Here’s another AI exercise with my new, free friend ChatGPT, who hangs around on the internet waiting for me to call. Of course, there is human agency involved (me) — I set it up with a series of questions I’ve been thinking about as I follow the ‘Abundance’ debate. Here’s the complete transcript, including two other [Your Name] op/eds in Atlantic and Jacobin styles, respectively. The op/ed above was requested in ‘polemic’ style — the other two are calmer.
The debate is important because I think it surfaces the development (and perhaps early-stage testing?) of a ‘neo-narrative’ to camouflage the continuation of status quo neoliberalism. A neo-narrative that is acceptable to moderate Democrats would appear to be critical to at least partially unify the party (which is apparently close to ‘civil war’) in preparation for the 2026 midterms. Or so it seems to me, as an outside observer and non-expert.
Btw, in case it’s mysterious why I’m following this stuff at all (when I’d rather be doing detailed analyses of technical aspects of federal infrastructure loan programs, where I do have some expertise), here’s a super-short explanation: My big goal is to see a reformation of federal infrastructure finance — explicit policy objectives with a major expansion of capacity and capabilities. That’s not going to happen until & unless American public infrastructure — and the federal role in it — becomes an important issue in the context of ideological battles over neoliberal status quo or post-neoliberal reform. So, I try to understand how the overall picture is developing, as best I can. Also, it’s just all kind of interesting, no?
This particular ChatGPT ‘discussion’ was, to be honest, more for amusement than enlightenment. I was almost asking the poor thing to bash itself & its makers (which no doubt it would do cheerfully for much harsher questions, up to a pre-programmed point anyway). But as usual, there’s a slightly disturbing element. The whole exercise took about ten minutes and the op/eds aren’t bad — what does this say about the way that future multi-media ‘narratives’ will be developed and refined by serious professionals? Or the effectiveness of those ‘narratives’ in fundamental social and economic battles? Something is very new here — historical parallels about the printing press, radio, etc. may not be applicable. I don’t know, and I doubt anyone else does either. But we’ll find out, maybe soon.