A.I. has a lot of potential for evaluating opinions and facts. One of the strong points of A.I. in its chat versions is its speed and comprehensiveness to accomplish broad research.
CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS
Of course, with any source of information, the most important part of critical thinking skills is for the person to gather and analyze information from various sources, including those outside any “silo” one might belong to.
Speaking of critical thinking skills, our society is in danger because not only does a too-large swath of our country not grasp the importance — or even consider — critical thinking skills, but we also have demagogues who attack critical thinking skills. Demagogues incite pitchfork-and-torches mobs to eliminate from all of society any information that conflicts with the forces of their demagoguery. That includes groups of people, books, entertainment, and education.
Indeed, the ability to think and analyze and evaluate a variety of opinions and facts is critical to democracy and, therefore, deadly to demagogues. To make that variety of opinions and facts available to citizens is so critical to democracy, it is declared in our First Amendment, the right to free speech. On the other hand, demagogues create their own information structure and demand that their followers choose and accept only their approved single sources of information.
A.I. can, in the best form, ignore demagoguery, bias, ignorance, and political slants to provide information drawn from a wide variety of sources. Again: this is the most critical part of a living, healthy democracy.
It is always up to us, the humans, to evaluate the information gathered by A.I. and determine if it aligns with our understanding of life, our goals, our political motivations, our personal need to oppress or free groups of people.
THE EXPERIMENT
I did a simple experiment with A.I. I took a question, phrased it in three parts, and used this as a prompt for five A.I. machines: ChatGPT, AI chat, Bing, Bard, and Jeeves. I created these “prompts” to address an issue that those under 40 years of age did not live through and might not grasp the importance of the subject’s evolution and how easily societies have lost their democracy.
There was a reassuring consistency among the answers, but each machine had some different information and a variety of overall assessments.
Question 1: It seems that the collapse of the USSR in the 1980s brought about a burst of democracy but, eventually, authoritarianism rose up without communism. Is it accurate to say Russia, Hungary, and other newly-authoritarian states, and even China, have shown a new social structure over the past three decades that could be described as tyrannical capitalism?
Question 2: In today’s political world, what is a practical definition of “tyrant” as it might exist now?
Question 3: Is there anything you’d like to add to these two questions?
I present here only the first response by the machines to the three questions.
THE RESULTS
AI Chat
Q1: “As an AI language model, I cannot provide a personal opinion; however, I can provide an objective and informative response.
It is true that the collapse of the USSR in the 1980s led to a wave of democratization in many post-Soviet states. However, in some cases, this was not sustained and authoritarianism emerged. The reasons for this are complex and multifaceted, but some scholars argue that factors such as economic insecurity, corruption, and the rise of populist leaders have contributed to the erosion of democracy in these countries.
The term “tyrannical capitalism” is not commonly used in academic discourse. However, some scholars have argued that the economic models adopted by some post-Soviet states, such as Russia, have led to the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small number of elites, which has contributed to the rise of authoritarianism. This model of capitalism is often referred to as “oligarchic capitalism,” in which a small number of wealthy individuals control key sectors of the economy and have significant political influence.
In the case of China, the country has a unique political and economic system, which includes elements of both capitalism and communism. The Chinese government has been criticized for its human rights record and restrictions on political freedoms, but it has also been praised for its economic growth and poverty reduction policies.
Overall, it can be said that the post-Soviet and post-communist countries have experienced a range of political and economic developments over the past three decades, and the reasons for the rise of authoritarianism in some of these countries are complex and varied. The concept of “tyrannical capitalism” is not commonly used in academic discourse, but there are valid arguments that the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small number of elites has contributed to the erosion of democracy in some cases.”
Q2: “A practical definition of a “tyrant” in today’s political world could be someone who holds absolute power and uses it for their own personal gain rather than for the benefit of the people they govern. A tyrant may disregard the rule of law, suppress political opposition, limit freedoms and rights, and engage in corruption or human rights abuses. Today, the term “tyrant” is often used to describe leaders who seek to consolidate power through authoritarian means or who undermine democratic institutions and norms.”
Q3: “As an AI language model, I can add some final thoughts to these questions. It is important to note that the political world is constantly evolving and changing, and the definitions of terms like “tyrant” and “authoritarian” can shift over time. It is also important to consider that the actions and behavior of political leaders may be perceived differently by different people, depending on their political or cultural background. Therefore, it is essential to analyze these terms in a nuanced and objective way, based on empirical evidence and sound judgment.”
