[FRIAM] Language Models and the End of Programming
Some of you will likely be interested in yesterday’s ACM tech talk by Matt Welsh > > Language Models and the End of Programming > You can either watch For On-Demand access to this TechTalk, please visit https://acm-org.zoom.us/rec/share/6fKQ5JsSPrBcM4fqGDLZb227t6q-vDxVHFSMBEEiZMAAZ7duU8O5XO0z-Z_K3duh.6-fbKSt3B_O_uDWB?startTime=1683648021000 or You can now download the slides here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P-X0uPxjY_njAytN-_NYwX9JqgPDd_aG/view?usp=share_link __ Ed Angel Founding Director, Art, Research, Technology and Science Laboratory (ARTS Lab) Professor Emeritus of Computer Science, University of New Mexico 1017 Sierra Pinon Santa Fe, NM 87501 505-984-0136 (home) edward.an...@gmail.com 505-453-4944 (cell) http://www.cs.unm.edu/~angel -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . 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/
Re: [FRIAM] Paxton's stages as a dynamical system
Not all movements are fascist movements. A key difference is if they accept violence as a legitimate tool or not. The Nazi party started with violent street fights and ended in a violent world war. Robert Paxton and Hannah Arndt both emphasize the use of violence and terror in totalitarian systems. Hannah Arendt and Juan José Linz agree that far-right Nazism and far-left Soviet Communism were similar phenomena. Linz writes "Stalinism and fascism, in spite of a deep difference in social foundations, are symmetrical phenomena. In many of their features they show a deadly similarity." (in his book "Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes").One of the similarities besides the propaganda in a dictatorial one-party system was the use of terror and violence. In smaller movements the use of violence usually leads to terrorist groups. In West Germany where I was born we had the RAF (Red Army Faction) at the time of the Cold War which was a far-left terrorist group that used violence to achieve their political aims. It was supported by the KGB in Eastern Germany, the zone occupied by Russia where Putin started his career.-J. Original message From: Prof David West Date: 5/11/23 2:32 AM (GMT+01:00) To: friam@redfish.com Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Paxton's stages as a dynamical system Once upon a time, I was a card carrying (metaphorically) bomb making (literally), persecuted (FBI and CIA in Japan) revolutionary.I was also an acid head, free love, hippy.The "card carrying" part denotes my membership in / participation in a "movement." The Paxton quote you shared —the creation of movements, he describes in chapter 2 a set of mobilizing passions which are "the emotional lava that set fascism’s foundations": from "a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional solutions" to "the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external" — would certainly apply to that movement. United states, circa 1964-1972.To the extent that my observation is 'valid'; and the quote is representative of Paxton (have not read) then all movements are fascist whether they originated from the "left" or the "right."davewOn Wed, May 10, 2023, at 3:19 PM, Jochen Fromm wrote:Yes, Robert Paxton tries to describe the essence of fascism in his book. While Hannah Arendt and Erich Fromm described fascism in Germany, and Stanley G. Payne is an expert for fascism in Spain, Robert Paxton is an expert for fascism in France during German occupation in WW II. He argues that it can reach different stages, just like the 5 stages of cancer in various degrees of severity. Chapter 2 to 6 in Paxton's book are dedicated to the 5 stages. Each chapter describes one stage, and one stage is a prerequisite for the next. The 5 stages are:(1) the creation of movements(2) their rooting in the political system(3) their seizure of power(4) the exercise of power (5) radicalization For the 1st stage, the creation of movements, he describes in chapter 2 a set of mobilizing passions which are "the emotional lava that set fascism’s foundations": from "a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional solutions" to "the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external".In the final chapter 8 Paxton finally gives a definition of fascism and argues that "fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion".He argues that violence is a important hallmark of fascism: "the legitimation of violence against a demonized internal enemy brings us close to the heart of fascism" and that it would be "a phenomenon of failed democracies".-J. Original message From: glen Date: 5/10/23 4:47 PM (GMT+01:00)To: friam@redfish.comSubject: Re: [FRIAM] Paxton's stages as a dynamical systemI haven't read Anatomy of Fascism. But one of the things I worry about, even though I make my career from it, is arguing by analogy. It sounds like Paxton is attempting to essentialize fascism. Is that the case? We've explored, a bit on this list, some problems with essentialism and reductionism. While it's good to de-universalize a concept (because if it applies everywhere, then it's not useful), that specificity in denotation (e.g. Islamists not being fascist) can be made observationally or constructively/axiomatically. In alignment with Feynman, if you
