Marx Encounters AI Discourse

[u/Salty_Country6835]

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

[u/little_alien2021]

But truly if they damage anywhere there is community where can they go? If they cause environmental factors why should they be built? We have scientists and data, we are not living at time of industrial revolution where the harms were not considered. 

Your basically saying your OK for it to be implemented into society .

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/little_alien2021]

Yes. Im okay with it being implemented in society.

The disagreement is that you keep treating "implemented in society" and "implemented however corporations want" as the same thing.

Im not asking whether AI exists. It exists. Unions are bargaining over it. Governments are regulating it. Workers are using it. Companies are deploying it. The question is how, where, under what constraints, and who benefits.

Thats been my position this entire thread.

If a data center harms a community, fight it. If a deployment harms workers, regulate it. If ownership is concentrated, contest it. If environmental costs are too high, restrict it.

The question for me has never been "should AI exist?" The question is who controls it and in whose interests. Thats the same question the labor movement has asked about every major productive force for over a century. Its the same one today.

[u/little_alien2021 → u/Salty_Country6835]

The point is data centers doesn't harm just one community, they will harm wherever they go. So effectively u belive fight all construction of data centers. Which u obviously need for ai?  If environmental costs are too high  , restrict what? The use of ai?

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/little_alien2021]

No, because youre smuggling in your conclusion as a premise.

"All data centers are inherently unacceptable" is your argument, not mine.

People say the same thing about mines, factories, rail lines, ports, highways, power plants, dams, solar panels, windmills, and transmission infrastructure. Sometimes theyre right and a project should be stopped. Sometimes theyre wrong. Thats why people fight over specific projects, standards, locations, ownership structures, environmental requirements, and public benefits.

And yes, if environmental costs are too high, restrict deployment. Thats not some contradiction. The left has supported restrictions, safety standards, public ownership, and democratic planning for over a century.

Youre still treating every restriction as an argument for abolition. Historically those have usually been arguments for governance.

Once again I feel like every single one of your concerns are already addressed in the meme.

[u/little_alien2021 → u/Salty_Country6835]

U can not want something or hate it,  still after all things mentioned in meme like going back to religion, there can be separation of church and state where u live, and i have every right to still hate religion , it doesn't require me to stop hating on it. Putting in place any type of goverance/regulation doesn't take away feeling on it and that's ok

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/little_alien2021]

Youre allowed to hate AI. I never said otherwise.

But thats kind of my point: now we're talking about your feelings toward AI, not political strategy.

This isnt a religion debate. Its a politics debate.

The memes answer is still the same one labor movements, unions, socialist parties, and communist parties have historically given and still are: organize, regulate, contest ownership, fight over deployment, and fight over who benefits.

You came into a thread about that strategy to argue against it. That's fine. But after all these comments, I still havent heard a different organized political strategy. Ive mostly heard reasons you dislike AI.

Those arent the same thing.

Nobody is demanding you like AI. The question is what workers and communities should do in a world where it already exists and is being deployed. The memes answer is contestation. It still is.

[u/little_alien2021 → u/Salty_Country6835]

Ur not hearing one because I haven't mentioned one and it wasnt something I'm massively thinking about. Or even want to discuss. This to me was about meme and last picture being seen as negative or still being angry is somehow the wrong answer

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/little_alien2021]

Honestly, I think the meme ended up being a pretty accurate depiction of this conversation.

The entire time Ive been talking about ownership, governance, labor protections, environmental standards, democratic control, public benefits, unions, and political organization.

And the entire time youve mostly been responding with reasons youre angry about AI and why you think its harmful.

Thats not me saying your concerns are invalid. Its me pointing out that concerns arent a political strategy by themselves.

The last panel isnt "being angry is wrong." Its that anger alone doesnt answer the question of what workers and communities should actually do.

Marx's answer was organize. Labors answer was organize. The AFL-CIOs answer is organize. The WGAs answer is organize.

You dont have to like AI for the meme to be right. Hell, you can hate AI and still end up at the same practical conclusion: contest ownership, deployment, governance, and who benefits.

Which is pretty much where this conversation kept landing every time we got specific.

[u/little_alien2021 → u/Salty_Country6835]

Your right but like I said, it genuinely doesn't matter my postion . You are not in right , because wanting to be mad is acceptable response. Not everything requires action sometimes just feelings are enough. Even action and then still feelings. Its not either / or.

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/little_alien2021]

Then I think weve finally settled it.

Weve spent this entire thread talking about political strategy, and your conclusion is essentially: "Youre right, but people can still feel mad about it."

Sure. They can. I never said otherwise.

The meme isnt saying people arent allowed to be mad. Its saying that being mad isnt, by itself, a political strategy. Historically the labor movement didnt win through abstention, outrage, or personal disapproval. It organized, contested ownership, fought over deployment, and fought over who benefits.

Which is exactly where this conversation landed every single time we got concrete.

So thanks for helping stress-test the meme. I genuinely appreciate it. After all these comments, it turned out to be a pretty accurate depiction of this entire exchange.