SavedAdd your journal

Journals / 4. BOYUT Medya ve Kültürel Çalışmalar Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 28

What is the Future of Work in the Generative AI Era? A Marxist and Ricardian Analysis

Üretken Yapay Zekâ Çağında Çalışmanın Geleceği Nedir? Marksist ve Ricardocu Bir Analiz

Pages
97–113
Publication Date
2026-06-10
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

There are three important differences in their theoretical framework: (1) Marx did not believe that high technological unemployment is possible within capitalism even with very advanced technologies such as AI, while Ricardo saw technological unemployment as a serious threat while he acknowledges countervailing employment-creating tendencies; (2) While Ricardo’s explanation for the falling rate of profit is limited to rising wages, Marx traces the profit decline to the rising organic composition of capital and automation itself; (3) For Marx, a desirable future of work is not found within a capitalist framework but in communism, while Ricardo sees no alternatives to capitalism.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:There is an increasing public discourse of automation for white-collar Professional jobs due to improvements in artificial intelligence (AI) capacities, raising the question about the contours of the future of work.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Marx and Ricardo’s framework of technological labour displacement helps us understand the future of work in the context of AI.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:There are three important differences in their theoretical framework: (1) Marx did not believe that high technological unemployment is possible within capitalism even with very advanced technologies such as AI, while Ricardo saw technological unemployment as a serious threat while he acknowledges countervailing employment-creating tendencies; (2) While Ricardo’s explanation for the falling rate of profit is limited to rising wages, Marx traces the profit decline to the rising organic composition of capital and automation itself; (3) For Marx, a desirable future of work is not found within a capitalist framework but in communism, while Ricardo sees no alternatives to capitalism.
🔬Design:Çeviri
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:yapay zekâ · teknolojik işsizlik · Marx

Abstract

There is an increasing public discourse of automation for white-collar Professional jobs due to improvements in artificial intelligence (AI) capacities, raising the question about the contours of the future of work. Marx and Ricardo’s framework of technological labour displacement helps us understand the future of work in the context of AI. Marx’s discussion in Capital and Ricardo’s discussion in Principles of Political Economy reveal the common thesis that technology-induced worker displacement and precariousness of employment relationships are built into the internal logic of the contemporary digital capitalist economy. There are three important differences in their theoretical framework: (1) Marx did not believe that high technological unemployment is possible within capitalism even with very advanced technologies such as AI, while Ricardo saw technological unemployment as a serious threat while he acknowledges countervailing employment-creating tendencies; (2) While Ricardo’s explanation for the falling rate of profit is limited to rising wages, Marx traces the profit decline to the rising organic composition of capital and automation itself; (3) For Marx, a desirable future of work is not found within a capitalist framework but in communism, while Ricardo sees no alternatives to capitalism.

Özet

Yapay zekâ (YZ) kapasitesindeki gelişmeler nedeniyle beyaz yakalı profesyonel mesleklerin otomasyonuna dair kamusal söylem artmakta, bu da çalışmanın geleceğinin sınırları hakkında sorular doğurmaktadır. Marx ve Ricardo’nun teknolojik işgücü ikamesi çerçevesi, YZ bağlamında çalışmanın geleceğini anlamamıza yardımcı olmaktadır. Marx’ın Kapital'deki tartışmaları ile Ricardo’nun Ekonomi Politiğin ve Vergilendirmenin İlkeleri’ndeki değerlendirmeleri; teknoloji kaynaklı işçi ikamesinin ve istihdam ilişkilerindeki güvencesizliğin, çağdaş dijital kapitalist ekonominin içsel mantığına yerleşik olduğu yönündeki ortak tezi ortaya koymaktadır. Kuramsal çerçevelerinde üç önemli fark bulunmaktadır: (1) Marx, YZ gibi çok gelişmiş teknolojilerle bile kapitalizm içinde yüksek düzeyde teknolojik işsizliğin mümkün olduğuna inanmazken, Ricardo dengeleyici yönde istihdam yaratıcı eğilimleri kabul etmekle birlikte teknolojik işsizliği ciddi bir tehdit olarak görmüştür; (2) Ricardo’nun kâr oranlarının düşmesine ilişkin açıklaması yükselen ücretlerle sınırlıyken; Marx, kâr düşüşünün izini sermayenin artan organik bileşimine ve otomasyonun kendisine kadar sürer; (3) Marx için arzu edilir bir çalışma geleceği kapitalist bir çerçevede değil, komünizmde bulunurken, Ricardo kapitalizme alternatif görmemektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Anonim (2026). What is the Future of Work in the Generative AI Era? A Marxist and Ricardian Analysis. 4. BOYUT Medya ve Kültürel Çalışmalar Dergisi, Sayı: 28, 97–113. https://doi.org/10.26650/4boyut.2026.1953989

