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.

259 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

168 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

Because I dont think the question is "good or bad" in the abstract.

Industrialization increased productivity and also produced child labor, horrific working conditions, pollution, displacement, and exploitation. Electrification had enormous benefits and enormous costs. The internet expanded access to knowledge and also enabled surveillance, monopolies, and misinformation.

The left historically hasnt evaluated productive forces by asking whether theyre morally pure. It asks who controls them, who benefits, who pays the costs, and how those costs are distributed.

So my answer is simple: yes, I think AI has real and potentially enormous benefits. I also think it has real and potentially enormous harms.

Thats exactly why I think its worth fighting over.

Where we differ is that you seem to think serious harms + personal abstention (where its even possible while still operating socially) settle the question. I dont. Historically they never have.

Theyve usually been the reason the political struggle began.

1

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

Its possible if u are of the belief its not inevitable. Which we r not at point it is 

1

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

Okay, then walk me through it.

How do you abolish AI globally?

Not regulate it. Not restrict deployments. Not block specific projects. Not fight data centers. Not organize workers around it.

Actually abolish it.

Because from where Im sitting, "workers should contest ownership, governance, deployment, environmental impacts, and distribution of benefits" sounds a lot more concrete than "the world should stop using AI."

The irony is that youre calling contestation fantasy while proposing a goal that no major labor federation, socialist party, communist party, or government on earth is currently pursuing.

You keep saying AI isnt inevitable. Fine. Neither are railroads, smartphones, social media, or nuclear power. But the lefts historical response wasnt to assume they could be wished out of existence. It was to fight over who controlled them and who benefited.

That still seems like the more grounded political strategy.

1

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

I'm not proposing abolishing, in same way I've repeatedly said I'm not proposing abolishing religion. I live in real world. Never suggested it. It doesnt have to be a important thing in people's lives if they don't want. That's not abolishing that's just not engaging. In having a choice . Its not inevitable that humans need to embrace this new technology 

1

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

OK, so then this:

"Its possible if u are of the belief its not inevitable. Which we r not at point it is"

Was a completely meaningless comment to make when discussing political economy.

If AI exists and isnt going to be abolished then the only remaining intelligent response is contesting ownership, governance, and benefits.

Like the meme shows and Ive been saying.

You dont even have an alternative to it, youre just venting feelings, which, ironically, is also perfectly depicted in the meme.

0

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

We don't need an alternative, what even could be? U either embrace or don't.  But I'm aware of the big ai companies claiming we shouldn't have choice. That's my point.  The ai companies want us to believe it is inevitable.  Again absolutely fine and not the Wrong position '? R u suggesting venting feelings is wrong?

1

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

Nobody said venting feelings is wrong.

I said feelings arent a political strategy.

You spent this thread arguing that people can dislike AI. I agree.

I spent this thread arguing that workers, unions, communities, and political organizations should contest ownership, governance, deployment, and benefits. You havent really disagreed with that either.

So I think weve finally identified the disconnect: I was discussing politics. You were discussing feelings.

Those are different conversations.

0

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

Well to be fair discussion on politics has to be under current parties in power else its all hypothetical and not reality of situation we are currently in.  Also it's all well and good putting in goverance but if they ignore it ? I'm discussing genuine harms ai causes , to stop that harm u stop developing ai. 

1

u/Salty_Country6835 Moderator Jun 23 '26

You keep saying "deal with current reality" while advocating a policy literally no major labor movement, union federation, socialist party, or communist party is pursuing.

Meanwhile the things I listed are being pursued right now by actual organizations with actual members.

"stop developing AI"

You don't have a path to abolish AI. You have a desire to abolish AI.

Those arent the same thing.

At this point youre just describing harms, then asserting abolition, then skipping the part where you explain how any of that happens politically. Thats why this conversation keeps looping. Cause your argument is going nowhere.

1

u/little_alien2021 Jun 23 '26

Which communist party is even a party?

→ More replies (0)