the application of scientific knowledge, etc.) are determined by and serve capital.

Similarly, regardless of whether we examine the era of the steam engine or the age of the intelligent robot, technology under capitalism was, is and will be a means of producing surplus value and a means of control and repression in the hands of capital’s power. Marx had also documented the role of machines in increasing the productivity of labour, making commodities cheaper and increasing the degree of exploitation. He had already highlighted in his work Grundrisse that the development of fixed capital indicates to what degree general social knowledge has become a direct force of production. Capital determines not only the use of technology but also the orientation and priorities of its development always driven by profit.

Marx had also foretold the saving of human labour time that automation and technological development in general could ensure, enhancing the conditions for the all-round development of human personality and social emancipation.

Based on the methodology and the scientific laws of Marxist political economy, we can approach the age of AI without hesitation. Let’s take a look at what is happening today.

The digital transformation of the economy in the USA, Europe and China has already progressed impressively. The Internet-connected computer is a universal machine that is simultaneously a means of production, communication, education, cultural creation and medical services.

The Internet of Things is already a reality. We can use our mobile phones to activate the so-called “smart appliances” in our homes, such as the air conditioner, fridge and TV, which are equipped with sensors and connect to the Internet.

Now we are entering the Internet of Bodies era, the direct connection among people, the Internet, robots and so-called smart machines in general.

Through the convergence of a number of technological advances, such as machine learning, deep learning and big data, AI systems are being developed that can rapidly transform large amounts of data, train themselves and perform complex tasks. Quantum computers, i.e. supercomputers, are being developed.

The digital transformation of the economy does not abolish the laws of profit and exploitation, i.e. the laws based on which capitalist economy operates.

In order for business groups to continue increasing their profits, they must continue increasing the degree of exploitation and bleeding the workers dry. They must extend the flexible forms of employment and working hours through the “working time arrangement”.

In the hands of capital, new technologies are utilized to increase intensification of work and the workload of those who continue to work. At the same time, the army of the unemployed is increasing.

Contrary to bourgeois propaganda, this technological development sharpens the contradictions of the capitalist mode of production and constitutes the continuous attack of bourgeois policy on workers’ rights a one-way street.

As we know from Marxist political economy, the higher the level of technical development of production, the higher the ratio of the means of production to labour power in the production process, the higher the technical and organic composition of capital, the greater the tendency for the rate of profit to fall. We must not forget that the source of exploitation, the source of surplus value and capitalist profit is the unpaid labour time of the wage-workers, the unpaid labour over and above the value of their labour power, which is appropriated by the capitalist. Only living labour power, not robots, creates surplus value.

Of course, bourgeois policy does not passively watch this downward trend in the rate of profit. It intervenes in multifarious ways to halt this trend and to increase the degree of exploitation of the workers in every sector and in the economy as a whole.

Capital takes advantage of the new technological possibilities which allow it to increase in practice the daily working time, irrespective of the time that workers spend in their workplace and the legal working hours, and at the same time to intensify labour. It exploits the surge in unemployment to generalize flexible labour relations.

However, capital does not stop there. It is trying to take advantage of the new, improved, more complex networking and interconnection among humans, the Internet and robots as well as new cutting-edge technologies in general, to achieve the complete subordination of labour to its objectives. In other words, it seeks to transcend a series of limitations on the exploitation of labour power that have hitherto dictated by the very features of the human body. It seeks to both increase and replace the capabilities of the human body and human cognition in order to increase capitalist profitability. For example, it is currently utilizing additional manual handling equipment to reduce the number of workers performing a task and to increase their surveillance in the workplace.

In this context, our bodies are being turned into a gold mine of data for capital, without our permission. Digital data is indeed the new gold, the new oil. The knowledge and processing of our biometric and personal data ultimately allows employers to decide on promotions and dismissals; insurance companies to change premiums; the state of capital to have knowledge of all our data, including our health status, our legal cases, our trade union activities, our debts and our financial situation, and exploit them for its goals.

Whichever aspect of social life we look at, it is clear that the contradiction between the social character of labour, which is constantly deepening, and the capitalist appropriation of the results of labour is sharpening. The bourgeoisie is becoming more and more reactionary.

The objective conditions for the intensification of the class struggle and for the working class to come to the fore and turn the wheel of history forward are more than ripe. It is becoming increasingly urgent to take the cutting-edge technology off the criminal hands of capital and to escape from the quagmire of capitalist exploitation. The imperialist centres know and fear this and are taking preventive measures.

