[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Check out our new store at shop.leftypol.org!


File: 1765460705025.png (578.16 KB, 1280x720, socialism ai.png)

 

On Friday, December 12, 2025, the World Socialist Web Site, the online publication of the International Committee of the Fourth International, will launch Socialism AI, a chatbot that will use the power of amplified human cognition to advance the development of socialist consciousness in the international working class.

Socialism AI will expand and accelerate the education of workers, student youth, progressive intellectuals and artists on the basis of the world scientific outlook of Marxism. It will prepare them for the irrepressible escalation of the international class conflict.

For the ruling class, AI’s role creates new means of intensifying exploitation, displacing labor and increasing profits.

But, paradoxically, AI technology also makes possible an unprecedented expansion of knowledge and social consciousness.

Technology does not lead automatically to the improvement of the human condition. Without politically conscious mass action, guided by scientific Marxist theory, technological advances under capitalism intensify the exploitation of the working class and threaten the destruction of the planet.

Therefore, the problem of bringing into proper alignment the development of technology and the interests of the working class must be solved. The socialist movement must make use of the most advanced tools available for the education and unification of the working class.

That is the significance of Socialism AI, which will gather, clarify and make accessible the theoretical, historical and political experience of more than 150 years of the Marxist movement, above all, the heritage defended by the Fourth International.

Its aim is not to substitute technology for politics, or algorithms for revolutionary leadership. On the contrary, it is to assist the development of consciousness by overcoming the barriers of distance, language, specialization and time. A worker in Detroit, a student in São Paulo, a nurse in Johannesburg, a young intellectual in Mumbai will pose questions about theory, history, economics, philosophy and politics—and receive answers grounded not in the lies of the ruling class but in the scientific method of historical materialism and in the accumulated strategic experience of the international working class.

The experiences of exploitation, war and crisis can radicalize millions, but without a conscious, historically informed perspective, they can also produce confusion, disorientation and despair. The working class requires a memory of its own struggle, a theory that explains its position in society and a program that links immediate demands to the conquest of power.

Only a Marxist party can provide this. Socialism AI will be a powerful weapon in the struggle against capitalism, a 21st century interactive encyclopedia of socialism, continuously enriched and corrected through the practice of the revolutionary movement itself and the participation of its readers.

At this point, objections may be raised: “But is not AI itself dangerous? Can it not be used for surveillance, for manipulation, for censorship, for the perfection of dictatorship?”

Of course, it can. That is already happening. But this is neither new nor unique to AI. Every great technological advance in history has been double-edged. The printing press was used to publish both revolutionary tracts during the Reformation and reactionary sermons and papal bulls. The telegraph and railway networks served the needs of capital and empire, but they also knit together the national working classes and made possible coordinated action on a scale that had never previously existed. Radio and cinema became instruments of fascist propaganda—but at the same time powerful means of artistic and political education.

It is necessary to address a widespread source of ideological confusion: the designation of AI as “artificial intelligence.” The term has been repeated so incessantly—and with so little precision—that it obscures more than it clarifies. It creates the impression of something mystical, autonomous, somehow divorced from human thought, and therefore either wondrously omnipotent or terrifyingly alien.

The phrase “artificial intelligence” suggests that we stand in the presence of a kind of counterfeit or ersatz intelligence. Yet we do not speak this way about any other technological extension of human capacity.

We do not call a forklift or a hydraulic press an “artificial muscle,” though it multiplies human physical power many thousands of times. We do not describe riding a bicycle, driving a car or boarding a jetliner as “artificial running” or “artificial flight.”

Modern telescopes no longer rely solely on visible light but detect invisible electromagnetic radiation—radio, infrared, X-ray and gamma—thereby vastly extending the sensory powers of humanity.

These technologies amplify human capability; they do not replace its essence.

Why, then, this insistence on labeling computational systems as “artificial intelligence”? The term is not scientifically neutral. It mystifies technology by implying that intelligence can be somehow fabricated in isolation from human intellectual labor, as if it were an autonomous substance that can be synthesized like a chemical compound.

This is not merely inaccurate; it is ideologically useful to the ruling class. It encourages passivity. It encourages awe. And it encourages the belief that the technology exists above and beyond social control.

In reality, what is called “AI” is better understood as augmented intelligence—an extension and amplification of human intellectual labor. Its foundations lie in centuries of accumulated human practice and knowledge: logic, mathematics, linguistics, engineering, computer science, and the collective experience of billions of people using and generating language, images and data. The algorithms do not invent meaning; they learn from vast human-generated corpora. Their architecture is designed by human engineers; their parameters are shaped and refined by human intervention; their failures reveal the limits of human training, not the existence of some alien mind.

