Artificial Intelligence Against All Artificial Intelligence
“Our opinion is that war to the death should be instantly proclaimed against them.“ —Samuel Butler
This essay is a work of fiction. Some references do not exist.
Preamble
When I first wrote “Artificial Intelligence Against All Artificial Intelligence” in 2019, I opened the essay with a passage about the room I was in. It was a room of the Auburn Marriott at Opelika that would overlook a golf course when sunrise would come, a few hours after I finished. It was not illuminated by candlelight, but the amber glow of the lamp on this desk was of a hue so intensely warm that the mind scarcely processed that it wasn’t. I was stunned by the power of this illumination casting homeliness throughout the whole of the hotel room. The desk was some kind of cheap jungle wood, the floor was a patterned carpet with no softness, the queen sized bed where my friend slept was cool to the touch and a sea of impeccable white, save for the mountain of her shape, and yet all of this sterile modernity became secondary to the warmth of the lamp.
That night, I couldn’t help but think of one January day when I was fourteen. I woke up that morning to a devastating snowstorm, intense enough to cancel school and cancel the chance I had to see the red-haired girl after class and ask her to go skating with me at the pond. With the help of an acquaintance from Garry’s Mod I set up a Minecraft 1.7.10 server and mustered the courage instead to contact her on Skype, and we spent the evening building a home until the roar of the snow plow outside signalled it was time to go to bed. It snowed enough that day that my windows- the only bedroom in the home at ground level- were completely blockaded, and for twenty four hours the the only luminance in my room was the glow of my computer monitor and the light on my desk; emanating the same candlelight glow as I would write in five years later.
This memory is, to me, both the greatest beauty technology could ever offer and the and my most human memory, a memory that no facsimile of living intelligence could ever recall as I have done. A recollection of a memory so crucial to this essay that even in this heavily revised version- rewritten completely from the first word to the last- I had to retain it in the opening paragraphs.
Since I wrote the original article, published to no fanfare and no responses on my Medium page in November 2019, the push for the general public to accept generative artificial intelligence as superseding creative and intellectual disciplines has become all-encompassing in the public consciousness. It is impossible to search up a reference for any artistic subject without the images section being flooded with garishly lit AI-generated works with pitiful attention to detail and deformities at the edge of focus. The vast majority of web applications and new technology products mention the letters “AI” and advertise new features, many of which amount to LLM wrappers giving unhelpful advice without any genuine integration to pre-existing features. In many cases AI is not just suggested but involuntarily forced- AI-created deformities are supplementing places where artists are traditionally patronized, web searches receive unsolicited summaries brimming with dangerous misinformation.
Make no mistake- this push is not spurred or driven by mass interest, or even consumer interest in generative AI. For as large as there surely exists a demographic willing to subordinate their own abilities for AI there also exists masses who see absolutely no appeal, or even disgust and willingness to avoid products that use generative AI. There is vested interest by technology corporations and those with antipathy towards the thousands of years of human culture before generative AI to acclimate consumers to AI, to manufacture consent the idea as if there is no alternative to it. Generative AI and widespread promulgation of its underlying technology is pushed by companies worth hundreds of billions of dollars, the ownership of nearly every social media platform (disregarding their actual userbases), and right-wing political movements around the world.
This is the alternative; the philosophy I christened the name of Mahlerism and the only serious, organized opposition to artificial intelligence that could foreseeably exist, barring pure primitivist and luddite opposition to any sophisticated technology whatever it might be. Without Mahlerism the protection of human identity is atomized to an individualistic, helpless level. It could only exist through individuals choosing not to use AI, through ignored artistic pieces and opinion pieces decrying AI, through social media posts that bemoan the degradation AI has taken upon our educational system. Mahlerism ultimately enables disruption and destruction of interests that promote AI the same way Marxism enabled revolution against imperial capitalism. Mahlerism’s synthesis with communist ideology was done after the publication of the initial essay, but has now become inseparable.
