It isfairly certain that the projected taking over of most jobs in the not too distant future by new technologies, like artificial intelligence, will occur. Gitura Mwaura It probably is, therefore, not merely just a matter of time before the post-work scenario, whose viability and moral justification has long been debated, will become a reality. With this, there has been growing literature, beginning with Karl Marx in the 19th Century who saw virtue in less work in a communist ideal to the present by contemporary thinkers lamenting the crises of work— crises that have been characterised by rising inequality as witnessed in low pay and dismal rate of growth in wages, underemployment and unemployment, and the threat to work by the digital revolution and climate change. Even as the push for technological Africa in an increasingly digital world continues, there are many who think post-work imminent. First, however, consider one of the more persuasive arguments discussed in The Guardian recently that, contrary to conventional wisdom, the idea of work as we know it today is neither natural nor very old. It quotes, among others, Benjamin Kline Hunnicutt, an American professor of leisure studies who has extensively explored the history of movements for reduced working hours and shorter working days. He argues that work is “an accident of history,” and that it is a recent construct. He identifies the main building blocks of our work culture as 16th-century Protestantism, which saw effortful labour as leading to a good afterlife; 19th-century industrial capitalism, which required disciplined workers and driven entrepreneurs; and the 20th-century desires for consumer goods and self-fulfillment. Before then, Prof Hunnicutt says, all cultures thought of work as a means to an end, not an end in itself. From urban ancient Greece to agrarian societies, work was either something to be outsourced to others – often slaves (and serfs even in traditional African settings) – or something to be done as quickly as possible so that the rest of life could happen. As one always on the grind and often without the time to engage in my more pleasurable, if artistic, pursuits, I am persuaded to agree with the post-work thesis. I want to believe that somewhere in the future humanity will have to dispense with the idea of work and free humanity to engage in passions as pleases each one’s fancy to pursue happiness and a fulfilled life. It is, nevertheless, not a light thing to question the place of work; it’s not only the means people are able to put food on the table and afford their preferred lifestyles but among the most important sources of identity and purpose in many individuals’ lives. Yet, looking at the negative human impact on global environment often due to work-related activities, many remain inclined to agree with other post-work advocates such as David Frayne who’s quoted to have quipped that “either automation or the environment, or both, will force the way society thinks about work to change.” His 2015 book, The Refusal of Work, has been touted as one of the most persuasive post-work volumes. Still, if we are to buy the post-work argument and accept we are destined to forfeit most of our jobs to artificial intelligence, how then to put food on the table? This, too, has long been anticipated with one of the possible options being the provision of universal basic income (UBI), already under experimentation around the world including in the region (see “Biggest basic income experiment slated for East Africa”, February 10, 2017, The New Times). UBI assures every person – the employed and unemployed, rich or poor – a small income to cover basic living costs with no questions asked about what one does with the money. And, aside from ongoing government-led UBI experiments in countries such as Finland, Canada and the Netherlands, it is probably no coincidence that the largest trial to test the viability of the concept is being led by tech companies, perhaps as a prick to their techie conscience and atonement for the concentration of riches in the hands of a few as artificial intelligence threatens to obliterate livelihoods and the dignity work has hitherto afforded. In November last year, the charity organisation, GiveDirectly, launched in Kenya the largest trial of basic income to date costing US$30million. Underwritten by some of the major the tech companies, it is significant in terms of both size and duration. The organisation explains that residents of about 120 rural Kenyan villages, comprising more than 16,000 people in total, will receive some type of unconditional cash transfers during the experiment. Some of the villages will receive the universal basic income of about US$23per resident per month for twelve years. The study is expected to come up with some of the most comprehensive data yet about what happens when people are given money for nothing. It’ll help answer questions such as: Do people stop working? Do they start businesses? Are they more likely to spend money on drugs and alcohol — or education? While the results are keenly anticipated, sustainability concerns notwithstanding, earlier small-scale experiments have suggested quite some encouraging outcomes. As for post-work future, I think we should brace for the day of its coming. Twitter: @gituram The views expressed in this article are of the author.