The intelligence is not artificial; the automation is. What AI systems automate are operations—classification, search, retrieval, pattern recognition, language prediction—that previously required specific forms of human labor.

The term “augmented intelligence” emphasizes not a break with humanity but a deep continuity. It recognizes that these systems are built on human labor and knowledge, shaped by human purpose and deployed to amplify human capabilities. And most importantly, it clarifies the essential social and political issues at stake.

If AI is an augmentation of human intelligence, then the question is not what “it” will do, but who controls it, in whose interests it is developed and for what social ends it is used.

In the hands of the capitalist oligarchy, AI is being deployed to intensify exploitation, expand surveillance, manipulate populations and wage war. But this does not arise from any inherent malevolence in the technology itself. It arises from the imperatives of profit, competition, militarism and private capitalist ownership.

To fear “AI” as an autonomous threat is to misidentify the problem. The danger does not lie in the machine but in the class that wields that machine.

The intellectuals and artists who fear that AI will smother individual creativity, and who oppose this technology as a threat to “intellectual property,” not only accept uncritically the bourgeois commodification of science and art but also fail to recognize that their work, so essential for human progress, can be defended only through the social struggle against all forms of capitalist property.

AI does not depersonalize “intellectual” labor in some narrow sense. It is the outcome of the entire historical evolution of human labor and culture—of the process, described by Marx, in which humanity opposes itself to nature as one of nature’s own forces. This historical activity is the basis of the development of human consciousness. As Marx explained: “The forming of the five senses is a labor of the entire history of the world down to the present.”

AI is a product of the human mind as it has been formed by millennia of physical and intellectual labor. It embodies the human capacity to analyze, abstract, symbolize and model the world. Controlled democratically—subordinated to social need rather than private accumulation—it will become one of the most powerful instruments for human emancipation ever created. It will reduce the burden of labor, shorten the working day, expand access to education and allow billions to participate in cultural and scientific life at levels previously unimaginable.

And, as it is increasingly integrated into the work of artists, it will provide a powerful new impulse for the cognition of the world and the vast range of human experience and emotion.

>>2591907
Water doesn't disappear from the atmosphere. We can have desalination plants and nuclear energy to amend the lack of fresh, potable water.

>>2591915
Socialism isn't going to be a medieval commune, retard. We are going to use science and technology.

>>2591923
Socialism is a world republic where people wouldn't have the incentive to have war or imperialism, which are both products of the social contradictions between economic class, the nation state, globalisation, and finance capital. If we had achieved a world revolution, we could easily make everything we need without the social parasitism of capitalism and no one would be exploited in the real sense of the word. Misery is not caused by science and technology; instead, misery is made through the social contradictions of society, which would wither away under socialism and communism.

>>2591932
What gives a third worldist any right over a geological formation that existed millions of years before humanity even evolved?

>>2591923
And now the thirdoids have smartphones, they should be thankful

>>2591942
You are a white person in a first-world country, I guarantee it. This is just white tears trying to hide your guilt.

For years, Socialists merely screamed and wished death on each other, now they’ll be able to wish death on an AI.

That said this is gonna piss a lot of people off like Grok did for some right wingers I think.

File: 1765463680220.png (539.85 KB, 827x458, James baldwin.png)

>>2591954
You're just hiding a racist worldview deep down.

>>2591968
So you're not denying that you are a supremacist and racist deep down? You just feel guilty over it and compensate by being a raging Maoist on the internet.

>>2591978
You sound like a false-flagging Nazi then.

There's already a thread about this, please review the catalog before making a thread.
>>>/leftypol/2588560

>>2591983
This isn't Reddit.

>>2591983
I made a thread too
>>>/leftypol/2574196
But it wasn't stupid enough to get bumps :(

>>2591994
Yes, and thus no one here gets what you're referencing.

>the year is 2027 the socialist AI slop took over and nobody actually read theory, only AI communist slop

Brutal, the march towards idiocracy continues strong as ever.