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (108)

  1. AbuMusab, S. (2023). Generative AI and human labour: Who is replaceable?. AI & Society, 1–3. google scholar
  2. Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2019). Artificial intelligence, automation, and work. In A. Agrawal, J. Gans, & A. Goldfarb (Eds.), The economics of artificial intelligence (pp. 197–236). University of Chicago Press. google scholar
  3. Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2022). Demographics and automation. The Review of Economic Studies, 89(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdab031 google scholar
  4. Bastani, A. (2019). Fully automated luxury communism. Verso Books. google scholar
  5. Benanav, A. (2014). A global history of unemployment: Surplus populations in the world economy, 1949-2010 [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. google scholar
  6. Benanav, A. (2020). Automation and the future of work. Verso. google scholar
  7. Bender, E. M. (2023, October 2). Opening remarks on “AI in the workplace: New crisis or longstanding challenge”. Medium. https://medium.com/@emilymenonbender/opening-remarks-on-ai-in-the-workplace-new-crisis-or-longstanding-challenge- eb81d1bee9f google scholar
  8. Berman, E., Bound, J., & Machin, S. (1998). Implications of skill-biased technological change: International evidence. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(4), 1245–1279. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355398555892 google scholar
  9. Bessen, J. (2019). Automation and jobs: When technology boosts employment. Economic Policy, 34(100), 589–626. https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiaa001 google scholar
  10. Bivens, J., & Banerjee, A. (2022, May 24). Inequality’s drag on aggregate demand. Economic Policy Institute. google scholar
  11. Bix, A. S. (2000). Inventing ourselves out of jobs? America’s debate over technological unemployment, 1929-1981. Johns Hopkins University Press. google scholar
  12. Bunker, N. (2023, November 15). Indeed’s 2024 US jobs & hiring trends report: Reasons for cautious optimism. Indeed. google scholar
  13. Card, D., & DiNardo, J. E. (2002). Skill-biased technological change and rising wage inequality: Some problems and puzzles. Journal of Labor Economics, 20(4), 733–783. https://doi.org/10.1086/342011 google scholar
  14. Casilli, A. A. (2025). Waiting for robots: The hired hands of automation. University of Chicago Press. google scholar
  15. Ceder, R. (2024, July 14). One-third of US military could be robotic by 2039: Milley. Military Times. google scholar
  16. Crawford, K. (2021). Atlas of AI. Yale University Press. google scholar
  17. Delfanti, A. (2021). The warehouse: Workers and robots at Amazon. Pluto Press. google scholar
  18. Deranty, J. P., & Corbin, T. (2024). Artificial intelligence and work: A critical review of recent research from the social sciences. AI & Society, 39(2), 675–691. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01691-1 google scholar
  19. De Rivera, J. (2020). A guide to understanding and combatting digital capitalism. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 18(2), 725–743. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v18i2.1169 google scholar
  20. Dujarier, M. A. (2023). How work as a category of thought has been disrupted in neoliberal capitalist societies. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 21(2), 107–121. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v21i2.1415 google scholar
  21. Duménil, G., & Lévy, D. (2011). The crisis of neoliberalism. Harvard University Press. google scholar
  22. Dyer-Witheford, N., Kjøsen, A. M., & Steinhoff, J. (2019). Inhuman power: Artificial intelligence and the future of capitalism. Pluto Press. google scholar
  23. Fehrle, J., Lieber, M., & Ramirez, J. J. (2024). Introduction: Marxism and the technology debate. In J. Fehrle, M. Lieber, & J. J. Ramirez (Eds.), (De)automating the future (pp. 1–53). Brill. google scholar
  24. Ferschli, B. (2024). Capitalism without workers: On the impossibility of automation and its relation to the question of value. In J. Fehrle, M. Lieber, & J. J. Ramirez (Eds.), (De)automating the future (pp. 135–157). Brill. google scholar
  25. Feuerriegel, S., Hartmann, J., Janiesch, C., & Zschech, P. (2024). Generative AI. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 66(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-023-00834-y google scholar
