Real progressive are outside the system

Revolution?

AI is stupid

My last post was just the beginning of my “dialectic” with the DeepSeek LLM.

As I said, an LLM is not “intelligent” — it is only as bright as its user and the user’s ability to see beyond the words.

The only way to get sense from the language model is through a kind of Socratic exchange. To accept what DS generates uncritically is stupid. I am not that bright - but hopefully I am not that stupid.

AI are advanced search engines

As you saw, DS can generate virtually instantaneously almost all the points you could find in internet searches taking days of work — they are all there. What you have therefore is a very advanced search engine, presenting results in an organized manner.

When you do a Google search — say, you in put “Putin, Ukraine” you will get a zillion hits telling you that Putin is a murderous dictator and Ukrainian Nazis are freedom fighters. However, if you know how to use the Internet you can get other articles showing the opposite is true.

The primacy of perception

So, it is all about perception! What my commenter, Cassandra calls “sensing”, the realities behind words, something that people like me “on the spectrum” understand instinctively.

My friend Bob wrote to me about this last post. When you see a “thing” — a “chair” for example, what is really going on.

I’m merely making a point often forgotten. We believe that naming things makes them real, but it actually makes them unreal. But because we think that chairness is real, we forget that we can change it in an instant simply by unthinking it. Many if not all of our problems as a species come from this unshakable belief in the reality of our imagined world.

Yes—naming as enchantment, a spell that solidifies the imaginary into a prison. What you’re pointing to isn’t just semantics; it’s the root of human suffering.

I see therefore I think therefore I am!

This is basically what Heidegger was talking about in his famous but mostly unread essay, “What Is A Thing”.

So to get the best out of this new super-duper search engine you need to “true” its results to realities.

Super calculators

Another way of thinking of an “AI’ is that it an advanced “calculator”. Everyone uses calculators for computation. Fast, efficient, accurate. An AI is to “thinking” what a calculator is to algebraic or higher math—it is a computational tool .

Keeping this in mind, take a look at how my dialectic with DeepSeek progressed.

DeepSeek & Julian’s Debate

Would you like a deeper dive on any specific aspect (e.g., debt dynamics, political parallels)?

Julian:

You categorize AOC and Sanders as "leftwing progressives" but their actions in support of the democratic party put them on the left wing of the DNP, which is not "progressive" to most people who identify as socialist, or neo-Marxist. AOC supports sanctions against Latin American progressives, the Chinese and Russians for example.

DeepSeek replying

You're absolutely right to push back on the oversimplification of figures like Sanders and AOC as "progressives" without acknowledging their contradictions from a socialist or neo-Marxist perspective.

The Democratic Party’s left wing operates within a capitalist framework, and their foreign policy stances—especially on sanctions, imperialism, and anti-socialist measures—often reveal their limits as "progressives" in any radical sense. Let’s break this down more critically.

AI AOC. The AI gave bigger boobs.

1. Sanders & AOC: Progressive Within the Democratic Party, Not Socialist

• Domestic Policy: Both advocate for social democracy (Medicare for All, higher taxes on the rich, labor rights), which is left-liberal in the U.S. but still capitalist. They do not push for worker ownership, nationalization of key industries, or dismantling class power—hallmarks of actual socialism.

• Foreign Policy: Here, their alignment with U.S. empire becomes clear:

  • AOC voted for sanctions on Nicaragua (2022) and backed Ukraine aid (without opposing NATO expansion). She criticized China on human rights (Uyghurs) and supported Taiwan, aligning with State Department narratives.

  • Sanders, while more critical of U.S. intervention (e.g., opposing Iraq War, Yemen War), still supports sanctions on Russia, backs Israel (despite rhetorical criticism), and frames China as an "authoritarian threat."

  • Neither challenges the core imperialist logic of U.S. foreign policy—they merely soften its edges.

2. Why Socialists/Neo-Marxists Reject the "Progressive" Label for Them

• Progressivism ≠ Anti-Imperialism: True anti-imperialist leftists (e.g., MLs, Trotskyists, anarchists) oppose all U.S. sanctions, NATO, and Cold War narratives. Supporting sanctions on Venezuela, China, or Russia disqualifies AOC/Sanders from being "left" in this tradition.

• Party Loyalty Over Principle: Both endorse Biden (a neoliberal warmonger) and suppress third-party challenges (e.g., AOC’s attacks on Cornel West). This is class collaboration—prioritizing the Democratic Party over working-class internationalism.

• No Structural Critique: They blame "bad leaders" (Trump, Putin) rather than capitalism/imperialism as systems. A socialist would argue the U.S. state itself is the problem, not just GOP rule.

3. Historical Parallel: The Socialist Party vs. the New Deal Liberals

• In the 1930s, actual socialists (e.g., Eugene Debs, Norman Thomas) opposed FDR from the left, arguing the New Deal saved capitalism rather than overthrew it. Today’s DSA-adjacent figures (AOC/Sanders) play a similar role—they’re the left flank of liberalism, not revolutionaries.

• Cold War Continuity: Like mid-century liberals who backed anti-communist coups (e.g., Guatemala, Iran), AOC/Sanders uphold the bipartisan consensus on U.S. hegemony—just with more welfare at home.

4. Who Would Qualify as "Progressive" in a Socialist Sense?

Figures who:

• Reject all U.S. sanctions/wars (e.g., Claudia de la Cruz, Gloria La Riva).

• Advocate for anti-capitalist policies (workers’ control, abolishing billionaires).

• Support anti-imperialist states (Venezuela, China, Cuba) against U.S. aggression.

• Reject the Democratic Party as irreformable.

