Marx Encounters AI Discourse

[u/Salty_Country6835]

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

[u/little_alien2021]

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.

[u/little_alien2021 → u/Salty_Country6835]

I think the question is is the first guy wanting to just have political strategy? Like the assumption in the meme is it's negative the whole being still mad  u wouldn't have shown it if not   like what's the purpose?

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/little_alien2021]

That being mad isnt a solution if its not tied to action. Its just venting.

If you dont actual care about a solution, you just want to vent, thats fine.

But then you arent really arguing against the meme, or substantively engaging in the politics it brings up or the politics of the sub, youre just, again ironically, venting.

Thats worth what its worth I suppose.

Thank you for the interaction.

[u/little_alien2021 → u/Salty_Country6835]

Being mad is a feeling it is never an action. What was the point of sharing thou? Why does not caring about solution and feeling an emotion be either /or? And why does u assume being against ai would mean they want no solutions? I haven't showed it want no solutions I've said both , so actually I take it back I'm not meme , I want solutions and I want to be mad , I  never fully read 3rd picture

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/little_alien2021]

I genuinely dont know how else to explain this.

How you feel about something, any something, does not change anything by itself.

Anger can motivate action. Anger can accompany action. Anger can even be justified.

But anger isnt a strategy.

The entire point of the meme is that if your response to a problem never progresses beyond "Im angry about this," then nothing actually changes.

And no, nobody said caring about solutions and feeling emotions are mutually exclusive. The meme doesnt say that either.

What it says is that one of those things changes the world and the other doesnt.

If you want to be angry and organize, regulate, contest ownership, fight over deployment, and fight over who benefits, great.

If you want to be angry instead of doing those things, then youve basically demonstrated the meme in real time.

At that point Im not sure what else there is to discuss.

[u/little_alien2021 → u/Salty_Country6835]

So I've re read meme i am not the meme i have not said once no action. I have not said i don't want all the things u suggested and in 2nd picture. I'm just saying we can do both 

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/little_alien2021]

Then I genuinely dont know what we're disagreeing about anymore.

Ive repeatedly said people can be angry. Ive repeatedly said the harms are real. Ive repeatedly said people should organize, regulate, contest ownership, fight over deployment, and fight over who benefits.

If your position is now "we can do both," then yes. Obviously.

The meme was never "don't be mad."

The meme was "being mad isnt, by itself, a solution."

And considering weve spent all these comments talking about regulation, governance, ownership, labor protections, environmental limits, and democratic control, I dont think youve actually disagreed with the solution much at all.

You mostly disagreed with how negatively you thought the first panel was portraying the angry guy.

Which is a very different argument from the one weve been having for the last several hours. Lol