  26. Ford, M. (2021). Rule of the robots: How artificial intelligence will transform everything. Basic Books. google scholar
  27. FRED. (2024). Civilian labour force level. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CLF16OV google scholar
  28. Frey, C. B. (2019). The technology trap: Capital, labour, and power in the age of automation. Princeton University Press. google scholar
  29. Friedman, T. L. (1999). The lexus and the olive tree. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. google scholar
  30. Fuchs, C. (2009). Information and communication technologies and society: A contribution to the critique of the political economy of the internet. European Journal of Communication, 24(1), 69–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323108098947 google scholar
  31. Fuchs, C. (2014). Digital prosumption labour on social media in the context of the capitalist regime of time. Time & Society, 23(1), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X13502117 google scholar
  32. Fuchs, C. (2020). Marxism: Karl Marx’s fifteen key concepts for cultural and communication studies. Routledge. google scholar
  33. Goos, M., Manning, A., & Salomons, A. (2014). Explaining job polarization: Routine-biased technological change and offshoring. The American Economic Review, 104(8), 2509–2526. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.8.2509 google scholar
  34. Graeber, D. (2018). Bullshit jobs: A theory. Penguin Random House UK. google scholar
  35. Gray, M. L., & Suri, S. (2019). Ghost work: How to stop Silicon Valley from building a new global underclass. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. google scholar
  36. Hartung, W. D. (2012). Prophets of war: Lockheed Martin and the making of the military-industrial complex. Bold Type Books. google scholar
  37. Harvey, D. (2003). The fetish of technology: Causes and consequences. Macalester International, 13(7), 3–30. google scholar
  38. Heinrich, M. (2004). Introduction to the three volumes of Capital. Monthly Review Press. google scholar
  39. Heinrich, M. (2013). Crisis theory, the law of the tendency of the profit rate to fall, and Marx’s studies in the 1870s. Monthly Review, 64(11), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.14452/MR-064-11-2013-04_2 google scholar
  40. Heller, A. (1976). The theory of need in Marx. Allison & Busby. google scholar
  41. Hirschman, A. O. (1977). The passions and the interests: Political arguments for capitalism before its triumph. Princeton University Press. google scholar
  42. Hui, X., Reshef, O., & Zhou, L. (2023). The short-term effects of generative artificial intelligence on employment: Evidence from an online labour market (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 4527336). SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4527336 google scholar
  43. Ivanova, M. N. (2011). Consumerism and the crisis: Wither ‘the American dream’?. Critical Sociology, 37(3), 329–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920510379442 google scholar
  44. Kalleberg, A. (2011). Good jobs, bad jobs. Russell Sage Foundation. google scholar
  45. Khanal, S., Zhang, H., & Taeihagh, A. (2024). Why and how is the power of Big Tech increasing in the policy process? The case of generative AI. Policy and Society, Article puae012. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puae012 google scholar
  46. Kliman, A. (2009, July). Roots of the current economic crisis: The falling-rate-of-profit tendency, insufficient destruction of capital, and bubbles [Conference paper]. Association for Heterodox Economics Annual Conference, London, United Kingdom. https://www.hetecon.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Kiliman.pdf google scholar
  47. Kollmeyer, C. (2017). Market forces and workers’ power resources: A sociological account of real wage growth in advanced capitalism. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 58(2), 99–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020715217702484 google scholar
  48. Kristal, T. (2013). The capitalist machine: Computerization, workers’ power, and the decline in labour’s share within US industries. American Sociological Review, 78(3), 361–389. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122413484131 google scholar
  49. Kurzweil, R. (2005). The singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. Viking. google scholar
  50. Lenin, V. I. (1964). War and revolution. In Lenin collected works (Vol. 24, pp. 398–421). Progress Publishers. (Original work published 1917) google scholar