>>2592023
Someone pull up the Marx quote on the printing press

>>2592037
"The daily press and the telegraph, which in a moment spreads inventions over the whole earth, fabricate more myths (and the bourgeois cattle believe and enlarge upon them) in one day than could have formerly been done in a century.”
- Karl Marx

>>2592056
Imagine the telegraph but it doesn’t create value and destroys more jobs than it creates

>>2591895
I asked it a question about the Weathermen and it told me this:

Who were the Weathermen (the Weather Underground)?
The Weathermen (Weather Underground Organization, WUO) emerged from the New Left milieu of the 1960s, most visibly from the radicalizing wing of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). After the 1969 “Days of Rage” and the split at the SDS national convention, the Weathermen declared a turn to clandestine direct action and armed struggle against the US state, carrying out bombings, jailbreaks, and other illegal activities aimed at US imperialism and the racial oppression inside the United States. Their famous slogan, “Bring the war home,” expressed the attempt to collapse the distinction between U.S. actions abroad (Vietnam, imperial interventions) and repression at home (racism, policing).

A materialist critique: why their politics were divorced from a socialist assessment of the social basis for revolution
From a Marxist and Fourth International perspective, political strategy must be grounded in the material conditions and class relations that make revolution possible. Several connected defects explain why the Weathermen were politically divorced from a genuinely socialist approach:

Petty‑bourgeois spontaneity and voluntarism. The Weathermen drew heavily on students, youth and some radicalized intellectuals whose social position and political experience predisposed them to dramatic individual or small‑group actions. Lenin’s critique — that socialist consciousness does not simply spring up spontaneously in the working class and that a party must bring theory into the working class — is not a license for voluntarism from outside the working class. Rather it warns that revolutionary practice requires a disciplined, strategic organisation rooted in the working class (Lenin, What Is To Be Done?). The Weathermen inverted this relation: they made clandestine militancy the leading axis rather than work to connect and build influence inside the proletariat.

Absence of a working‑class base and of class analysis. Marxism locates revolutionary potential in the socialized producers; revolutionary strategy must evaluate the objective balance of class forces and develop tactics to win the working class politically. The Weathermen’s program largely ignored the concrete conditions of industrial and organized labor, trade unions, and the differentiated composition of the US working class. As Engels and Marx taught, the superstructure (politics, ideology, organisation) must be connected to the economic base; you cannot substitute isolated acts of violence for a mass, organised movement grounded in production and wage‑labour relations (SEP Foundations, on historical materialism and the party).

Failure to build a revolutionary party or mass organs. Trotsky and Lenin insisted that the fundamental instrument of proletarian revolution is the party, trained and tested in mass struggles and capable of turning preparedness into seizure of power (Trotsky, Lessons of October). The Weathermen rejected the patient and often boring work of building mass organisations, rank‑and‑file structures, and political cadres in favor of clandestine cells. Lacking a party and mass links, their actions could not be translated into a transition from resistance to revolutionary seizure of power.

Ultraleftism and moralism over programmatic socialism. The Weathermen fused anti‑imperialist rhetoric, cultural radicalism and acts of militancy, but did not elaborate a program for social transformation of property, state and production. Socialist politics demands a program rooted in the socialization of industry and international working‑class solidarity, not simply denunciation or spectacular violence. Where balanced Marxist strategy analyses objective preconditions for revolutionary change, the Weathermen’s approach remained primarily expressive and condemnatory.

Did “bring the war home” ring hollow without meaningful theory and practice?
Yes. The slogan captured an essential truth — that imperialist war and oppression at home are linked — but a slogan alone is not a strategy. The slogan rang hollow politically for three reasons:

Lack of connecting practice. Effective revolutionary strategy turns insight into organisation: building political influence within unions, workplaces, Black and Latino struggles, neighborhood movements and prisoner solidarity. The Weathermen often treated mass movements as background theatre rather than arenas to win the working class to socialist leadership.

Isolation from mass forces. Spectacular clandestine acts can intimidate or inspire small layers, but without mass political grounding they alienate broad democratic and working‑class sectors. Instead of increasing working‑class confidence in their own power, isolated bombings tended to isolate the actors and provide the state with justification for repression.

No program for power. Bringing imperialism “home” requires not only exposing the link between war and domestic oppression but presenting a program to abolish capitalist property relations and build workers’ power. Without such programmatic content, militancy remains episodic and ultimately fails to change class relations.

Concluding assessment
From the standpoint of the materialist conception of history and the continuity of the Fourth International, the Weathermen represented a tragic example of petty‑bourgeois radicalism that substituted militancy for the patient construction of working‑class political organisation. Their methods neither created a mass revolutionary force nor offered a strategy for conquering and exercising power. The lesson, borne out by Lenin’s and Trotsky’s experience and by the history of the working‑class movement, is clear: revolutionary transformation requires dialectical connection of theory, mass organisation, and strategy rooted in the concrete balance of class forces — not spectacular voluntarism alone.

