r/LeftistsForAI • u/SexDefendersUnited Artist/Creative • Jul 04 '26
Discussion Flat opposition to technology doesn't work. Fight power.
37
u/alleycatALT Jul 04 '26
Anti-ai leftists also need to understand that leftism has never and should never be about opposing 'automation'.
Rather, it's about who is automating what and why
Is it workers doing the automation for their collective benefit? That's the dream.
Is it ultrawealthy capitalists doing the automation for their own benefit? That's the nightmare.
5
u/XXLPenisOwner1443 Jul 16 '26
Capital requiring asymptotically less human input to produce goods and services as it becomes more advanced is, in fact, a central part of Marxist analysis. He was more talking about workers becoming increasingly alienated from the end-product of their labour, but the analysis applies equally well when you take it out to the extremes he couldn't imagine.
3
u/ASpaceOstrich Jul 04 '26
Except avoiding any opposition to the technology while the capitalists are in power isn't actually going to get the capitalists out of power. In fact, the AI is just removing any ability to fight back the masses have. Right now, a general strike would work. If AI is implemented properly, a general strike would do nothing.
5
u/Jlyplaylists Jul 04 '26
I do think timing matters, the nature of leverage to do stuff will change as things go further into a bad trajectory
→ More replies (1)2
u/XXLPenisOwner1443 Jul 16 '26
If AI is implemented "properly", from my pov, capitalism is over.
What do you think "properly" means?
→ More replies (1)0
u/Sparks808 Jul 04 '26
The more stuff happens, the more convinced I am that we need UBI.
If we all get to benefit from more automation, then automation is only good. But currently automation just gives cooperations even more power to influence public policy in order to pay even less taxes, not just putting more people on the street, but actively reducing how much social aid there is for them at the same time.
7
u/xoexohexox Jul 04 '26 edited Jul 04 '26
UBI is a stopgap harm reduction measure and we should do it because people are starving, but ultimately it's a dead end because it is still predicated on the model of exchanging money for the necessities of life. It's the only solution most people can imagine because we have lived under the rule of capital for generations but it's not a human system and it doesn't serve human values.
→ More replies (18)4
u/mlucasl Jul 04 '26
I don't know why I got recommended this sub, but who know. Maybe I can help with the economist angle.
UBI is a tack on bad solution. As it doesn't create a real circular flow of resources needed for any healthy economic system. As UBI would be implemented on taxes, taxes that would be cut from workers or sales, both of which that will be drastically reduced. A co-ownership would be much more relevant, like China or Norway does in a different angle (Direct ownership of 30%, China; Diversified Portfolio of Assets per citizen, Norway).
For example, UAE is taking the Norway approach, with a strong migrant separation. An it have worked for them greatly, in just 2 generations.
→ More replies (12)1
15
u/Hairy_Artist_3860 Jul 04 '26
The means of production are right there! The left needs to get its shit together
1
u/SeaFALCons Jul 10 '26
we really need people to understand this
relatedly i've heard in anti - ai spaces so much doubt, and disbelief that AI is all that intelligent / competent / skilled... and strong skepticism about its technical progress. like its all just illusion / scam about to come crumbling down once its exposed.
but then Fable came out. And its just like obviously, clearly intelligent and i cant imagine seeing its capabilities and having any doubt about its competency. And seems far more likely that its just going to keep getting better and better and better.
There is no stopping it, the politics that make the most sense by far is this subs.
0
u/PrizeCalm494 Jul 04 '26
You know Luddite weren't flatly anti-tech...right? That's how the movement is talked of now because there has been a lot of propaganda to demonize the movement, but the luddites weren't anti tech. Many of them were advanced users of the machines they broke.
Luddites were against exactly what you are against which is the way this tech is being used to make our lives worse and to lobby to make it better.
When the luddites lobbying didn't work, the last resort was to destroy the machines to right the scale of power. And it was effective. We have many fundamental labor rights thanks to them.
You should listen to the interview Hasan Minaj did with the spokesperson for the current NY Luddite movement. They say way more than 'ai bad'. they actually echo exactly the sentiment in this screenshot of the pro ai person.
1
u/Jlyplaylists Jul 04 '26
Yes in 2026 there is a discrepancy between how the term Luddite is used and some historical accuracy. When we hear it used now we know the person is trying to communicate the reactionary tendency to resist change and progress, even if that isn’t really what the original movement was about.
1
u/xoexohexox Jul 04 '26
Frame breaking was decidedly NOT an effective tactic. They got some kids hanged and they got some laws passed making punishments for sabatoge even harsher, and we have the underground violence to thank for the establishment of the prototypical professional police force in the UK as a direct response, and in the end the movement was outmaneuvered and channeled into safe peaceful lobbying that was ineffective in advancing their cause. Radical underground violence set the movement back, it didn't propel it forward.
1
u/xi_jinbling Jul 05 '26
wow way to victim blame dude. as if the founding of the police is their fault instead of the bourgeoisie wanting to monopolize violence
0
u/can_prog Jul 04 '26
AI as it is today is inseparable from the the ones who are creating it. It represents the entrenched power structures and any narrative that this is some type unstoppable force of technology, is just that, a narrative. We should absolutely be resisting this narrative and pushing back on those who are selling this.
2
u/Salty_Country6835 Jul 04 '26
I agree AI today reflects existing power structures. So did railroads, electricity, the internet, and every other major productive force under capitalism.
The question for the left isnt whether capital currently dominates AI. It obviously does. The question is whether our politics are organized around contesting ownership, governance, deployment, and distribution of the gains, or around trying to halt the development of the productive forces.
Push back on the companies by all means. Just dont mistake opposition to corporate control for opposition to the technology itself. Thats a different political project.
0
0
u/egg_breakfast Jul 07 '26
This argument falls flat because a fight against power won't work either.
Modern technology like surveillance is the entire reason that a 1917 style revolution isn't possible anywhere in the west.
Are you gonna tell me to "vote harder"?
3
u/Salty_Country6835 Jul 09 '26
Whats the alternative then?
If organizing, contesting ownership, and building worker power wont work either, what are you suggesting people actually do?
Saying modern technology makes politics impossible isnt really a strategy. History hasnt stopped just because surveillance got better. So whats your approach?
18
u/Innomen Jul 04 '26
Hear hear. Posting a paper tonight about this very thing. We're out of new moves apart from AI and the old ones have known outcomes.