  51. Lewchuk, W. (2018). The political economy of precariousness in an era of artificial intelligence: Precarious work, or none at all. Canadian Labour and Employment Law Journal, 21, 239. google scholar
  52. Lin, K. H., & Tomaskovic-Devey, D. (2013). Financialization and US income inequality, 1970-2008. American Journal of Sociology, 118(5), 1284–1329. https://doi.org/10.1086/670050 google scholar
  53. Liu, Z. (2021). Sociological perspectives on artificial intelligence: A typological reading. Sociology Compass, 15(3), Article e12851. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12851 google scholar
  54. Macaulay, T. (2024, April 10). Meta’s AI chief: LLMs will never reach human-level intelligence. The Next Web. google scholar
  55. Mandeville, B. de. (1970). The fable of the bees. Penguin Classics. google scholar
  56. Marx, K. (1844). Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. In Marx & Engels collected works (MECW) (Vol. 3, pp. 229–346). Lawrence & Wishart. google scholar
  57. Marx, K. (1845). The german ideology. Progress Publishers. google scholar
  58. Marx, K. (1847). The poverty of philosophy. Progress Publishers. google scholar
  59. Marx, K. (1863). Theories of surplus value. Progress Publishers. google scholar
  60. Marx, K. (1867). Capital: Volume 1. Progress Publishers. google scholar
  61. Marx, K. (1885). Capital: Volume 2. Progress Publishers. google scholar
  62. Marx, K. (1894). Capital: Volume 3. International Publishers. google scholar
  63. Marx, K. (1966). Felsefenin sefaleti (E. Başar, Çev.). Sol Yayınları. (Orijinal çalışma basım yılı 1847) google scholar
  64. Marx, K. (1999). Artı-değer teorileri: İkinci kitap (Y. Fincancı, Çev.). Sol Yayınları. (Orijinal çalışma basım yılı 1862-1863) google scholar
  65. Marx, K. (2011a). 1844 elyazmaları: Ekonomi politik ve felsefe (K. Somer, Çev.). Sol Yayınları. (Orijinal çalışma basım yılı 1932) google scholar
  66. Marx, K. (2011b). Kapital: Ekonomi politiğin eleştirisi: Cilt I (M. Selik & N. Satlıgan, Çev.). Yordam Kitap. (Orijinal çalışma basım yılı 1867) google scholar
  67. Marx, K. (2012). Kapital: Ekonomi politiğin eleştirisi: Cilt II (F. Engels, Ed.; M. Selik, Çev.; N. Satlıgan, Kavram Ed.). Yordam Kitap. (Orijinal çalışma basım yılı 1885) google scholar
  68. Mau, S. (2023). Mute compulsion: A Marxist theory of the economic power of capital. Verso. google scholar
  69. Merchant, B. (2024, July 23). AI is already taking jobs in the video game industry. Wired. google scholar
  70. Mueller, G. (2021). Breaking things at work: The Luddites are right about why you hate your job. Verso. google scholar
  71. Muldoon, J., Cant, C., Wu, B., & Graham, M. (2024). A typology of artificial intelligence data work. Big Data & Society, 11(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517241232632 google scholar
  72. Munn, L. (2022). Automation is a myth. Stanford University Press. google scholar
  73. Nowrozy, R. (2024). GPTs or grim position threats? The potential impacts of large language models on non-managerial jobs and certifications in cybersecurity. Informatics, 11(3), Article 45. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202404.1600.v1 google scholar
  74. O’Brien, M. (2024, November 21). US ahead in AI innovation, easily surpassing China in Stanford’s new ranking. AP News. google scholar
  75. O’Connor, J. (1973). The fiscal crisis of the state. Transaction Publishers. google scholar
  76. O’Rourke, K. H., Rahman, S. A., & Taylor, A. M. (2013). Luddites, the Industrial Revolution, and the demographic transition. Journal of Economic Growth, 18, 373–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-013-9092-x google scholar
  77. Pasquinelli, M. (2023). The eye of the master: A social history of artificial intelligence. Verso. google scholar
  78. Pitts, F. H. (2018). A crisis of measurability? Critiquing post-operaismo on labour, value and the basic income. Capital & Class, 42(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309816816678563 google scholar
  79. Ricardo, D. (1817). On the principles of political economy and taxation. Rod Hay’s Archive for the History of Economic Thought. McMaster University. google scholar
  80. Ricardo, D. (2007). Ekonomi politiğin ve vergilendirmenin ilkeleri (T. Ertan, Çev.). Belge Yayınları. (Orijinal çalışma basım yılı 1817) google scholar
