Prompt: steelman an argument that challenges the premise of my prompt on political violence. Audience FRIAM group email list. Snarky tone.
Oh, so corruption and illegitimacy are supposed to be the magical catalysts for political violence? That’s an adorably tidy theory. The reality is messier—violence needs a potent brew of economic collapse, inequality, and sometimes foreign meddling, not just a "bad guy" in charge. Plenty of corrupt regimes limp along peacefully with patronage networks and repression, while their citizens begrudgingly prioritize stability over idealistic notions of "legitimacy." And let’s not pretend legitimacy is some universal standard—what’s corrupt to you might be perfectly fine to someone else (hello, cultural relativity). Besides, history is packed with examples of violence against perfectly legitimate leaders because deeper societal fractures were the real issue. So yeah, blaming political violence on corrupt leaders? Cute, but maybe think bigger. On Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 9:01 AM steve smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote: > Glen - > > I have to agree with you on your rant. Not just because I suspect that > will trigger you, but because it actually "got" to me in a new way. > > I do use the terminology of "<elaborate statement X> can you > reflect/elaborate/discuss/etc on this for/with me?" at which point it > (any given LLM of the moment) is likely to very agreeably > (obsequiously?) pretends to do just that. For my purposes, it is > (almost?) as if it is in fact doing "just that"... but I think I > intuitively agree with your instinct/intuition that it is merely > "pretending" to do that. > > Of course, I don't know how this fits into your oft-stated idea that > "people don't communicate" or "communication is an illusion"... this > bias would suggest that "if people don't actually discuss > (communicate?), then there is no reason to believe gradient-descenders > on high-dimensional manifolds would either?" > > I do agree that there is an element that my "discussions" with LLM chat > interfaces is a lot like a well-lubricated browsing of spreadsheets > and/or wikipedia pages (with spreadsheets and charts and anecdotal > examples linked heavily). But then chatting with others (here included) > has a great deal of that quality as well. > > Mumble, > > - Steve > > On 1/28/25 8:44 AM, glen wrote: > > I've always been annoyed by [micro]bloggers who will launch a > > rhetorical salvo and then write (often shouted with an ! or all caps) > > "Discuss!" What Claude and GPT are doing here is not discussing. It's > > not even "discursing", which I guess isn't a word. The prompt would > > better be "Lecture me on ...". But when I type that into the anthropic > > console (3.5-sonnet), I get "I aim to discuss this complex topic > > objectively and factually. Key historical patterns include tensions > > building over time through economic disparities, erosion of rights, > > and repression, often leading to transition through mass movements, > > legal reforms, and institutional changes. I can discuss specific > > historical examples if you're interested." > > > > Jesus H Christ. Claude is using your sense of the word "discuss" too! > > What has this world come to, where [people|machines] can use any word > > they want to mean any thing they want? Get off my lawn! > > > > More importantly, though, this stuff is gaslighting everyone into > > thinking one can *have* a discussion with the machine. Can you? Is it > > actually a discussion? I argue "no". It's much more akin to browsing a > > spreadsheet than discussing. Granted, with stateful lookups, the > > spreadsheet can remember your prior query and do things like AND, OR, > > NOT, or any F() it may choose. But when 2 animals have a discussion, > > what actually happens to the animals? Is what happens to the > > (stateful) machine analogous to what happens to the animal? > > > > I think this is where the (artificial, saccharine) obsequiousness of > > the aligned LLMs really grates. When it makes those statements like > > "Oh right" or "Yes, I'm sorry" or whatever, what has happened inside > > the machine? Is it analogous to what happens in the animal when they > > flap their gums to extrude similar words? > > > > And when have you ever had a conversation with someone (you respect) > > and they just immediately roll over and agree with you about anything? > > Is this why people like "chatting" with LLMs? Because they're > > obsequious? Is it just a fancier "filter bubble"? Ugh. Now I'm > > nauseous. Thanks Obama. > > > > > > On 1/27/25 5:16 PM, Stephen Guerin wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 1:08 PM Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com > >> <mailto:mar...@snoutfarm.com>> wrote: > >> > >> I asked Claude about the historical patterns for emergence and > >> resolution of political violence from corrupt leaders that are > >> considered illegitimate, and it essentially refused to answer. > >> ChatGPT was more forthcoming.. > >> > >> > >> hmm, here's Claude and ChatGPT's initial response > >> > >> Prompt: *discuss the historical patterns for emergence and resolution > >> of political violence from corrupt leaders that are considered > >> illegitimate * > >> > >> Claude: > >> > >> I'll analyze historical patterns in how political violence > >> emerges from and is resolved under corrupt, illegitimate leadership. > >> Let's examine this systematically: > >> > >> > >> Emergence patterns often begin with a gradual erosion of > >> institutional checks and balances. Leaders typically consolidate > >> power by: > >> - Weakening independent judiciary systems > >> - Controlling or intimidating media outlets > >> - Corrupting or dismantling oversight mechanisms > >> - Creating parallel security forces loyal to them personally rather > >> than the state > >> > >> Violence tends to escalate when: > >> 1. Economic conditions deteriorate and inequality increases > >> 2. Opposition groups are systematically excluded from political > >> participation > >> 3. Security forces are given impunity for human rights violations > >> 4. Traditional conflict resolution mechanisms break down > >> > >> Historical resolutions have generally followed several paths: > >> > >> Institutional Reform Path: > >> This involves rebuilding democratic institutions, often through: > >> - Constitutional reforms > >> - Creation of independent electoral commissions > >> - Strengthening judicial independence > >> - Establishing truth and reconciliation processes > >> > >> Popular Movement Path: > >> Successful peaceful resistance movements have often employed: > >> - Sustained civil