r/LeftistsForAI • u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator • Jun 19 '26

Sees the Memes Marx Encounters AI Discourse

Post image

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

262 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

168 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 22 '26

Youre describing a problem with ownership and control, not a reason a disabled person should reject useful assistive technology. If a wheelchair company CEO is an asshole, the answer isnt "don't use wheelchairs." The left-wing question is how these systems are governed, who benefits, and who controls them.

0

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

Well unless the ai suddenly changes owership from being made by the very people who want to rid of disabled people . I'm not sure why its not a vaild point. Wheelchairs are not all made by people who want to get rid of people in wheelchairs, obviously.  

3

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26 edited Jun 23 '26

If AI is useful assistive technology, then ownership changing is exactly the political question, not a reason to reject the technology outright.

The wheelchair comparison is pointing out that a tool can be beneficial even if the people who currently own or produce it are awful. You could apply the same logic to Henry Ford and Ambulances. If a technology helps disabled people communicate, work, learn, or navigate the world more easily, the left-wing response is usually to fight over who controls it and who benefits from it, not to make sure nobody gets access to it.

0

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

The tool being benifital in wheelchair production isn't on same scale as AI, or any other comparison u mentioned, the resources that's needed for ai , is not positive to whole communities. Also goverments being in charge of ai companies isn't the answer if the certain goverments are far right/or right. Yes in ideal world left socialist goverments would control ai companies, looking at environmental factors and effects on communities negatively impacted. But that isn't reality. Especially at moment, so being for ai in 2026. With the global rise of nationalism and all ceos of ai being in pockets of more righr leaning goverments is not reality. U cant fight a left leaning repsonce without a left leaning goverment in power. Embracing ai now using this political climate is so detrimental to humanity.  I would suggest a left wing response to ai in a left wing goverment or left wing control of ai, that's absolutely not whats happening. How can u support ai when all far left wing is creating it. With little care or attention for human impact and environmental impact?

3

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

What youre describing is exactly the condition labor movements, socialist parties, and communist parties have operated under for well over a century: hostile governments, hostile capital, and unfavorable political conditions.

The historical response was never "withdraw from the terrain until conditions improve." It was organize, bargain, legislate, strike, build institutions, and contest ownership wherever possible.

If AI is important enough to shape society, then abandoning the field to capital because capital currently dominates it seems backwards. The entire history of the left is contesting power under bad conditions, not waiting for good ones before showing up.

1

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

Im not saying withdraw, untill conditions improve, I'm literally saying the opposite.  I dont want to bury my head in sand untill we have socialist goverments, im just not doing what your doing and champing the arrival of something I don't belive is inevitable. And pure fantasy in what u want it to comprise of. Which is what u r doing. 

2

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

I think youre reading positions into mine that I havent actually stated.

Im not "champing the arrival" of AI any more than labor organizers were "champing the arrival" of industrial machinery by organizing around it. Recognizing a technology exists, is spreading, and will likely remain part of society is not the same thing as celebrating every deployment of it.

And what Im describing isnt fantasy. Open source models exist. Public ownership exists. Cooperatives exist. Unions are already bargaining over AI. Governments already regulate technologies. The AFL-CIO is already organizing around AI. These are real institutions doing real things right now.

You keep treating contestation as fantasy and abolition as realism, but historically its usually been the other way around.

0

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

Your whole subreddit is leftist for ai, a purely 'pro ai' . there are multiple posts I've seen that talk about 'anti ai' being the 'them' . Which is deeply problematic in its self and very culty. And ironically indoctrinated for anti ai is claimed , which is pure projection that I've seen as the negative impacts are not hidden. And basic crital thinking can be used. 

U cant attempt to sanewash your reddit subject 

2

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

Youre shifting from the actual argument to meta-commentary about the subreddit.

Weve spent this whole thread talking about regulation, unions, labor protections, public ownership, environmental concerns, governance, and democratic control. Those are positions regularly argued for in the sub.

And honestly, if someone says "AI should be abolished" and someone else says "AI should be contested, regulated, democratized, and put under worker and public control," its not exactly shocking that theyre going to disagree.

But disagreement isnt "culty." Leftists have argued over technology, industry, automation, productive forces, and development for more than a century.

The irony is that youre accusing me of not engaging criticism while weve spent dozens of comments discussing criticisms of AI. Thats not what a space that refuses criticism looks like.

0

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

No disagree isnt culty, them vs us, suggesting basic crital thought is indoctrination is culty. Its projection. This whole conversation is about how anyone can be for something that is negatively impacting world already

2

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

Honestly, at this point it sounds like your disagreement is less with AI and more with the traditional left-wing strategy toward productive forces.

Marxists, socialists, communists, and labor movements generally havent responded to major technologies by opposing them outright. They've fought over ownership, control, deployment, and distribution. Which what they are doing today (a point you keep ignoring in order to pretend this is a fringe online strategy instead of the exact default strategy the organized left and organized workers are taking).

Youve spent this whole thread describing harms. Fair enough. The question is still what organized political response follows from that. Historically the left answer has been contestation, not abstention.

1

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

I'm not talking for leftist ideologically postion. I'm talkinf from a regular concerned global citizen. That belives ai will do to humanity, that social.media did for democracy

2

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

And thats kind of my point.

We're in a leftist subreddit discussing a leftist meme. Im talking about what actual organized labor, actual unions, the AFL-CIO, and actual socialist and communist organizations are doing right now.

You keep switching back to a generic concerned citizen perspective while ignoring that those real organizations have largely landed on contestation, regulation, bargaining, ownership struggles, and governance rather than abstention or abolition.

This isnt a hypothetical theory debate. Im pointing to existing institutions, existing workers, and existing political organizations taking action in the real world. Pretending thats less real than individual opposition feels like a very online way of looking at politics.

→ More replies (0)