The perils facing the peoples by the implementation of the EU’s strategy in robotics, AI and cutting-edge technology overall cannot be concealed. The EU was forced to admit some of them in its regulatory framework on AI. It points out the perils of recording and processing personal data, biometric data and individuals, which could jeopardize political and trade union freedoms, fundamental civil rights and even the bourgeois concept of freedom of thought and expression. It also raises concerns about the dangerous techniques of manipulation and the possibility of influencing people’s subconscious through the interface between people and “smart machines”, the so-called brain–computer interface and augmented reality systems.

The Euro-Atlantic staffs are aware that the aggressive rhetoric currently in vogue labelling anyone who points out the present and future dangers as a technophobe or a truther can only convince the extremely ignorant and the politically naive.

That is why they are staging and funding a complex, multifaceted political and cultural campaign to foster complacency and manipulate the working people.

A key aspect of the policy of complacency concerns the formulation and promotion of the EU regulatory framework that will supposedly protect us from threats. The assurances from the dictatorship of capital that it will protect our rights amount to a fox guarding the henhouse.

A look at the current EU practice is enough to enlighten us. The EU staffs claim to have enshrined a European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. What is happening in practice? In the name of security and counter-terrorism, they have legally enshrined the full digital profiling and processing of our personal data as well as preventive surveillance and intervention.

The AI act’s regulations on artificial intelligence are similar. The real rules of the new framework are in fact the exceptions and the downplaying of dangers.

In the name of public safety and counter-terrorism, biometric identification such as the analysis of our voice and our movement in public places are an exception to the rule. France has already become the first EU Member State with legislation allowing the use of biometric monitoring in public places in the name of safeguarding the security of the Olympic Games.

In the name of entrepreneurship, the workplaces in companies and factories are exempt from the bans.

In the name of established practices of performance appraisal, the use of AI systems for social categorization based on race, political opinions, trade union membership, sexual life, etc. is of course is an exception to the rule.

In the name of encouraging innovation and EU competitiveness, three other categories of minor dangers are distinguished, where there are no prohibitions, but there are obligations of transparency and voluntary implementation by companies. In general, enterprises are required to monitor themselves to ensure compliance with EU rules in order to avoid paying a fine.

In the hands of capital, the digital transformation of the economy is utilized to increase the degree of exploitation of the workers, while leading to the emergence of deeper crises and a greater sharpening of inter-imperialist competition. It is in line with the increase in social inequalities, digital and energy poverty, and the rise in chronic unemployment.

Digital transformation cannot cancel out the scientific laws of the capitalist economy, which lead to the periodic outbreak of the crisis of over-accumulation of capital. On the contrary, it expedites concentration and increases the over-accumulation of capital, which cannot find investment channels with a satisfactory profit rate. The German economy, which is the engine of the Eurozone, is already in recession. The risk of recession in the Eurozone overall is increasing. Eurozone GDP has been in contraction since the last quarter of 2022. Eurosystem experts forecast that Eurozone GDP growth will slow down from 3.5% in 2022 to 0.9% in 2023. [2]

As regards the G7 bloc, the economies of Italy and Canada are also in recession. Furthermore, China’s economy is in a slowdown phase, with a serious possibility of a crisis in the real estate sector and construction in general. In addition to the distressed real estate market, there is already a decline in consumption and in Chinese exports.

Most reports by international organizations and rating agencies [3] are sending out a risk signal of a marked slowdown in the international economy in 2023, highlighting the negative impact of accelerating interest rate hikes by Central Banks, while inflationary pressure has not abated yet. The growth rate of global GDP and international trade in goods and services is already on a slowdown path at the international level.

Recent developments in US banks confirm once again that the crisis is born out of the normal operation of the capitalist system. It is in its DNA. Long before high-tech companies started withdrawing their deposits from banks like the SVB, there was a drop in their profit rate. The shares of these companies were plummeting in 2022. The over-accumulation of capital that cannot be invested at a satisfactory profit rate also increased in the USA. Groups like Amazon, Meta and Google made thousands of workers redundant.

Bourgeois staffs have deployed all their weapons to avoid the outbreak of a deep crisis.