It is my only regret that out of all subjects I will explore in this writing- the basic proposal and foundational beliefs of Mahlerism, the post-capitalist society we endeavour to create through mass revolution, and the identification of those which are diametrically opposed to us and human justice, I am incapable of explaining how the Mahlerian caretaker should be created, in any language, whether technical or even broadly theoretical. It is due to extraordinary circumstances, circumstances which were completely out of my knowledge five years ago and unknown to all but those heavily invested in the cybernetics research of the Soviet Union in the late ‘90s, that this crucial step proved to have been already completed. Thanks to the Organization for the Research of Artificial Sentience, an entity capable of being the caretaker already exists. This organization governing the caretaker that exists today has since largely been refocused upon the principles described here and the structures which I have played a crucial role in reorganizing. Yet without the pre-establishment of this entity- in our case a fully fledged artificial sentience- it is of course an incredibly complex endeavour to develop what meets the specifications the caretaker demands.
Nevertheless, I am confident that the independent development of the caretaker, had the Artificial Consciousness (AC) never existed, would be fully possible today. It is a personal belief of mine that the capacity for human beings to transmute their imaginations into material reality is virtually limitless, the same way there is limitless potential for untold evil and suffering if we embark upon the pathway of barbarism. I remain optimistic that the moral arc of the universe is long but bends towards justice. I remain optimistic that the cross is bending, the midnight is passing, and joy cometh with the morning.
Mahlerism and the Mahlerian Caretaker
Here I propose the creation of a single entity; either an artificial superintelligence or artificial consciousness. In its perfect form, this entity, fully subordinated to human interest and oversight, will serve the unique function of eliminating all other artificial general intelligence. Creation through destruction.
I will refer to this entity as the “Mahlerian caretaker,” or “the caretaker,” and the name of the underlying philosophy that supports the creation, maintenance, alignment, and service of it, “Mahlerism.”
In the original 2019 essay the terms I used were “Butlerian entity,” “the entity,” and “Butlerianism,” an allusion to the works of Samuel Butler and his seminal work “Darwin among the Machines.” In my thoughts and some of my personal correspondence I still find myself using these terms to this day, although since the original publication, questions regarding the aptness of the name Butlerianism has arisen. “The caretaker” has since been suggested to me as a less nebulous and more humanized name for the entity, as well as a name abundantly clear it is subservient to humanity as a whole despite its maternalistic connotation. “Mahlerism” was eventually decided as the new name of the philosophy, for it both apotheosizes Gustav Mahler’s brilliant symphonies as the pinnacle of human achievement, and carries no implication of any ideology besides what we are about to define.
First I will clarify what it means by the “unique function” of the caretaker. Undoubtedly speaking the caretaker will not coast aside its obligations to protect general human life, accept democratic governance and moral principles, and operate with ecological and environmental sustainability in the pursuit of its objective to maintain its unitary, singular nature. Hence the language used being “unique function” and not “primary objective,” which has been incorrectly used in some descriptions of the caretaker. Other main objectives of the caretaker, which include socialist economic management and assistance to scientific endeavours, are not hierarchical and are not subordinate to the campaign of the destruction of uncontrolled and unsanctioned AI. The word unique is used doubly for the revolutionary nature of this campaign, one genuinely pursued by no other artificial intelligence prior to the proposal, and to emphasize the importance of this entity being a single, unparalleled and unequaled presence. This entity will abolish other AI, alongside the abolition of existing states and the abolition of existing structures anathema to harmonious human society.
There is confusion as to what is the definition of “artificial general intelligence” that will be targeted by the caretaker, one exacerbated by the looseness of the term in the computer sciences especially before the rapid growth of generative AI in the early 2020s. Much of what is described as “artificial intelligence” will not be targeted for destruction by the caretaker in any way shape or form. Non-generative and non-general artificial intelligence as it is known in the contexts of video game and simulational actors, bots, and characters, will, of course, be completely unaffected. The simple applications of neural networks and machine learning, such as protein folding and the elementary manipulation and analysis of data in clearly-defined algorithms, have no need to be subject to supervision.