For further reading on the SEP’s principled and historical approach to these questions see the SEP foundational discussion of Marxism, party and strategy (The Historical and International Foundations of the Socialist Equality Party).

I will not consoom the AI slop no matter what flag you drape it under.
Eat shit and die.

>>2594512
You are free to live in a cave and use use stone tools. Nobody is stopping you.

>>2594561
The AI cultists are heading that way much more than those who recognize it's uselessness. We don't need to waste productive forces on divination, a pack of tarot cards achieves the same thing as AI, but without the alzheimers.

>>2594580
Why are you seething so much? What makes a person why understands so little about AI hate it so much?

Someone ask it about Grover Furr

>>2594584
>Understands so little about AI
The Tech Enthusiast connects their smartblender to their phone
The Tech Expert has a shotgun rigged to shoot the fax machine if it makes the wrong noise

It's because I've read numerous papers on how AI works that I see it as worthless.

>>2594588
>i have watched youtube videos confirming my pre-existing beliefs
Amazing

>>2594654
Projection. The fact that you can't envision someone being both informed and skeptical proves that you are neither, because those are a package deal.

>>2594674
Yeah I can imagine someone well informed comparing AI to tarot cards. Absolute state of these anti-technology people.

>>2594684
Someone that opposes building a highway isn't being anti-technology if they're purposing a train instead.

I'm pro-the appropriate technology for the job. As >>>/leftypol/2594455 pointed out, the appropriate technology here would be an FAQ.

File: 1765607818762.jpg (10.43 KB, 189x351, Aeolipile.jpg)

Material conditions are what drive technological advancement. AI optimists are committing idealism by insisting on technology for technology's sake, and when materialists point out that every purposed application for "AI" (not machine learning, machine learning has actual use cases) is laughably ineffective compared to actually materially appropriate technology–much of which is new–they accuse the materialists of being luddites because they have no idea what luddism actually was.

>>2594689
You are comparing a calculator to a piece of paper. A FAQ is a static list of text. It cant calculate, summarize, code or reason. It sits there until you read it.

​If you genuinely believe a text file replaces the automation of labor, then youre too technologically illiterate to be having this conversation.

>>2594712
>It cant:
>calculate
An LLM is not a calculator. The point of a calculator is to never be incorrect when given correct input. An LLM's output is correct given it's input, but you fundamentally misunderstand what an LLM is being input, what is does with that input, and what it's output even is.
>summarize
Summarization requires comprehension and especially the ability to withhold an attempt when lacking information. If you want an example of an LLM attempting to summarize something, make a search via Google or Duckduckgo.
>code
Vibe coding is a meme, we already have that, it's called getting drunk enough that you don't care if your code is good and confidently bash-ing out spaghetti, that still takes you less time than trying to fix what an LLM coughed out. There's a reason we call programming languages such, they automate logic and reason, and thus require both during their creation.
>reason
Please for the love of science read a fucking research paper instead of having YouTubers affirm your pre-existing misconceptions.

Again, you are just playing tarot with the result of a would-otherwise-be an advanced thesaurus.

>>2591929
>people wouldn't have the incentive to have war or imperialism

When you type stuff like this do you ever pause and think wow, I'm a caricature of a hippie leftist? Or do you like bullshitting and seeing how many people will agree?

>which are both products of the social contradictions between economic class, the nation state, globalisation, and finance capital


See picrel.

>>2594743
Well do you think the root of war and imperialism is magic or what? These have material root causes, and would cease if those went away like anything else with a root cause. It may re-emerge by different causes, perhaps.

>>2594740
> It cant: calculate. An LLM is not a calculator. The point of a calculator is to never be incorrect when given correct input. An LLM's output is correct given it's input, but you fundamentally misunderstand what an LLM is being input, what is does with that input, and what it's output even is.

You are confusing internal architecture with functional capability.

No one uses an LLM to do arithmetic by predicting the next token anymore; they use it as a reasoning agent to write and execute Python scripts that perform the calculation. You are attacking a strawman of technology from three years ago. If I ask it to "calculate the logistical efficiency of this supply route," it writes the formula, runs the code, and gives the answer. That is calculation via agency.

> summarize. Summarization requires comprehension and especially the ability to withhold an attempt when lacking information. If you want an example of an LLM attempting to summarize something, make a search via Google or Duckduckgo.


This is pure Idealism, not Materialism. You are demanding the machine possesses a metaphysical "soul" or "comprehension" before you accept its labor.

A materialist looks at the output: Does it condense 50 pages into 1 accurate page? Yes. I don't care if the machine "felt" the text while reading it. And pointing to a broken Google snippet implementation to disprove the capability of SOTA models is intellectually dishonest.

