Yes, it does.

(This is actually one of the topics I tend to beat to death, so...)

It's not unique to AI or to any other industry or organization.

Broadly, in the competition to climb the ladder of success in a hierarchical system, an individual must continually make choices.

A person with honor, integrity and/or empathy will have some number of possible choices that they'll eliminate immediately, even if they're strategically superior, simply because their moral standards won't allow for them.

People without any of those qualities, which is to say psychopaths and sociopaths, are not similarly constrained. They're wholly willing and able to choose the most personally beneficial course of action, entirely regardless of the harm it might do others.

So all other things being more or less equal, psychopaths and sociopaths actually have a competitive advantage in hierarchical systems, so for all intents and purposes, hierarchical systems actually reward and effectively select for antisocial personality disorder.

Yeah... that's what I was waiting for...

More precisely, it depends on the moral compass of five psychopaths.

Trump wants to throw algae pool ‘vandals’ in jail. He’s desperate stupid insane.

ftfyb

And right on schedule, Israel engages in a bit of genocidal sleight-of-hand, distracting from their atrocities against one neighbor by increasing them against another.

It'll be Yemen's turn next.

Certainly.

But part of their strategy for doing that is to regularly shift their focus, which also shifts the focus of the rest of the world, which invariably takes a while to fully catch up, which gives Israel a period of essentially free rein to engage in murder on a particularly grand scale.

Then when the rest of the world catches up and the condemnation for their current main mass murder gets loud enough and pointed enough to potentially be a problem, they suddenly shift their focus again.

If you look back through the news, you'll even find that they follow the same order each time - Gaza to the West Bank to Lebanon to Syria to Yemen to Gaza.

Too bad science no longer plays a part in political decision-making.

Every politician or industrilaist who is an active part of the US's attempts to pretend that climate change is not real should be charged with crimes against humanity and, when convicted, should face the full and unfettered consequences due their brazen and callous evil.

Trump and the Republicans want to kill poor people.

And by design, if you're not willing or able to work that much, you'll have no safety net, so you'll either die or at least end up homeless, and once homelessness is fully criminalized (as is happening piecemeal around the country) that means you'll end up in prison, as a slave working that many hours anyway.

They're actively recreating the Middle Ages, just with a somewhat different propertied class.

Israel isn't foolish. Israel is insane.

As intended.

Was the uranium just a false justification for punishing Iran's economic independence?

It didn't even rise to that.

Trump wanted a war - any war - in part because his ego is entirely focused on his legacy and he thinks that being a "wartime president" will be a good thing, and in part to dustract from the Epstein Files and the risk that he'd be exposed as a serial child rapist.

He wanted that specific war because Bibi told him it'd be a cake walk - that he could just blow in like in Venezuela and take out the Ayatollah and the government would collapse, and then he could get Narges Mohammadi out of prison and she'd be so grateful she'd give him her Nobel medal, and then Trump would be the bestest President ever because he'd have two Nobels.

The Republicans have never cared if the poor die. That's a basic part of their ideology.

This is different though. Starting with DOGE and continuing unabated since, Trump and his Republican lackeys (and his fascist handlers) have clearly deliberately gone out of their way to arrange things not so that poor people might die but so that they will die.

What they want are tons of poor, desperate voters and workers.

Which is exactly what will be left over after they kill off as many "undesirables" as possible.

It was never America's war.

More obviously than about any war in modern memory, this was a war of the oligarchs - of Trump and Netanyahu and the Republicans and the Zionists - of Palantir and AIPAC and Raytheon and OpenAI.

The American people fought it and will end up paying for it, but it was never their war.

Kick people off unemployment = they don’t count as unemployed.

Hmm...

Yes - this is true. And it's essentially 100% guaranted that unemployment, measured honestly, is going nowhere but up.

And with the midterms coming up...

Yes - this seems more likely to be the primary motivation.

Right, but they also went out of their way to drum up as much public support as they could first. Granted that it was all lies and greed and corruption, at least they went through the motions of trying to make it a war the people supported.

Trump didn't even bother to do that much.

Even though it's just two variations on awful, there is a difference between pretending that the people matter and not even bothering to do that.

Oh, they're not planning on killing all of the poor people. Just the unemployed ones.

And with employment protections gone, their conception of undesirables - non-cis and/or non-white - will be over-represented among the unemployed.

And not even all of them will die, but the survivors will have no safety net so will end up homeless, and with homelessness criminalized, they'll be sentenced to private prisons/workhouses and be corporate slave labor.

Basically, they want to cull the herd - just eliminate the people who won't serve an immediate purpose in their planned technofeudalism.

Yow.

Raskin might have just painted a much more serious target on his back - simply expelling him might not be enough for the fascists any more.

Hopefully some more congress critters will grow a backbone and join him.

What you're describing is neither platformism nor synthesis.

Platformism and synthesis are both formalized ideas that some third party(ies) will be empowered to oversee and direct an anarchistic system, with the only difference being that platformism starts by decreeing the norms that will be required, while synthesis ar least vaguely nods toward anarchism by ceding the fact that no norms will ever be universally voluntarily held, but still then goes on to posit some body given oversight over the collective, and merely stipulates that they'll "allow" multiple viewpoints.

What you're describing is just individual interaction, which is in fact the only thing that anarchism can be based on. Yes - if the system is truly anarchistic, you'll be free to ally yourself with whoever you might prefer on whatever basis you might prefer, as, of necessity, will everyone else.

Platformism and synthesis are not ways in which you might choose to pursue that, but ways in which the entire process might be "organized." They're explicitly top-down ideas, which is exactly how and why they both fail.