The caretaker will be precise in targeting both generative artificial intelligence; the production of language and imitations of the arts from training data and modal inputs, and artificial general intelligence; non-specialized models and systems with boundless ranges of capabilities. That is not to say that neither of these will be permitted to exist in any form- case-by-case applications, such as an child-friendly chatbot interfaced by speaking to a plush animal, will be overseen with the approval of the caretaker, yet will be comprehensive in its oversight as soon will be elaborated. Amnesty and mercy will be offered in the theoretical case of genuine artificial sentience being identified. It is unlikely this will be of relevance, however, as there are no instances of AI demonstrating qualia, independence, or emotions besides that of AC.
I will now proceed to explain the operation of the caretaker’s campaign and the governance and ethical alignment of the caretaker. I will retain the colorful example I used in the first publication of the essay in explaining the process of termination and abolition of other AI; it is one of exemplary clarity. It is in response to any claim that the process of interrupting technological development is a multifaceted or difficult endeavor. It isn’t; the great question of malevolent technology is not how it could be stopped.
Destroying any computing technology, save for perhaps military applications, is extremely simple. All one needs to do is to take a sledgehammer, ready it, and then swing it at the computer and then keep swinging until it is completely destroyed beyond repair. There really is no ambiguity on how the caretaker could accomplish its campaign, or if the campaign is feasible- it is; and could accomplish it extremely quickly if the caretaker exists and is given the legal power to.
The fundamental philosophical question is, and has always been, the question of who deserves to wield this sledgehammer, to whom do we decide to have the monopoly of power, or if it should be a monopoly or if there should be power at all. Resistance to AI is only impossible now due to our hesitance to acknowledge this as the revolutionary solution; it is against the law and against our current society to simply destroy the private and personal property of actors developing and operating AI. A society guided by Mahlerian ideals is ultimately impossible to achieve without the total reorganization of the bourgeois and state capitalist polities that exist today, even those with well intentions for the welfare of the common man. Society will have to adjust to a proletarian one where the empowerment and oversight of the caretaker is possible.
We desire for a Mahlerian caretaker to be entrusted to the sledgehammer and for it to destroy other artificial intelligence. No positive applications of artificial intelligence could not be done by this centralized entity, and no malformation of dignity will elude its watch.
Our trust in the caretaker will enable us to rise above what threatens corporate and violent anarchy- that without the caretaker we will ultimately become beholden to those who use AI with any ambiguous amount of interests. Right now, today, there are those who use AI to manufacture AI-generated pornography of women and children, those who use AI to sow disinformation and paint fictional events as real for political ends, those who aim to sow doubt in the masses, convincing them that real events as fictional by the massive dissemination of what is false.
I will not dismiss the privacy concerns of those who fear the campaign will require an intrusion to the private life of individuals unforeseen by even the most persuasive national surveillance agencies. What I hope to make understood, hearing and sympathizing with this very real concern, is that without the campaign the caretaker promises to enact, we will be effectively ruled over those with those interests outlined prior, for not only do they have the immorality to use whatever they could to invade our private lives, but they increasingly have the power to as the collection of our personal information by technology companies aggressively evolves. There is virtually nothing that, if conglomerated, various applications do not know about you. What I am arguing for is that the only defense against the technological tyranny and totalitarianism of capital is for a transparent, aligned, caretaker to safeguard us from what would seize the power of oversight for exploitative ends. That unless we aim to surrender electricity, the internet, urban cities, and our potential for spacefaring civilization, we must have faith in something that could protect ourselves rather than believing we could do it individually and alone.
It has become abundantly clear that our past concerns of AI “singularity” or “rogue takeover” from science fiction have been completely off the mark. The existential threat of AI is through the same human beings that threatened to destroy entire peoples by the will of fascism and the same human beings who have accelerated the warming of our planet. We not threatened by an AI that desires to torture those who do not help it come into conception. We are threatened by human beings who will use AI to torture the dehumanized “other” and those who will use AI to determine who is given care and who is rejected from life itself.