  81. Riddell, T. (1989). Inflationary impact of the Vietnam war. Vietnam Generation, 1(1), Article 4. google scholar
  82. Rodrik, D. (2016). Premature deindustrialization. Journal of Economic Growth, 21, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-015-9122-3 google scholar
  83. Rosenblat, A. (2018). Uberland: How algorithms are rewriting the rules of work. University of California Press. google scholar
  84. Say, J. B. (1834). A treatise on political economy (6th American ed.). Grigg & Elliott. google scholar
  85. Schiller, D. (1999). Digital capitalism: Networking the global market system. MIT Press. google scholar
  86. Shestakofsky, B. (2024). Behind the startup: How venture capital shapes work, innovation, and inequality. University of California Press. google scholar
  87. Siddiqui, T. (2023, June 29). Risks of artificial intelligence must be considered as the technology evolves: Geoffrey Hinton. University of Toronto. https://www.utoronto.ca/news/risks-artificial-intelligence-must-be-considered-technology-evolves-geoffrey-hinton google scholar
  88. Smith, J. E. (2020). Smart machines and service work: Automation in an age of stagnation. Reaktion Books. google scholar
  89. Soper, S. (2021, June 28). Fired by bot at Amazon: ‘It’s you against the machine’. Bloomberg. google scholar
  90. Sørensen, S. B. (2024). Value and productive labour in the era of digital technologies. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 22(2), 498–517. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v22i2.1524 google scholar
  91. Srnicek, N. (2016). Platform capitalism. Wiley. google scholar
  92. Srnicek, N., & Williams, A. (2015). Inventing the future: Postcapitalism and a world without work. Verso Books. google scholar
  93. Standing, G. (2011). The precariat: The new dangerous class. Bloomsbury. google scholar
  94. Starosta, G. (2013). The system of machinery and determinations of revolutionary subjectivity in the Grundrisse and Capital. In R. Bellofiore, G. Starosta, & P. D. Thomas (Eds.), In Marx’s laboratory: Critical interpretations of the Grundrisse (pp. 233–263). Brill. google scholar
  95. Steinhoff, J. (2022). The proletarianization of data science. In M. Graham, & F. Ferrari (Eds.), Digital work in the planetary market (pp. 191–206). MIT Press. google scholar
  96. Susskind, D. (2020). A world without work: Technology, automation, and how we should respond. Penguin. google scholar
  97. Tubaro, P. (2022). Learners in the loop: Hidden human skills in machine intelligence. Sociologia del Lavoro, 163, 110–129. https://doi.org/10.3280/SL2022-163006 google scholar
  98. Tubaro, P., & Casilli, A. A. (2019). Micro-work, artificial intelligence and the automotive industry. Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, 46(3), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40812-019-00121-1 google scholar
  99. Tubaro, P., Casilli, A. A., & Coville, M. (2020). The trainer, the verifier, the imitator: Three ways in which human platform workers support artificial intelligence. Big Data & Society, 7(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720919776 google scholar
  100. Van Doorn, N. (2017). Platform labour: On the gendered and racialized exploitation of low-income service work in the ‘on-demand’ economy. Information, Communication & Society, 20(6), 898–914. google scholar
  101. Van Doorn, N., & Badger, A. (2020). Platform capitalism’s hidden abode: Producing data assets in the gig economy. Antipode, 52(5), 1475–1495. google scholar
  102. Vitale, S. (2020). Beyond “Homo Labourans”: Marx’s dialectical account of human essence. Social Theory and Practice, 46(3), 633–655. google scholar
  103. Wallerstein, I., Collins, R., Mann, M., Derluguian, G., & Calhoun, C. (2013). Does capitalism have a future?. Oxford University Press. google scholar
  104. Watermeyer, R., Phipps, L., Lanclos, D., & Knight, C. (2024). Generative AI and the automating of academia. Postdigital Science and Education, 6(2), 446–466. google scholar
  105. Wendling, A. E. (2020). Technology and science. In M. Musto (Ed.), The Marx revival (pp. 363–375). Cambridge University Press. google scholar
  106. Western, B., & Rosenfeld, J. (2011). Unions, norms, and the rise in US wage inequality. American Sociological Review, 76(4), 513–537. google scholar
  107. Wheeler, T. (2024, June 24). Connecting the dots: AI is eating the web that enabled it. Brookings. google scholar
  108. Wood, E. M. (2009). Democracy against capitalism. Cambridge University Press. google scholar