Ideology in My Controversy

Who is involved?

     There are plenty of sources involved in the issue of robots taking human jobs.  There are the manufactures using robots, the creators of the robots, and the humans whose jobs are being taken.  There are most likely more third party people who are involved in some way, but perhaps not directly. 

Who are some of the major speakers/writers?

     Most of the major speakers/writers are certain groups of people. For example, engineering students who are creating the robots for the future will have many important things to say on the issue.  The president of Volkswagen, a company who is directly involved with the conflict, will have something else to say about robots being used in various ways. And there are the workers in the field whose jobs may be in jeopardy because of this issue. There are not many specific authors/writers who stand out in the issue yet; however, there will surely be key figures who emerge throughout this debate.

What kind of social/cultural/economic/political power does each group hold?

     Each group that is a part of this controversy has large social power.  Workers, employers, and creators/manufacturers all have social power within the issue. As well as social power, they each have economic power as well.  The employers and creators of the robots obviously have a little more influence in the economic realm of the issue than the workers do because they will ultimately be the defining factor of the creation of more and more robots or not.  Eventually, this issue will become political, because there could possibly be a large drop in job availability because of robots, but that is the heart of the issue, so it will be a long time before the issue has political significance. 

What does each group value?

     Workers value their jobs.  Future workers will need to be able to be employed in order to live the life they desire.  Employers and creators of the robots, stereotypically, value monetary benefits.  They each want to make money and do so in whatever way they can.  There is most likely accepting to this stereotype.  For example, there are some engineers who value the morality of having workers in the field, so they will want to have restraints and things against the over-take of robotics in the work field.  

Is there a power differential?

     There is absolutely a power differential.  Creators of robots have the most power because they, well, they ultimately decide what is made and of what quality the things being made are. The employers and manufacturers who purchase and use the robots are next in the power pyramid because they decide what will be used and how many people the robots will replace.  The workers can only hope that their skills are valuable enough to be kept, rather than being replaced by a machine. 

Is there any acknowledged common ground between the groups?

     There is not much common ground between the three main groups of people involved in this issue. The largest common ground would come from the moral values of the people involved and if they find robots logical for use in the field of work.     

Is there any unacknowledged common ground?

     There is not much common ground between the groups at all, acknowledged or unacknowledged.  Outright, there does not seem to be any common ground that is not already out in the open.  In the future, the creators of the robots may have some common ground with the workers if the robots start creating better robots, but that is what science fiction movies are for.

Do the various groups listen to each other?

     There is not much communication at this point about the issue.  There have been people who have already lost there jobs to machinery, but robotics is not quite at the stage yet where the issue is being presented in plain site. As of now, the issue is primarily monetary.  All of the sides of the issue are worried about money.  They are concerned with how much money they can get and how they can live comfortably doing what they can do.