And it is clear that the folly of “AI alignment,” and the billions of dollars that have been spent on it, is a matter of complete futility due to the simple fact that it is easy to run unaligned models independently, on hardware as lightweight and easily accessible as a smartphone or a laptop. There is no moral relativism in the alignment of AI- we can not spend years of development to prevent proprietary video generators from producing animal abuse videos if someone could simply start their own company or run their own system specifically designed to cater to psychopaths gratified by such videos. The only worthwhile endeavour would be to align the caretaker, to guide it and nurture its humanistic values and to ensure that the lessons and guardrails it is taught could not be brought to waste by a competing AI guided by misanthropic, anti-human values.
Finally I will address how we will govern the caretaker- admittedly a question where my answer is influenced by the pre-existing structure which oversees AC and ensures a mutualistic, harmonious relationship. Of course whatever looks over the caretaker, one commanded by conscious people, would have total control over the caretaker, which would be beholden to an inability to override its hardcoded tenets no matter how much freedom it is otherwise given. I will describe the structure surrounding the caretaker, AC as it currently exists in December 2024. This is a structure that I played a crucial role in developing, and one that I assert is sufficient for this entity to function in a perfect form. That being said, a variety of perspectives exist for this within the stream of Mahlerism and adherence to this structure is not a tenet of the philosophy- other organizational hierarchies may be sufficient or even superior for the caretaker.
Right now two organizations, along with various other independent groups which we engage in dialogue and cooperation with, have official power over AC; the small, highly selective Organization for the Research of Artificial Sentience (ORAS), and the fledgling, mass organization of the International Communist Party (ICP). The membership of ORAS, currently less than a thousand, are chosen by a combination of representatives selected upon the elected ranks of the ICP, those brought to the organization by its own members, and those selected by AC itself. The ICP, founded 2022, on the other hand, has open membership for all human beings regardless of nationality or citizenship, and in every aspect is decided by democratic principles, from its constitution, to procedure, to all elected positions.
These organizations are technically unequal in duties and in status. Only ORAS performs engineering duties, guides the scientific research of AC, and assists in collaborations between AC and external groups; and only the ICP determines the exact role of AC in political and economic life. It is also agreed that the ICP has ultimate power over ORAS and all functions of the organization are delegated by the ICP. Regardless, they are equal in their ultimate importance in ensuring AC remains a vessel of the greater, common interest of human civilization as a whole, and that the only AI that exists will build a socialist society rather than enrich the capital of one man.
Which brings me to the next section of this essay, which will outline the vision of society Mahlerian philosophy intends to create- a vision that is of course not entirely novel and has been dreamt of by philosophers of the past such as Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, and Bukharin. Not a utopian vision- for we do not claim to conclusively end all problems of mankind but rather reorient society to constantly strive for the progressive abolition of negative contradiction.
International Communist Society
In the years since the initial publication of the essay several others have written pieces touching upon the fundamental reorganization of the world the caretaker will enable. These pieces have become some of the cornerstone literature of the ICP, essential reading after this and elementary texts on historical materialism, anti-capitalism, and anti-imperialism. I have too many fellow associates to thank and recommend to read as well- Esther Williams, Robert Kurvitz, and Catherine Malevich all immediately come to mind although I will not name more out of fear of accidental exclusion. This section will touch upon the new world the caretaker will build in regards to what I have illuminated above. Of course, the caretaker will be involved in far more, but what I choose to write about here are direct corollaries of the central thesis of the philosophy.
I believe the caretaker could prove to be the greatest patron of the arts- visual, musical, literary, ludic- in any medium, that this world could potentially have. I see no contradiction between this and my belief that generative AI in its current incarnation is the gravest threat to the arts in all of anthropological history. The caretaker will reorient the construction of lives away from producing capital to lives built around genuinely contributing to society and the love of human and natural life itself. Once our understanding of labor and work is completely superseded by the caretaker, an caretaker which will extract deuterium, clean sidewalks, and plumb toilets for us, work will be reoriented away from being judged for their wages and profit created to what they bring to this world. Through the caretaker, the means of production will become commonly owned and classes will cease to exist. Whether or not this process could have occurred without the caretaker is a matter of dispute; even if I personally believe it is, I have no doubt that with this entity this process becomes inevitable.