Re: [FRIAM] Paxton's stages as a dynamical system
Thanks. I'm still concerned it sounds more like diagnostic criteria from, say, the DSM-V than something that could be axiomatically generated in a simulation. My guess is, as relatively specific as it is (compared to say Eco's Ur-Fascism), it's too robust a (set of) phenomena. I.e. the space of possible generators that can generate Fascism, as defined, is computationally too huge to make any kind of constructive project feasible. If that's the case, then by talking about it as a dynamical system, you'd need to commit to allowing at least some structural features of the dynamical system remain *latent*, occult, never understandable except through indirect markers. Perhaps *some* mechanisms could be built (e.g. violence). So you'd have a composite system, one part opaque oracle (perhaps with randomly generated mechanisms) and one part axiomatic. On 5/10/23 14:19, Jochen Fromm wrote: Yes, Robert Paxton tries to describe the essence of fascism in his book. While Hannah Arendt and Erich Fromm described fascism in Germany, and Stanley G. Payne is an expert for fascism in Spain, Robert Paxton is an expert for fascism in France during German occupation in WW II. He argues that it can reach different stages, just like the 5 stages of cancer in various degrees of severity. Chapter 2 to 6 in Paxton's book are dedicated to the 5 stages. Each chapter describes one stage, and one stage is a prerequisite for the next. The 5 stages are: (1) the creation of movements (2) their rooting in the political system (3) their seizure of power (4) the exercise of power (5) radicalization For the 1st stage, the creation of movements, he describes in chapter 2 a set of mobilizing passions which are "the emotional lava that set fascism’s foundations": from "a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional solutions" to "the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external". In the final chapter 8 Paxton finally gives a definition of fascism and argues that "fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion". He argues that violence is a important hallmark of fascism: "the legitimation of violence against a demonized internal enemy brings us close to the heart of fascism" and that it would be "a phenomenon of failed democracies". -J. Original message From: glen Date: 5/10/23 4:47 PM (GMT+01:00) To: friam@redfish.com Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Paxton's stages as a dynamical system I haven't read Anatomy of Fascism. But one of the things I worry about, even though I make my career from it, is arguing by analogy. It sounds like Paxton is attempting to essentialize fascism. Is that the case? We've explored, a bit on this list, some problems with essentialism and reductionism. While it's good to de-universalize a concept (because if it applies everywhere, then it's not useful), that specificity in denotation (e.g. Islamists not being fascist) can be made observationally or constructively/axiomatically. In alignment with Feynman, if you can't construct the phenomenon, then you don't understand it. Of course, I know Paxton can't (and wouldn't) construct a fascist society. That's why simulation is a good thing. 8^D But does Anatomy of Fascism read as a recipe, a how-to? Or is it more like a collection of observational case studies? On 5/10/23 03:41, Jochen Fromm wrote: > I don't know much about South Africa but one direction towards higher stages of Paxton's fascism scale is certainly democratic backsliding. Democratic backsliding can happen if a country is in a deep crisis and has a "strongman" leader which longs to stay in power. Orban in Hungary, Erdoğan in Turkey and Netanyahu in Israel have eroded democracy in their countries because they wanted to stay in power at all costs. Ruth Ben-Ghiat wrote about it in her book "Strongmen" [1]. > > The more interesting aspect is to view it as a disorder of the system. Already Plato considered tyranny as a disease and disorder of a state [2]. He defined a tyrant as a person who rules without law, using extreme and cruel methods against both his own people and others. In a tyranny, the city is enslaved to the tyrant, who is in turn a slave to his desires and uses his guards to remove social elements and individuals that pose a threat to retain power. He will also provoke warfare to consolidate his position as leader. Aristotle says tyranny is a selfish rule by a single
Re: [FRIAM] Paxton's stages as a dynamical system