The Central Banks have secured cheap credit to the states and “more money” to provide the large packages of state aid. The result was soaring inflation, which was compounded by the US-EU energy war with Russia.

To deal with inflation, Central Banks then raised and continue to raise interest rates. But a remedy for one symptom may turn out to be poison for another. Rising interest rates and expensive borrowing aggravate the slowdown and recession in capitalist growth.

A survey published by the Wall Street Journal cites dozens of US banks in distress. [4] The damage from an immediate massive sale of US bonds is estimated to exceed $620 billion.

The USA claims to guarantee all deposits. However, it is an over-indebted state, which has already exceeded the “red line” of the maximum permanent sovereign debt ceiling. The US public debt has exceeded $31.5 trillion and 120% of GDP, having sparked a dispute between Republicans and Democrats over the need to cut state spending, which has resulted in a temporary compromise. [5]

The crucial issue is that no measure or injection from the state can address the root cause of the over-accumulation of capital. There is no shortage but an excess of capital in the markets. State measures and the concentration of larger market shares in the strongest banking groups can only temporarily postpone the onset of the crisis. The next crisis will be deeper.

The race to consolidate supremacy in the technological sector, especially in the sector of AI, as well as in the exploitation of the digital transformation of the capitalist economy and state, is today one of the main fields of sharpening inter-imperialist contradictions.

As is the case in the economy as a whole, the technological sector is dominated by two powerful poles competing for supremacy: The USA and China. The two protagonists have an edge over the rest as regards their ability to collect and process big data and deep learning. The USA has the powerful GAFAMI quintet (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft) and China has the BHATX (Baibu, Huawei, Alibaba, Tencent, Xiaomi).

The USA, which is currently the technological leader, is promoting a strategy that mainly aims to both contain China’s momentum and gain advantage over the EU. [6]

It is, therefore, imposing restrictions on the export of advanced technology chips, i.e. faster and more energy-efficient ones, used in AI computers in China, and on the export of hardware and software technology in general. It is pushing for and has secured a certain amount of EU-Japan convergence in this direction.

Furthermore, the USA is generously subsidizing domestic monopolies in this sector. The Chips and Science Act (passed by the Democrats and a section of the Republicans) secured $52 billion in aid to increase the low US share of advanced semiconductor manufacturing and another $200 billion over a decade to boost scientific research. In parallel, the Biden Green Transition Package, worth $360 billion, is also in operation, offering preferential treatment to any European business group setting up in the USA. Thus, for example, Apple, which owned manufacturing plants in China, has been moving production out of it.

However, according to Bloomberg, US companies are at a disadvantage as their production of goods is 50% more costly and 25% more time-consuming compared to respective factories in Southeast Asia.

The EU initially aligned itself with the US on export restrictions to China, thus facing internal frictions, particularly in Germany, where a large part of 5G networks have been built by China’s Huawei and ZET and where Mercedes has major partnership agreements with China’s CATL.

The EU has formulated its own programme of support for European business groups, namely the European Chips Act, with the aim of doubling its lowly share of the global market by 2030, from 10% to 20%. However, most analysts believe that €43 billion is not enough to bridge the large gap that now separates it from the USA.

At the same time, in an effort to strengthen its independence, the EU has concluded agreements to host 6 powerful quantum computers on European soil in Germany, France, Italy, the Czech Republic, Spain and Poland. This is an infrastructure that significantly increases the computing power to support applications in industry and scientific research.

For its part, China has set the goal of becoming the world’s leading digital power by 2030. To this end, it is increasing state support for the Chinese microprocessor industry.

These trends are being reinforced as digital transformation has provided a springboard for AI, which has been developing rapidly since the beginning of 2010 thanks to the convergence of three scientific and technological advances: The ability to process huge amounts of data resulting from the use of the Internet, i.e. big data; the ability of computers to train themselves with sophisticated algorithms, i.e. machine learning (neural networks and deep learning); and the ability to enhance the capacity of modern supercomputers and quantum computers.

In simple words, modern machines are acquiring even more human abilities such as self-training, and the working people, i.e. the primary productive force, are operating increasingly complex machines. At the same time, the “learning machines”, the robots, the data centres that collect and process huge volumes of data, are in the hands of a few monopoly groups, mainly in the US and China.

Of course, this is not the first time that a technological revolution has multiple applications that are not limited to production, but affect the whole spectrum of the society. Let us recall the rapid changes brought about by the advent of steam engines, electricity and the utilization of nuclear energy.