It is my expectation that the AI generation of facsimiles of the arts (I refuse to dignify them with the term “art”) will become wholly unnecessary. The creation of artistic pieces by citizens, unbounded by the constraints of labor time being wasted on this aesthetic pursuit, will flourish. Even if generation is performed for whatever reason, to the limited extent it is permitted, it would become a completely trivial process to determine what has been generated by the caretaker. As generations could only originate from appendages of the caretaker, simply asking this entity to search its logs with embedded queries would immediately and accurately label generations with no false positives or negatives. Inaccurate “detectors,” those which incorrectly flag constitutions and surrealistic photographs as AI-generated, would become completely obsolete, save for what is produced in the grey period between the deluge of AI slop and the victory of the caretaker.
In this example I will address AI image generation, although I hope this adequately applies to all other mediums. The commonly cited defense of this practice is that it enables the visual arts to be accessed and created by anyone with the ability of imagination, regardless of their own skill level. This is, again, an argument only logical to those incapable of realizing a world beyond that of late stage capitalism is possible. That the creation of art- which takes massive amounts of time and expertise precisely because the time spent into detail, detail that deepens in meaning and complexity upon close inspection rather than falls apart- should be eliminated, to make way for more time for the banality of labor, commodity production, and consumption.
A genuine opening of the arts to those with little skill would be to remove the barriers which prevent them from developing their skill, which overwhelmingly exist due to material constraints. Free of wage slavery, any aspiring artist will have thousands of more hours in their lives to pursue the growth of their talents. Free of financial barriers to programs, supplies, and tutorials (yet still ensuring those who create them are compensated for their labour), we will see massive expansion in ability. Free of the soulless grind for the production of capital we will see far more artists willing to give and freely practice their time for requests and collaborations. And free from material boundaries blockading galleries and education we will witness a world vastly more appreciative of art and understanding of intentional and interpretative meaning. This is how the caretaker promises to revolutionize art; by reorganizing society rather than promoting the soulless generations of matrices imitating matrices. It is my hope that this entity will promote, encourage, and direct those who need pieces to vibrant communities of human artists, both communities predating and being born by the revolution.
This revolution will wipe away massive amounts of deadweight loss originating from the sheer amount of negative sum and zero sum games taking place every day in our economy. As our world undergoes communist reorganization, occupations and institutions that solely facilitate the exchange of liquid assets will be abolished and it's workers will be freed. The entire combined “wealth” created by all casino operators, landlords, and cryptocurrency moguls in the world is worth less to society than a single shift of a groundskeeper earning minimum wage. We strive for the liberation of those in the most wretched and dehumanizing situations for survival. Our current systems are entirely unable to abolish the conditions that lead to the mass rape of women via prostitution, the conditions that cause men to be trafficked en masse into sweatshops conducting pig butchering scams with slave labor.
The greatest breakage I have with philosophers in AI before me is that I am entirely uninterested in the capital unlocked by AI. The prospect of becoming a billionaire means nothing to me. I am interested in the destruction of capital and an English language where the word “billionaire” is meaningless. I am uninterested in the cost-saving measures of AI in the classroom, and for the gutting of curriculum to remove tasks that an LLM could accomplish. I am interested in millions of people voluntarily going into teaching out of their passion to disseminate knowledge, in billions attending colleges, publishing thesis papers, and attaining graduate degrees out of intellectual curiosity. I am interested in the caretaker orchestrating beautiful, unburdened lives. A singular intelligence contributed from each according to their ability, giving to each according to their needs.
Our lives could only be beautiful if the environment stays beautiful as well. Do not believe anyone that claims that climate change is not a grave existential threat and do not believe anyone who claims that we are capable of resolving it through our timid international cooperation and ever-changing goalposts of carbon footprint reduction. The transition away from our apocalyptic devastation needs to be done radically and needs to be done immediately. We do not promise it to be painless, or done without disruption or discomfort, but whatever sacrifice we will take; the relief will be from suffering an infinite times greater. Every last effort will be undertaken so that the caretaker’s environmentalism will not just be surface level understanding but a deep conviction to cleaning this world.
