Fully Automated Luxury Communism

One of the debates in ecosocialist forums is around de-growth vs "acceleration" and what metrics to use for defining each. Acceleration might be described as using all the technology and productive capacity possible to provide "the good life". The extreme example is Fully Automated Luxury Communism (FALC) with its emancipatory claims. On the other end of the spectrum we find Deep Greens who insist all growth in production has disatrous impacts for ecosystems and so espouse radical simplicity. The most subjective aspect of this debate is how the terms "good life" and "luxury" are defined. Should we use UN Development goals, caloric intake, life expectancy? How about feelings of community belonging, harmony with nature or meaningful life? Obviously, acceleration is an easier sell to subjects formed by capitalist culture, those programmed to believe more is always better. De-growth has intonations of austerity, something the wealthy have historically imposed on the already disposessed. So we have a struggle over meaning: relinquishment and simplicity can be liberating and morally satisyfing and there is a Protestant tradition of frugality and limits (Thoreau) that can be tapped into. Of conservation. On the other hand, socialism has been associated with productivist, even Promethian ambition, unleashing the human potential to harness nature. De-growth is also associated with a sentimental nostalgia, a desire to Return to a purer state that existed in pre-capitalist, even pre-modern times. Accelerationists want to ride the wave of technological wizardry, propelling us into a glorious future. I'm always looking for a synthesis.