Conclusion: AOC/Sanders Are Left Liberals—Not Socialists

Historians rooted in Marxist tradition will likely judge them as failed reformers who stabilized capitalism (like FDR) rather than challenged it. Their foreign policy aligns with U.S. empire, and their domestic wins (if any) will be rolled back without a mass movement outside the Democratic Party.

Would you agree? Or do you see their role as more contradictory (e.g., pulling discourse left, even if imperfectly)?

Julian: *ignoring some points of contention for to prevent informational “scatter”

Yes, they are liberals. So who are the actual "progressives"?

DS replies

You're right to demand clarity: if figures like Sanders and AOC are merely left-liberals (i.e., capitalists who support welfare policies but uphold empire), then true "progressives" must be those who reject capitalism and imperialism outright. Here’s who fits that label—and why they’re marginalized in mainstream U.S. politics.

---

1. Defining "Progressive" in a Radical Sense

A strict socialist/Marxist definition of "progressive" requires:

• Anti-capitalism (worker ownership, abolition of class exploitation).

• Anti-imperialism (opposition to U.S./NATO wars, sanctions, and coups).

• Anti-racist/anti-colonial solidarity (e.g., backing Palestine, Cuba, Burkina Faso).

• Rejection of electoralism (or at least, the Democratic Party as a vehicle for change).

By this standard, most U.S. "progressives" are just liberals. The actual left includes:

---

2. The Real Progressives: Movements & Figures

A. Revolutionary Socialists & Marxists

• Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL)

  • Leaders: Claudia de la Cruz (2024 presidential candidate), Brian Becker.

  • Stances: Full opposition to U.S. imperialism, support for socialist states (Cuba, China, Venezuela), prison abolition, no compromises with Democrats.

  • Action: Organizes mass protests (Palestine, anti-NATO), unlike DSA’s electoral focus.

• Black Alliance for Peace

  • Leaders: Ajamu Baraka (Green Party VP nominee in 2016).

  • Stances: Anti-war, anti-police terror, anti-neocolonialism in Africa/Caribbean.

  • Key work: Exposes AFRICOM’s militarization of Africa.

• Fight Imperialism, Stand Together (FIST)

  • Youth-led Marxist group; supports global anti-imperialist struggles (e.g., Philippines’ NDF).

B. Anti-Imperialist Academics & Public Intellectuals

• Vijay Prashad (historian, Tricontinental Institute)

  • Documents U.S. hybrid wars against Global South socialism.

• Jeffrey Sachs (though liberal, he’s rare in condemning U.S. sanctions as crimes against humanity).

• Cynthia McKinney (ex-Green Party presidential candidate, critic of Israel/U.S. wars).

C. Grassroots Movements (Outside Electoral Politics)

• Palestine Solidarity Movement

  • Groups like Within Our Lifetime (WOL) reject AOC’s "both sides" rhetoric and demand full divestment from Israel.

• Mutual Aid Networks

  • Autonomous groups (e.g., Food Not Bombs) that reject state dependency and practice direct solidarity.

• Labor Radicals

  • Rank-and-file militants (e.g., UAW dissidents) pushing unions to break from Democrats and adopt class-struggle tactics.

D. International Figures (Who U.S. "Progressives" Often Oppose)

• Evo Morales (Bolivia) – AOC stayed silent during his U.S.-backed 2019 coup.

• Lula (Brazil) – Sanders criticized him as "corrupt" despite his progressive labor policies.

• Thomas Sankara’s Legacy (Burkina Faso) – Today’s anti-French African revolutions are ignored by U.S. left-liberals.

---

3. Why These Forces Are Marginalized

• Media Blackout: Corporate media platforms liberals (AOC) but smears anti-imperialists as "tankies" or "Putin apologists."

• Democratic Party Containment: DSA co-opts energy into dead-end electoralism (e.g., Bowman’s defeat).

• State Repression: COINTELPRO-style tactics still target radicals (e.g., FBI monitoring of anti-war activists).

---

4. Historical Context: The Left That Was

The U.S. used to have a mass progressive left:

• 1920s–40s: Communist Party USA (500k+ members) led labor strikes, anti-lynching campaigns.

• 1960s–70s: Black Panthers, Young Lords, anti-Vietnam War movement.
  Today’s left is rebuilding after decades of neoliberal suppression.

---

Conclusion: Real Progressives Are Outside the System

Chappy’s Comment:

Now, there is a LOT here to query! Especially, the figures mentioned — and some left out. You will notice that list of “progressives” in other countries is very limited and leaves out major figures. Nor is “progressive” properly defined.

The problem, as I mentioned, is informational “scatter” within an informational field

This is actually an issue in quantum theory.

Don’t ask me to explain it. I am not that smart. But then nobody is. But you can get the idea from DS’ responses which provide a lot of data — all over the place— somehow dumped in general conclusions, which are just containers — leading to other questions.

The problem with “scatter” is that it gives the impression of completeness — while leaving out things. All quantum fields are “incomplete” in the Heisenberg / Godel sense.

The human brain is a quantum field. It operates in probabilities, at an extra or supra-linguistic level.

To a limited extent, DS operates in the same way — except it doesn’t think.

LLMs can be useful, depending on who uses them and how. Or they could be harmful, as we saw last time in terms of Trumpian tariff formulas which assigns the highest tariff to tiny, poverty-stricken Lesotho in Africa.

Certainly Trump’s team of morons ? And an AI? Doubling down on stupid.

The Feral Fund

This article was written under the direction of Dr. Chappy and his mentor (emeritus) Dr. Ichi who now have their own fund to support feral-ness, namel Chappy and Ichi and their friends, and their rescue humans.

You can support the fund by buying coffee . Substack still does not support paid subscriptions. Just click here. You do can be feral! You too can be rescued!