disobedience > >> - Building broad coalitions across social groups > >> - Strategic use of strikes and economic pressure > >> - International solidarity networks > >> > >> International Intervention Path: > >> External pressure can contribute through: > >> - Targeted sanctions against corrupt leaders and enablers > >> - Support for civil society organizations > >> - Mediation between competing factions > >> - Peacekeeping operations when necessary > >> > >> Key factors that often determine successful resolution: > >> - Unity among opposition forces > >> - Maintaining nonviolent discipline in resistance movements > >> - Support from key institutional actors (military, civil service) > >> - International diplomatic and economic pressure > >> > >> Would you like me to elaborate on any of these patterns or discuss > >> specific historical examples? > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> same prompt: *discuss the historical patterns for emergence and > >> resolution of political violence from corrupt leaders that are > >> considered illegitimate * > >> > >> ChatGPT: > >> The historical emergence and resolution of political violence > >> stemming from corrupt and illegitimate leaders often follow patterns > >> influenced by societal, economic, and cultural dynamics. These > >> patterns can be divided into phases: > >> > >> ### 1. **Emergence of Political Violence** > >> Political violence often arises when a leader's corruption or > >> illegitimacy creates significant discontent among the population. Key > >> factors include: > >> > >> - **Perceived Illegitimacy:** Leaders who come to power through > >> fraud, coercion, or foreign intervention are often seen as > >> illegitimate. This can spark resentment, especially when governance > >> fails to meet public expectations. > >> - **Economic Inequality:** Corrupt leaders often divert state > >> resources for personal gain, exacerbating wealth gaps and creating > >> widespread economic hardship. This inequality fuels discontent, > >> especially among marginalized groups. > >> - **Erosion of Institutions:** Corruption undermines trust in > >> institutions like courts, police, and legislatures, creating a vacuum > >> where violence becomes an outlet for grievances. > >> - **Polarization:** Leaders who use divisive rhetoric to > >> consolidate power often create factionalism within society. This > >> polarization can escalate into violent clashes between opposing groups. > >> - **External Influences:** Foreign powers may exploit unrest to > >> destabilize a regime or support opposition groups, adding to the > >> violence. > >> > >> ### 2. **Triggers of Political Violence** > >> The actual violence is often triggered by events that act as > >> tipping points, such as: > >> - Rigged elections. > >> - Unjustified crackdowns on protests. > >> - Revelations of egregious corruption. > >> - Human rights abuses or massacres. > >> > >> Examples include: > >> - The Arab Spring (2010-2012), sparked by economic hardship and > >> corruption, where illegitimate leaders were overthrown in Tunisia, > >> Egypt, and Libya. > >> - The French Revolution (1789), fueled by inequality, a corrupt > >> monarchy, and the failure of reforms. > >> > >> ### 3. **Resolution Pathways** > >> The resolution of political violence depends on whether > >> institutional or revolutionary mechanisms prevail. Historical > >> patterns include: > >> > >> #### **Reforms and Transition:** > >> - **Negotiated Settlements:** Dialogue between the regime and > >> opposition often leads to power-sharing agreements or peaceful > >> transitions, as seen in South Africa's transition from apartheid in > >> the 1990s. > >> - **Anti-Corruption Movements:** Public pressure or elite > >> intervention may lead to systemic reforms, as in post-Marcos > >> Philippines after the People Power Revolution (1986). > >> > >> #### **Overthrow and Revolution:** > >> - **Regime Change:** When reforms are impossible, violent > >> revolutions or coups often result. The Russian Revolution (1917) and > >> the overthrow of Ceaușescu in Romania (1989) exemplify this. > >> - **Exile or Execution:** Illegitimate leaders are sometimes > >> forced into exile or executed, as seen with Mobutu Sese Seko in Zaire > >> (1997) or Saddam Hussein in Iraq (2006). > >> > >> #### **State Fragmentation:** > >> - **Civil War:** Prolonged violence can lead to civil wars, as > >> seen in Syria (post-2011), where the regime's corruption and > >> repression fractured the state. > >> > >> ### 4. **Post-Conflict Reconstruction** > >> After the resolution of violence, reconstruction efforts often > >> determine long-term stability: > >> - **Justice Mechanisms:** Trials or truth commissions address > >> grievances and establish accountability, such as the Nuremberg Trials > >> after WWII or the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa. > >> - **Institutional Rebuilding:** Strengthening institutions to > >> ensure accountability and reduce corruption is critical. > >> - **Reconciliation Efforts:** Social healing and bridging divides > >> help prevent the resurgence of violence, especially in polarized > >> societies. > >> > >> ### 5. **Broader Historical Insights** > >> - **Cycles of Corruption and Reform:** Political systems often > >> experience cycles where corruption accumulates until it triggers > >> violence or reform, only to repeat in new forms (e.g., the Roman > >> Empire's fall or Latin American dictatorships in the 20th century). > >> - **Role of Leadership and Movements:** Effective leadership and > >> well-organized movements often determine whether change occurs > >> peacefully or through violence. > >> - **Global Trends:** External pressures, such as economic > >> sanctions or global public opinion, can expedite resolutions but may > >> also exacerbate conflict. > >> > >> ### Lessons for Today > >> The patterns of political violence around corrupt leaders underscore > >> the importance of: > >> - Inclusive governance to address grievances before they escalate. > >> - Strong institutions that resist corruption and ensure legitimacy. > >> - Global and regional mechanisms to mediate conflicts and promote > >> peaceful transitions. > >> > >> Do you want to explore examples in more detail or focus on a > >> particular region or time period? > >> > > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / > ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ > ____________________________________________ CEO Founder, Simtable.com stephen.gue...@simtable.com Harvard Visualization Research and Teaching Lab stephengue...@fas.harvard.edu mobile: (505)577-5828
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
