For beings like humans who should have individual identity, healthy collective identity is when that doesn’t get overwritten
“The free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.”—Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels, 1848
nothoughtsheadempty
Karma: 7
Not sure why I’m getting downvoted for posting a quote from a communist in a post about collective identity.
I can only reason they are coming from:
people who closely associate with Milton Friedman’s economic position
people with values similar to those set forth by neoliberalism
people who believe Karl Marx was a bad person
similarly to 1, people whose ideologies were critized in his work
If you are not one of these, please let me know so I can adjust my thinking. If you identify with one of the above I think it’s better to use the disagreement karma since I didn’t say anything factually incorrect afaik
What is the difference between studying Politics and studying History?
Some people with certain identities are actively politicized throughout history, not understanding politics and thus not understanding the memetics of the social world which has the power to enforce rules upon you is not advisable if you’re a person with one such identity.
Should I attack the anti-trans legislature attacking many in my community today, in the year 2023? Should I defend the rights and freedoms of undocumented workers given their productivity per capita when adjusted for wages? Should I have participated in the 2014 protests against the Venezuelan government?
There are questions of values, the responses to these last two questions depend on ought statements, not ones which the study of natural sciences can answer as of yet unless you choose a particular Utility Function humanity should abide by like the sum of all nations GDP. “Should I defend x group of people as they are being critized with ideas born from the status quo?” is not a question with a universal answer. I believe all people provide equal value to the richness of our history; therefore I believe I have to defend communities with proportionally less financial power so long as they aren’t harming other communities. What if I believe that world is a pure meritocracy instead? Wouldn’t it be fair to not care about such groups if all they need to do is put a little effort? What about disabled people? Do they deserve less for being less able to function in a world without accomodations for us?
Politics is not just about ideological conflict, but also about the rules for collaboration we follow, and under the current globalized economy we decided to use mostly free market competition even with industries like insurance which suffer from problems like adverse selection.
As such I think there’s room for deep intellectual inquiry in the realm of political science iff we decide to analyze things materially and not just ideologically and we decide to analyze and actually criticize the contents of people’s ideas rather than the person.
Question: how is the criminal justice system not racist? As I understand it. There are no laws banning slavery in prison, so there were financial incentives to move enslaved people to prison and there are financial incentives today to put people in jail which results in the perpetuation of racial biases in law enforcement
I think another regulatory target, particularly around the distribution of individual GPUs, would be limiting enthusiast grade hardware (as opposed to Enterprise) to something like xGB where x is obligately readjusted every year based on risk assessments
Hello, I’m working on mechanistic interpretability alongside technical alignment. I’m interested in AI governance and how technical work can inform policy.
Or corporation, many humans act in ways that maximize the profits of a corporation even when they believe that the work they do is a little unethical.
I’m very glad that there’s people thinking outside of the individualist bounds that we usually set for ourselves.