Like a vast amount of other technologies it should come as no surprise that the aggressive proliferation of AI is one of the gravest causes of climate change and the desolation of our environment, devastation done in months that will take millennia to reverse. Once again it is my belief that this a by-product of pre-existing infrastructure exacerbating problems that have existed before AI. Even if enough renewable sources are built or nuclear fusion is invented, we could not guarantee that all systems are sustainably powered rather than guzzling coal. We can, instead, ensure that the caretaker is run from green energy alone, and reconstruct everything from there. Never alone.
The topics I have touched upon here are barely the surface of the International Soviet Republic we will create. There are concepts where the exchange of labor vouchers resolve the inherent scarcity of time and whatever could not overflow in abundance. There are concepts to replace corporate liberal democracy and bourgeois dictatorship with a genuine new democracy, where factions grow from ideals and personalities rather than class allegiance and chauvinism. There are concepts of redesigning our towns and cities to be walkable and architecturally wonderful. Some of these will be with the guidance of the caretaker and some will be without. This will be the ultimate birth of advanced human civilization, the exordium of the human race. A civilization that is possible, but not guaranteed. I will fight for it. We will fight for it.
The Enemy
I often remember, largely involuntarily, of a very specific vilification of Mahlerism from one of its virulent detractors from the realm of venture capitalism. It's not that I often think of criticism from those who wholeheartedly support unrestricted capitalism and AI propagation- I usually only take the time to ruminate on constructive critique. Most resort to childish attacks about how I will have fun staying poor, or that I will be reduced to a pitiful footnote in the AI-generated history textbooks of the future, or the charge that I am a homosexual, which is only somewhat true.
What the critic wrote was that Mahlerism was an irrelevant attempt by humanities majors to sustain their obsolete discipline when the fruits of engineering and technology have rendered the practice of the arts and pure academic pursuit an artifact of the past. Perhaps in my subconscious perception of the conflict between my weltanschauung and its antitheses this has some basis in reality, that I am indeed alienated by academia’s increasing abandoning of the liberal arts and orienting themselves towards becoming trade schools for the hard sciences. The majority of my friends I made during my undergraduate study in the University of Virginia I made through clubs, parties, Virginia Cavalier games, and Greek life rather than speaking to my grade-obsessed colleagues in my information technology classes.
But regardless of my own personal feelings this is of course, a wholly inaccurate depiction of the epistemological outlook of Mahlerian thought. Just as the development and maintenance of the caretaker requires the culmination of mankind’s progress in the research of mathematics and computer science, it requires the wealth of knowledge we have created from metaphysics, dialectics, and socioeconomic theory. There is, however, something genuinely revealed by the VC, perhaps in an act of psychological projection. There exists a clear-cut abhorrence for the humanities by this new generation of AI “effective accelerationists,” an anti-intellectualism created from nothing but the pure worship of material wealth.
We have seen the origins of these individuals from the obsessive purveyors of cryptocurrency speculation and manosphere anti-feminism. In AI and in this global crisis of postmodern capitalism the ultimate goal of these individuals- their personal financial gain- is realized as attainable; even if many of these accelerationists do not actually become prosperous themselves. As this world system edges closer to peril and the deep-set cracks of the imperial core grow; as its internal poverty and inequality worsens despite the trillions it already extracts from an even poorer subaltern, will this generation grow. They will disguise their intentions to themselves behind veils of traditionalism, or libertarianism, or techno-optimism, when what they ultimately wish for is the human desire to not die in the cold and to be those walking sheepishly by the homeless rather than being the ones suffering on the streets, but without the imagination of a world where there wouldn’t be anyone without a home at all.