However, it is a fact that the development of AI in the context of capitalist relations of production exacerbates well-known problems, such as the rise in unemployment. It also and raises new, original issues that require reflection at the level of political economy and philosophy, particularly in regards to changes in the relationship between the main productive force, i.e. the working social human, and the modern machines, i.e. the means of production.

The scientific debate focuses on the rapidly expanding ability of machines, which learn and self-train to replace a large part of today’s human labour. Initially, the estimate was that this scope would be limited to replacing much of the routine manual and intellectual work, the occupations that require repetitive, routine tasks in a standard environment.

The most reliable bourgeois analyses on this topic, which were carried out a few years ago, assured that professions demanding genuine creativity and a response to unpredictable environments are beyond the abilities of AI. [7] However, it turned out that the neural networks of “learning machines” can develop different capabilities by analysing a large amount of data. They gain the ability to achieve complex goals. They now have the ability to acquire new knowledge and then apply it to a specific domain. AI is even penetrating into artistic creation, such as painting and cinema.

In a recent discussion hosted by Brookings Institution, the view was expressed that we can no longer rule out the possibility that all the jobs that skilled workers do today may be replaced by machines. Professor Geoffrey Hinton, who laid the foundations for building AI systems, recently resigned from Google and sounded the alarm about the unintended consequences and the uncontrolled development of systems by powerful business groups. At the same time, 1,000 technology leaders signed an open letter on its unforeseen negative impact. They are certainly not “technophobes”, nor are they “Luddites”.

The truth is that many of today’s jobs will disappear and the nature of others will change. However, this does not amount to the abolition of the role of the working human as the main productive force. The decoding of some of the neural processes that take place in the human brain and the study of the countless synapses of nerve cells that form the biological basis of human cognition is progressing. However, the development of human cognition is a much more complex phenomenon and is not limited to the cognitive skills of an individual.

The human brain, as an organ of thinking and forming consciousness, grows and develops historically in the process of social work and social life in general. Social work is carried out within the dominant relations of production, whether feudal, capitalist or socialist. There, humans form their capacity to reflect reality in a generalized way with concepts, judgment and reasoning. They acquire the ability to develop scientific knowledge; to set goals; to construct, set in motion, and utilize the means of production. The social human beings can make plans, set goals, organize and implement actions to achieve them, and predict the final result of their actions. They are the main productive force in every mode of production.

AI does not think in a comprehensive and complex manner like humans. At present, it mainly transforms some data quickly into other data. [8] In essence, supercomputers are faster and more efficient for specific tasks. They cannot think politically and set general goals with a social content, e.g. the goal of changing the system and the mode of production. They can quickly process measurable, quantitative data based on specific criteria set by social human beings, in the framework of the dominant relations of production.

All this does not mean that we should become complacent, but rather focus on the real problem, i.e. the currently dominant capitalist relations of production.

For its part, the ruling class intervenes in a pre-emptive, systematic and decisive way to further erode and manipulate the people’s consciousness. It seeks to achieve its objectives without hindrance and persuade the workers to adopt them, to the extent possible, as if they were their individual rights.

The US government, the EU and the major shareholders of powerful business groups are currently placing particular emphasis on the erosion of the consciousness of the workers for the latter to uncritically and unconditionally accept the implementation of all technological advancements, without asking who will benefit from them and whose needs will be met.

For the workers to accept the commercialization of and the intervention in a healthy human body —which is now presented as a neutral, living laboratory— without limits and social restrictions, as something progressive. For example, Elon Musk cynically disdains the naysayers of his future plans and raises the danger of the latter being marginalized unless they continually enhance their brains according to his technical specifications.

 This is why the postmodern, irrational perception of “self-identification” and multiple identities is promoted in a multifaceted and systematic way. This perception disconnects the human being from any objective identification, e.g. of the class or sex to which they objectively belong.

Moreover, it fosters the illusion that everyone can and should define themselves solely on the basis of their individual desire or their subjective opinion of reality, since they falsely believe that there is no objective truth, that we cannot know it or that it is meaningless to approach it.

Let us consider how much easier it is for the workers to become a pawn in the hands of the power of capital when they cannot answer or are indifferent to whether they are a worker or a boss, a Palestinian or an Israeli, or when they identify themselves in a neutral way as regards their sex.

