The buggy analogy is not exactly apt. The industrial revolution did not remove or even reduce the need for human participation in the process of the wealth generation. It simply required humans to participate in new and jitherto unfamiliar ways. So long as human participation is required to generate capital and wealth, it is possible for participating humans to negotiate a cut of the wealth.
I think we are rapidly arriving at an age where human participation in any form is unnecessary to most of the wealth creation. I can envision a day in not too distant future when everything from inspiration to creativity, to say nothing of repetitive or unkilled labor, requires no human participation.
In such a case there is nothing humans can do to adapt themselves to any position where they can negotiate for a cut of wealth through indispensable contribution. Rather their only leverage for claiming wealth would be by threat and violence to disrupt processes that could have gone on without them at all.
I think we are rapidly arriving at an age where human participation in any form is unnecessary to most of the wealth creation. I can envision a day in not too distant future when everything from inspiration to creativity, to say nothing of repetitive or unkilled labor, requires no human participation.
In such a case there is nothing humans can do to adapt themselves to any position where they can negotiate for a cut of wealth through indispensable contribution. Rather their only leverage for claiming wealth would be by threat and violence to disrupt processes that could have gone on without them at all.