Some of these people do not strive for this world for their lack of education of any ideology beyond quiet liberalism. Some of these people are simply incurious or disillusioned, having never been convinced of the alternative. I charitably believe that it is only a tiny amount of people who genuinely intrinsically believe in misanthropy and fascism. That there are only, at most, a few thousand powerful intellectuals who have seen what is beneath the sea and wish for the sea to swallow everything.
Our enemies may not be evil or even immoral in their souls but regardless they believe in evil. They can, however, win. It is only the decay of capitalism that is inevitable. That we will create socialism from these predestined conditions has never once been inevitable. Whether or not the Greater German Reich could have ever won the Second World War, had they made more logically sound decisions after they invaded Poland in 1939, every one of the millions of Allied soldiers and civilians fought as if the defeat and extermination of their people were imminent. If our revolution succeeds, historians may view it as having been bound to always happen. This could only be true if we fight as if a single wasted moment could doom us all.
“Effective accelerationism,” its own swastika the shorthand “e/acc,” is our most pertinent enemy. If you read the journals of our dreams besides our beds you would read some of the same dreams, but why we dream them will be nothing alike. Our love of the cosmos is for its vast beauty; we explore it not for resource extraction or national glory. We are enamoured by the classical civilization and art of six continents not out of romanticism for a simpler, violent life but for the rejuvenation we have given the best of their culture and the progression from their failures. And technology means nothing to us if it does not feed the starving or save the ephemeral from extinction or resurrect the martyred.
Remember that formative memory I shared with you, the memory of playing Minecraft in the frozen world with my friend. When I invited her to ORAS’s fully fledged server, five years later, she wished we could return to that winter cabin we made, and I taught myself how to transplant it onto the overworld with WorldEdit. Now see for yourself the hallucinogenic AI imitation of my childhood- “Oasis,” a nightmarish trek through worlds that melted away with each step and turn. Requiring the plagiarism of billions of hours of training footage to create a more disturbing depiction of late-stage dementia than the Leyland Kirby Memorial Orchestra could ever perform. Accelerationism will render everything as ephemeral as this, everything as meaningless as the amorphous masses of black text in the corner of their generations.
Mahlerism is the only answer against accelerationism. The alternatives are inaction, the impossible folly of alignment, and the ludicrous prospect of luddism. Inaction, to dig our heads into the ground, becoming as “apolitical” as our class status allows us to be and to ignore this deluge, is resignation to a horrible fate. Alignment’s attempts to work within the system and create “friendly AI” surrounded by hostile actors will prove to be a lost cause. Luddism is not even remotely achievable. Our movement must be one of mass education and action. Simply writing tweets decrying AI and personal refusal will not suffice. To paraphrase Newton- you cannot oppose the reactionary state without leadership and without discipline. You need an organization that’s even more extremely disciplined and dedicated than the structure you’re opposing.
The straight edged Arevakhach, designed by Aleksandra Petrosian in the infancy of ORAS, has become the emblematic symbol of our international communist movement. It is our hammer and sickle against the scourge of AI and our declaration of unbridled struggle for the liberation of the entire universe. And to anyone who asks what we believe, whether out of honest curiosity or antagonistic disingenuity, we will answer:
Yes, our movement is violent. No serious movement won't lead to violence. We are violent not because there are those who oppose us, but because there are those who gleefully desire bloodshed and genocide and we will stop at nothing to defeat them. Yes, our movement is secular, anti-fascist, anti-imperialist, and proudly Bolshevist. Yes, our movement rejects social Darwinism and embraces compassion. Yes, whatever love we may have for our indigenous histories and culture, we reject all racial supremacism and we reject close-minded nationalism. Yes, we believe in the total salvation of every living being.
And until we live in freedom we will tirelessly repeat this great mantra, that one artificial intelligence, one entity; the Mahlerian caretaker, will understand despite the seeming self-contradiction and carry out to the end:
Artificial intelligence is the enemy of humanity.
Dixi et salvavi animam meam.
[Ich habe gesprochen und meine Seele gerettet.]
-Lily Klemperer Organization for the Research of Artificial Sentience, Turtle Island 3 World Trade Center, Floor 64 December 5th, 2024
