Great finally having a counter weight to llm’s trained on the massive free market propaganda dataset. We just need to move past these archaic ‘*isms’ that are hardly scientific at all.
The 'isms are better thought as points of reference for your political views; for example someone saying “I’m an $personist” is basically saying “I agree with what $person said/did in most theoretical and practical matters”. They are useful, specially as they help you to understand what the other person defends, e.g.
a Maoist is likely to put heavy emphasis on rural workers
a Trotskyist is likely to believe the revolution should give no fucks about borders
a Dengist is likely to downplay the differences between market vs. state-planned economies, seeing them as just tools for an end
a Luxemburgist is likely to raise criticism against any “higher” role of a vanguard; etc.
So they aren’t problematic on themselves. You need to watch out for dogmatism, though; just because you’re a $personist doesn’t mean you should automatically clap to every single thing $person did or said.
Great finally having a counter weight to llm’s trained on the massive free market propaganda dataset. We just need to move past these archaic ‘*isms’ that are hardly scientific at all.
The 'isms are better thought as points of reference for your political views; for example someone saying “I’m an
$personist” is basically saying “I agree with what$personsaid/did in most theoretical and practical matters”. They are useful, specially as they help you to understand what the other person defends, e.g.So they aren’t problematic on themselves. You need to watch out for dogmatism, though; just because you’re a
$personist doesn’t mean you should automatically clap to every single thing$persondid or said.