When they belittle that they are a victim of capitalist exploitation and that they must actively participate in the class struggle, but instead stand in solidarity with a section of the capitalists owing to their individual preference or their multiple identities.

AI today does what capital wants it to do. This applies to production, education, culture and all areas of social life. Its exploitation for the sake of capitalist profit can lead to a large increase in long-term and permanent unemployment, to the exclusion of a significant part of the population from production and to their condemnation to live on the “guaranteed minimum income”, i.e. to survive on an allowance of extreme poverty.

Forecasts and estimates vary according to the political objectives of those who make them. Some argue that, as in any technological revolution, many new professions will be created to absorb the losses (e.g. software and AI application developers, cyber security specialists).

In 2021, the World Economic Forum predicted that 97 million new jobs will be created and 85 million jobs will be eliminated by 2025 due to the change in the division of labour between humans and machines.

The McKinsey report predicts that between 2035 and 2075, 50% of today’s jobs will be eliminated globally, while generative AI will add up to $4 trillion a year to the global economy. Several related studies are in the same vein, e.g. by PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Major analysts point out that, based on the index of employment in the US, the first job created by computer technology occupies only the 21st place. The momentum of losses will be significantly greater than the momentum of creation of new jobs.

The problem will be exacerbated in the coming years. According to the International Federation of Robotics (IFR), over the last 30 years more than 75% of jobs in the steel industry have already been replaced by conventional robots and automated processes. And that was before modern robots, which can replace workers in creative cognitive tasks, even appeared.

However, this development is not a one-way street. It pertains to the decisive influence of capitalism on the priorities in the development of technology, the organization of production and education.

Similarly, there is no classless development of scientific research and scientific work. Capital today controls the flow of scientific knowledge, the ways and methods of its utilization it, the priorities and the norms. Competition between business groups and patents are putting the brakes on the deeper socialization of scientific research.

Many were impressed, and rightly so, by the application of the Chat GPT AI, which was spread and became known in a very short time. It is advertised as an impartial interactive language model that can answer our questions directly.

We asked its original version whether the Soviet Union was a democratic regime. It replied that it was not, since there was no multi-party system, free elections and tolerance of opposing political views. It added, however, that there may be different ideological views and criteria.

This system has obviously been “trained” with material imbued with the dominant bourgeois ideology. Some school and university students are already using it as a tool for their exams and assignments. A heated debate has already been sparked off over the limitation of its use in the academic community and the negative consequences that its indiscriminate use may have in reducing the user’s critical faculties.

However, the main negative effect of the capitalist system concerns the obstacles it places in the way of the development of the main productive force, i.e. the working human. Instead of technological progress being used for the all-round development of the workers’ personality, mental and physical abilities, it is used for capital’s attack on their rights. On the one hand, it is used to increase the intensification and exploitation of the labour power of workers and, on the other hand, to increase the army of permanently unemployed and impoverished, and to render the labour power of a significant part of the population obsolete. It erodes in many ways the physical and mental health of workers and the unemployed, who live in uncertainty and insecurity about the future. It increases the alienation of workers from their fellow human beings and triggers competition.

The capabilities of automated machines to coordinate with each other and with workers and to perform complex tasks have advanced considerably. At the same time, as we have already mentioned, the content of many tasks and the need for continuous retraining are changing. The demands on human intellectual labour are rising, including demands for continuous retraining, teamwork, quick adaptation to new experiences and work tasks. [9]

Think of the radical difference between the way that capitalism and socialism address these problems. Under capitalism, it is the workers’ individual responsibility to rapidly adapt to new tasks and upgrade their knowledge, for fear of being unemployed and uninsured.

Socialism, on the contrary, can unlock and release the creative abilities of the workers and their initiative, because it brings them to the forefront of the historic course towards social emancipation.

In socialism, the purpose of production and the role of workers change. The purpose of production is the satisfaction of the needs of society, which are constantly expanding. The workers, freed from the yoke of wage slavery, play an active, daily role in the making and control of decisions. The keys of the economy and the reins of power pass into the hands of the working class. The driving force of progress is no longer competition, but the power of collectivity at work.

Only socialism can ensure the replanning of technological development and thus transform it from a means of increasing the degree of exploitation and control of the working class (i.e. its current function under capitalism) into a means of meeting all social needs.