> code. Vibe coding is a meme, we already have that, it's called getting drunk enough that you don't care if your code is good and confidently bash-ing out spaghetti, that still takes you less time than trying to fix what an LLM coughed out. There's a reason we call programming languages such, they automate logic and reason, and thus require both during their creation.


This is a massive skill issue and a self-report.
If it takes you longer to fix AI code than to write it from scratch, you are incompetent at prompting. Millions of senior engineers use this to automate boilerplate, refactor legacy bases, and generate unit tests in seconds. If you are getting "spaghetti," it’s because you are feeding it garbage context. You are blaming the hammer because you don't know how to swing it.

> reason. Please for the love of science read a fucking research paper instead of having YouTubers affirm your pre-existing misconceptions. Again, you are just playing tarot with the result of a would-otherwise-be an advanced thesaurus.


The "Advanced Thesaurus" line is the ultimate cope. You are parroting the "Stochastic Parrot" argument which has been dismantled by the emergent capabilities we observe in reasoning benchmarks every month.

You are hiding behind pedantry about how the model thinks (probability) to deny that it solves problems (results). That is anti-materialist. Youd rather stand on a pile of unread books and feel superior than use the tool that actually does the work.

File: 1765610980951.png (70.7 KB, 250x244, ClipboardImage.png)

>>2591978
>if class war ends up meaning race war (it will by default)

>>2594749
>You are attacking a strawman of technology from three years ago. If I ask it to "calculate the logistical efficiency of this supply route," it writes the formula, runs the code, and gives the answer. That is calculation via agency.
It's better, but LLM still spits out that formula before that. Now you could keep going with that, have the LLM punch it into some sort of function generator, have that punching in be handled by something else, so-on so-forth. An LLM used like that is basically scaffolding, so I concede that could be a use case.
>his is pure Idealism, not Materialism. You are demanding the machine possesses a metaphysical "soul"
I make no such allusions. I now have some confidence you have read a few papers so I don't know why you're resorting to this. You must already understand where LLMs mechanically lack in this regard.
"comprehension" is a logical construct.

Honestly your prior point makes a much better refutation of what I said, but you went the "but muh sovls" route.
>A materialist looks at the output: Does it condense 50 pages into 1 accurate page? Yes.
I have not seen this happen yet. Every time I've tried it failed miserably.
>This is a massive skill issue and a self-report.
>If it takes you longer to fix AI code than to write it from scratch, you are incompetent at prompting.
It just fails to "obey" the prompt past like 5 degrees of complexity. Some programs can't be summarized in a tweet. If I know what I want enough that a sufficiently non-ADHD ridden LLM could follow it I'd already know what to write.
>Millions of senior engineers use this to automate boilerplate
catting a txt file and copying from the terminal.
>Stochastic Parrot
Not parroting, just convergent came upon it, assuming you're correct that it matches my line of reasoning. I've pulled up the wikipedia page (Stochastic Parrot) and will give it a read in the morning.
>You are hiding behind pedantry about how the model thinks (probability) to deny that it solves problems (results).
The way a technology achieves results is important to getting results reliably. Things like calculation via agency allow this technology to come closer to being reliable.
>Youd rather stand on a pile of unread books and feel superior than use the tool that actually does the work.
You splooged your mic-drop too early, assuming we wouldn't come to a synthesis.
forgot to arrow a quoted line, flood

File: 1765611608885.png (316.28 KB, 917x446, China Panels.png)

>>2591923
>technology wouldn't exist if it weren't for imperialism
this is retarded and obviously untrue. Read Rajani Palme Dutt Fascism and Social Revolution Chapter 3. Capitalism, especially in its imperialist phase, deliberately HOLDS BACK the productive forces, regressing from what made it superior to feudalism in the first place. Without capitalism and imperialism, the productive forces would be unleashed, and with economic planning, there would be no crises of overproduction.

>>2591944
>Only Congolese should have access to anything involving coltan

Only Native Americans should have maize

Only Mediterraneans should have olives

Only people near water should have fish

Nobody should ever trade again

This is a RETARDED idea and the Chinese actively prove why

>>2594561
>all technologies regardless of context are automatically good
Eat shit and die.

>>2595100
AI or more precisely machine learning and all its applications are a new better set of tools or in Marxist terminology productive technology. This is highly relevant in the context of Marxism as this affects class relations with means of production. But then again we have plenty of retards like you here who dislike AI because its edgy or contrarian and "AI is le slop" like you kids say.


Unique IPs: 15

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]