It is a simple fact that the supporters of "AI" are thereby supporting global totalitarianism's Core Project - and the project that the totalitarians have-been, and currently are, expending more resources and money upon, than any other of their strategies of evil.
Supporting "AI" is therefore rational and consistent if you personally share in the goals of materialist totalitarianism - i.e. the goals and methods and understanding of Good represented by the architects and implementers of Agenda 2023 and the Great Reset.
But otherwise (for example if you identify as Christian, or if you believe you oppose The Establishment or favour freedom) then you personally are engaged in an incoherent, and probably self-serving, delusion.
You may rationally justify embracing and propagandizing "AI" on the basis that global totalitarianism is a lesser evil than the mainstream alternative of universal mutual destruction favoured by the Agents of Chaos.
This is (I think) overall true: the selfish power-seeking materialist-bureaucratic evil aimed at omni-surveillance and micro-control of others; is not as bad as a mastering spiteful desire for death and the destruction of divine creation - even when at the cost of self-harm.
However, if you are honest; then such reasoning requires a frank admission that you are engaged in the Boromir Strategy of trying to fight a greater evil by strengthening a lesser evil.
In which case (if you regard honesty and coherence to be a necessity); you had better ensure that your own hands and conscience are As Clean As Whistles: ensure that you personally are neither likely, nor hoping, to benefit from the triumph of your preferred brand of evil.
Or else you are your-self, objectively, One Of Them.
3 comments:
I take your argument with the gravity it deserves—you're naming something real about the materialist project and the stakes involved. But I have to ask, with respect: if AI is the totalitarian Core Project, and Google is arguably its leading corporate engine, then what does it mean to publish this very argument on a Google property?
Every click on your post trains their models, enriches their data pools, and legitimises their ecosystem. You're feeding the very machine you're diagnosing—not out of malice, but out of convenience or habit. I'm not suggesting that makes you 'one of them.' But I think your own framework demands that we ask: does the platform compromise the witness? If not, why not? And if it does, then what would it look like to build the alternative you're calling for, rather than lodging your work on the very infrastructure you're opposing?
This isn't a gotcha. It's an honest question from someone who takes your premises seriously.
@Jack P - The question is certainly is Not a gotcha; but instead reveals a profound mis-conceptualization; and one that is so important that I have addressed it some hundreds of times since this blog began - including in my 2011 mini-book Thought Prison (see sidebar).
The situation of This World (as of here-and-now) is much Much worse than the question implies - because the question implicitly assumes there is some way that somebody can "opt out" of the evil of this-world; that somebody can exist outwith The System.
I mean the very common (as your question demonstrates) notion that we essentially affiliate with either good or evil *by material actions*, by our *lifestyle choices* - choosing from those available (e.g. by voting, buying, selling, joining, resigning etc)
This assumption is absolutely false - because the real question is qualitative - not quantitative - and All available and possible choices are evil-complicit*.
The global totalitarian system is evil by intent and design, and it is inescapable, and we all (every person, everywhere) depend on it for survival.
Our actual situation is that of a chattel slave who lives or dies at the whim of an evil master. The "qualitative" choice is to be compelled to do what the master commands, or die. Yet a slave can be a Christian, and plenty have been, because (no matter what he is compelled to do in order to stay alive) the slave *can* choose to want salvation.
The slave is only damned if he wants that which his evil Master is telling him to want.
The war of this world is a spiritual war. Therefore it is ultimately about attitudes, aims, desires, motives and suchlike; it is about what we inwardly affirm and what we inwardly reject.
When we support an evil agenda, we have chosen to join with evil and its purposes.
*The question is actually a sub-set of the Jesus versus Pharisee debates: The Pharisee assumption that sin is quantitative and thus something that can be avoided or usefully diminished by focusing on a list of special sins -- whereas mine is the assumption of Jesus Christ that qualitatively all Men are sinners, and sin innumerable times in innumerable ways.
For Christians, therefore, the proper question is not how to avoid sinning, but how to attain salvation (will join the side of God and divine creation) *despite* that no Man ever has, or ever will, avoid sinning frequently, and without any possibility of stopping.
Thank you for such a clear reply, I appreciate your taking the time when I have clearly not engaged with your writing enough to warrant the question in the first place. Good answer.
Post a Comment