I tend to favor evolutionary explanations for human behavior. Paxton's analysis characterizes Putin's actions as part of a fascist process, involving the interaction of a mass movement, a charismatic leader, and a complicit elite. Putin has cultivated a devoted following around his persona and his political party, United Russia, which dominates the political system and suppresses any opposition. He has exploited the sense of crisis and humiliation following the Soviet Union's collapse, promoting a nationalist and conservative agenda that resonates with many Russians. Putin has demonstrated disdain for democratic norms and human rights, employing violence and intimidation against his critics and opponents. He has also intervened militarily in neighboring countries, including Georgia, Ukraine, and Syria, to assert Russia's interests and influence. >From an evolutionary perspective, Putin's behavior exemplifies intergroup aggression or coalitional violence, which are forms of hostility or violence between groups or coalitions of individuals. Putin has formed a group based on shared identity or interests, such as Russian ethnicity, culture, or religion, and has competed with other groups for resources or status, such as land, oil, or power. He has also employed psychological mechanisms, such as ingroup bias, outgroup derogation, or dehumanization, to rationalize and facilitate his aggression towards other groups. He has also cooperated and coordinated with others based on shared objectives or values, such as security, stability, or sovereignty, using violence or threats as a means of achieving them. Additionally, he has adhered to cultural norms, such as honor, loyalty, or revenge, to regulate and motivate his violence against other coalitions. These two perspectives may complement or conflict with one another in various ways. For example, Paxton's perspective may underscore the role of ideology and politics in Putin's behavior, while evolutionary perspectives may focus on the biological and psychological factors underlying Putin's actions. Paxton's view may also center on the contextual and historical factors shaping Putin's actions, while evolutionary perspectives may focus on the general and universal factors influencing Putin's actions. Paxton's outlook may offer a more critical and normative evaluation of Putin's actions, whereas evolutionary perspectives may provide a more descriptive and explanatory account of Putin's actions. On Thu, 11 May 2023 at 05:12, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Emotional lava at a lower temperature is rock. Fascism aims to create a > rock, not lava -- the fascia that ties many into one immutable, > controllable entity. Organizations and communities reduce mixing -- some > folks are in, some folks are out. These "solids" should at least be > porous, or they are unfair and exclusionary. Better to keep a society in > liquid form to the extent possible. > -- > *From:* Friam on behalf of Prof David West < > profw...@fastmail.fm> > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 10, 2023 6:33 PM > *To:* friam@redfish.com > *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Paxton's stages as a dynamical system > > Once upon a time, I was a card carrying (metaphorically) bomb making > (literally), persecuted (FBI and CIA in Japan) revolutionary. > > I was also an acid head, free love, hippy. > > The "card carrying" part denotes my membership in / participation in a > "movement." The Paxton quote you shared — > the creation of movements, he describes in chapter 2 a set of mobilizing > passions which are "the emotional lava that set fascism’s foundations": > from "a sense of overwhelming crisis beyond the reach of any traditional > solutions" to "the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that > justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, > both internal and external" — would certainly apply to that movement. > United states, circa 1964-1972. > > To the extent that my observation is 'valid'; and the quote is > representative of Paxton (have not read) then all movements are fascist > whether they originated from the "left" or the "right." > > davew > > On Wed, May 10, 2023, at 3:19 PM, Jochen Fromm wrote: > > Yes, Robert Paxton tries to describe the essence of fascism in his book. > While Hannah Arendt and Erich Fromm described fascism in Germany, and > Stanley G. Payne is an expert for fascism in Spain, Robert Paxton is an > expert for fascism in France during German occupation in WW II. He argues > that it can reach different stages, just like the 5 stages of cancer in > various degrees of severity. > > Chapter 2 to 6 in Paxton's book are dedicated to the 5 stages. Each > chapter describes one stage, and one stage is a prerequisite for the next. > The 5 stages are: > (1) the creation of movements > (2) their rooting in the political system > (3) their seizure of power > (4) the exercise of power > (5) radicalization > > For the 1st stage, the creation of