Water, energy, health, communications, transport, education, and labour power itself cease to be a commodity. Land and the means of production, factories, data centres, ports, airports and infrastructure are state social property.

“Can all this be done?”, many people ask us in a well-intentioned manner.

It was done, dear friends, in the Soviet Union in the 20th century. The scientific central planning and the socialization of the means of production accomplished significant achievements that capitalism never will.

Unemployment and energy poverty were abolished. The people gained free access to high-quality health and education services. Enormous strides were made in technological progress, such as the conquest of space.

Of course, there was also negative experience, when the principles of socialist construction were gradually abandoned and undermined, and the policy of market socialism prevailed, paving the way for its overthrow.

However, this negative experience also highlights the superiority of socialism, which is growing in the 21st century.

Because now we can make use of the great new possibilities for socialist construction generated by information technology, digital technology, robotics and AI, which are the heralds of socialism.

A number of technical and scientific limitations that restricted the capabilities of central planning and socialist construction in the Russia of 1917 and the Soviet Union of 1930 no longer exist. Now the degree of socialization of labour and automation of production has increased considerably.

The new possibilities for an increase in labour productivity can be used by workers’ power to significantly increase the free, non-working time of workers. They can be utilized to raise the general level of education and to promote the all-round development of workers’ personalities through their daily, active participation in decision-making and control of decisions, through creative work.

Significant new opportunities will also be utilized for the prevention and rehabilitation of workers’ health, for the prevention and treatment of accidents at work and occupational diseases.

Unlike capitalism, socialism can deal effectively and efficiently with the new problems brought about by the development of technology and the productive forces as a whole.

It can deal effectively with the demands for the continuous retraining of workers, for rapid adaptation to new work tasks and new data and for teamwork in the workplace.

Because socialism will deal with new problems in a planned way as a matter of collective, social responsibility and not as an exclusively individual matter of the worker. Workers will be retrained without the fear of being unemployed and uninsured, in a society that encourages and relies on collective effort rather than competition.

The main productive force, the working human being, will therefore be strengthened. The increase in the productive capacity of workers, based on the new possibilities, will not be at the expense of their health, nor will it threaten their physical and mental well-being.

At the same time, production as a whole and in every sector will be strengthened to meet social needs. AI systems, robots and so-called smart machines in general will be called upon to elaborate criteria, algorithms and data aimed at satisfying social needs and shielding socialist construction.

New possibilities for improving the sufficiency and quality of the necessary products will be utilized to ensure the people’s welfare: new ways of planning and controlling production, automatically predicting faults and ordering spare parts, redesigning machines and technical systems, improving processing materials, optimizing energy consumption and the necessary reserves.

Think of the potential of modern interdisciplinary research to anticipate and respond to societal needs.

Think of the new possibilities AI offers for designing ships, trains and planes.

Imagine the ability to predict how different planning decisions will affect the performance and safety of a public transport vehicle. Or the ability to use simulation to evaluate a design before it is implemented in the production process.

However, the new technological possibilities are not only related to production. They can increase the efficiency of central planning itself and help to completely eliminate any form of group ownership.

Think of the new possibilities for quickly gathering and processing large amounts of data and information, comparing proposed plans and solutions, and making quick and optimal decisions on complex problems.

Digital transformation and the use of AI technologies can, therefore, contribute to an optimal allocation of workers, means of production and raw materials in different sectors in order to ensure the necessary proportional growth among key production sectors and among regions of the country. It can help to anticipate social needs and specific production requirements at an early stage in order to identify appropriate production and training targets, particularly for the production of means of production and scientific research, which are the top priorities.

This is the path of digital transformation and the exploitation of AI for the benefit of the people’s needs that the KKE illuminates with its revolutionary Programme. Of course, we already struggle based on this Programme without wasting any time.

We are stepping forward to organize the great, popular counter-attack that will open the path to the overthrow of the barbaric system of exploitation.

Today, we are at the forefront of the struggle to reduce working time, and demand 35-hour work week (7-hour work, 5 days a week), with substantial increases in wages and pensions.

We are at the forefront of the struggle against the EU’s liberalization policy that gives rise to energy and digital poverty. We struggle for safe, fast and cheap communication and transport. We struggle to abolish the reactionary EU framework that allows the pre-emptive digital profiling of all citizens. We struggle for the utilization of new technologies to improve civil protection. We struggle for exclusively public and free health and education.