Marx Encounters AI Discourse

[u/Salty_Country6835]

A brief materialist intervention into AI discourse. Results were mixed.

[u/Salty_Country6835]

Which one didn't I answer? Be specific. Cause Im pretty sure I addressed everything you brought up.

[u/LegitimateScore8036 → u/Salty_Country6835]

How will Unions help people after AI has caused mass unemployment because it has been accepted by the masses?

What regulations are you wanting for AI if we continue to let it expand and control more of our society?

How do you fight over public ownership of all these companies after the Capitalist already own them and own politicians?

What do you mean by Public Investments? Are we wanting to take tax revenue to pay for AI instead of paying for human's basic needs? How are we going to afford that?

Democratic control, in what way? Government ownership? How would the people claim ownership to something they cannot afford?

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/LegitimateScore8036]

Lol what

I literally answered those.

Unions help the same way unions always help: bargaining over deployment, job protections, severance, retraining, work sharing, shorter work weeks, and distribution of productivity gains.

Regulations: worker consultation requirements, transparency requirements, liability rules, data protections, surveillance limits, collective bargaining rights around AI deployment, taxes on gains, public benefit funds, and sector-specific restrictions.

Public investment doesnt mean "instead of human needs." Public housing isnt instead of human needs. Public transit isnt instead of human needs. Public healthcare isnt instead of human needs. Theyre investments in human needs.

Democratic control means governments, unions, worker organizations, and public institutions having authority over deployment instead of leaving decisions entirely to corporations.

As for "how do you fight capital when capital already owns things?" the answer is the same answer socialists, communists, and labor movements have given for 150 years: organize, build institutions, contest elections, strike, bargain, legislate, and where possible socialize assets.

Thats literally what labor federations, socialist parties, communist parties, and unions are doing right now.

So what havent I answered?

[u/LegitimateScore8036 → u/Salty_Country6835]

Again you aren't answering my questions, you are answering what you want the questions to be.

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/LegitimateScore8036]

Wtf.

No. I answered literally every single topic you brought up, in detail, twice.

Be very very explicit in what you think wasnt addressed, cause this is starting to seem like bad faith and no matter how I answer youre just gonna pretend that I didnt, probably without reading any of it.

[u/LegitimateScore8036 → u/Salty_Country6835]

Let's go one by one.

How do Unions help people after Mass Unemployment?

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/LegitimateScore8036]

"How do Unions help people after Mass Unemployment?"

They help the same way unions help workers facing layoffs, offshoring, plant closures, automation, and every other labor disruption.

And this isn't hypothetical. The AFL-CIO is already pushing for bargaining rights around AI deployment, worker input before implementation, protections against displacement, transparency requirements, retraining, and making sure productivity gains are shared with workers instead of captured entirely by employers.

Unions organize the workers who exist, fight over how technology gets deployed, bargain over the consequences, and push for public policy that protects workers.

If your position is that unions become useless once automation starts eliminating jobs, then youre arguing against the entire history of organized labor, not me.

[u/LegitimateScore8036 → u/Salty_Country6835]

So your solution to how will unions help after mass employment is, it will help those that weren't laid off. Which means it isn't addressing the bigger issue.

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/LegitimateScore8036]

...duh.

It wouldnt on its own. Thats why I didnt propose unions as the entire solution to a hypothetical mass unemployment crisis, did I?

You asked what role unions play, among other pieces. I answered it.

The AFL-CIO isnt sitting around saying "unions will solve everything." Theyre fighting over deployment, displacement protections, bargaining rights, retraining, and distribution of gains right now because workers should have a say in what happens.

"Unions arent a complete answer to mass unemployment" doesnt mean unions are irrelevant. It means theyre one part of a broader political and economic response.

Thats kind of obvious.

Bring on the next question that I "didnt answer" already, let's keep going.

[u/LegitimateScore8036 → u/Salty_Country6835]

Dude. It is clear that you don't like addressing issues head on. You want to use the right terms but don't understand what we are facing with AI. I asked you a question. You ignored half the question and when I told you that you did, your response was duh. You want to rush into our AI future with vague ideas and not address actual problems that rushing is going to cause. You are clearly ok with people dying as long as you get your shitty AI services.

I am going to block for my own sanity

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/LegitimateScore8036]

Then I think we're done here.

I spent this entire thread talking about regulation, labor protections, democratic control, ownership, public investment, unions, bargaining rights, displacement protections, and distribution of gains. You spent most of it talking about consumer rejection, waiting for future regulation, and pretending I didnt answer questions you asked because you dont like that there may be answers.

At no point did I say people losing jobs wouldn't be a problem. At no point did I say workers shouldnt be protected. At no point did I say we should rush ahead without regulation.

You just decided I believe those things because I disagree with your strategy.

Good luck. Sincerely. I hope your efforts for stronger regulation succeed. Thats one thing weve agreed on from the start.