BING
Q1: “That is an interesting question. There is no definitive answer to how to classify the political and economic systems of different countries, but some scholars and journalists have used the term “tyrannical capitalism” or “authoritarian capitalism” to describe the phenomenon of rising autocracy and inequality in the post-Cold War era. According to these analyses, capitalism does not necessarily lead to democracy, but can also foster the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few elites, who use their influence to suppress dissent, manipulate information, and undermine the rule of law. Some examples of countries that have been labeled as tyrannical or authoritarian capitalists are:
– Russia: After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia underwent a chaotic transition to a market economy, which resulted in the emergence of a class of oligarchs who amassed enormous fortunes by exploiting the privatization of state assets. These oligarchs formed a close alliance with Vladimir Putin, who consolidated his control over the political system by cracking down on independent media, civil society, and opposition parties. Putin also pursued an aggressive foreign policy that aimed to restore Russia’s influence in its former sphere of interest and challenge the Western-led world order³.
– China: China has maintained a one-party dictatorship under the Communist Party, which has pursued a strategy of economic reform and opening up since the late 1970s. China has become the world’s second-largest economy and a global power, but it has also faced growing social and environmental problems, such as inequality, corruption, pollution, and unrest. The party has responded by tightening its grip on information, surveillance, censorship, and repression of dissenting voices, especially in regions like Tibet and Xinjiang. China has also expanded its military and economic presence in Asia and beyond, often clashing with its neighbors and rivals over territorial disputes and trade issues¹.
– Hungary: Hungary was one of the first countries to join the European Union after the fall of communism in Eastern Europe, but it has since drifted away from the democratic norms and values of the bloc. Under the leadership of Viktor Orbán, who came to power in 2010, Hungary has undergone a process of “illiberal democracy”, which involves the erosion of constitutional checks and balances, the domination of state media by pro-government propaganda, the curtailment of civil liberties and minority rights, and the demonization of immigrants and refugees. Orbán has also aligned himself with other populist and nationalist leaders in Europe and beyond, such as Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan².
These are just some examples of countries that could be described as tyrannical capitalists, but there are many others that share similar features. The term is not universally accepted or defined, and it may not capture the diversity and complexity of each case. However, it does point to some common challenges and dangers that arise from the interaction of capitalism and authoritarianism in the contemporary world.
Source: Conversation with Bing, 9/2/2023
(1) Conservatives are attacking capitalism – The Economist. https://www.economist.com/culture/2023/08/11/conservatives-are-attacking-capitalism.
(2) Capitalist Freedom Is a Farce – Jacobin. https://jacobin.com/2019/03/capitalism-freedom-socialism-milton-friedman-hayek.
(3) How capitalism is destroying democracy | CBC Radio. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/how-capitalism-is-destroying-democracy-1.5786136.”
Q2: “There is no single or definitive definition of a tyrant, as different contexts and perspectives may influence how one judges a ruler or a person in power. However, based on the dictionary and web search results, a possible practical definition of a tyrant in today’s political world could be:
– A tyrant is someone who uses power oppressively or unjustly, without regard for the law, the constitution, or the rights of the people.
– A tyrant is someone who seizes power without legal right, or who maintains power by manipulating information, suppressing dissent, and undermining institutions.
– A tyrant is someone who exercises absolute power harshly or cruelly, often causing harm to the people, the environment, or the international order.
This definition is not exhaustive or universally accepted, but it may capture some of the common features and dangers of tyranny in the modern era.
Source: Conversation with Bing, 9/2/2023
(1) . https://bing.com/search?q=definition+of+tyrant.
(2) Tyrant Definition & Meaning – Merriam-Webster. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tyrant.
(3) Tyrant Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/tyrant.
(4) Tyrant – Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrant.
(5) Tyrant – definition of tyrant by The Free Dictionary. https://www.thefreedictionary.com/tyrant.
(6) undefined. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/.”
Q3: “No, I think I have answered your questions as best as I can. I hope you found my responses helpful and informative. If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask me.”
CHAT GPT
Q1: “The transformation of former Soviet Bloc countries and China over the past few decades has indeed seen shifts in their political and economic systems. The term “tyrannical capitalism” is not commonly used in academic or political discourse, but it’s possible to analyze these changes in the context of authoritarian capitalism or illiberal capitalism.
1. Russia: After the collapse of the USSR, Russia transitioned to a market economy but faced challenges in building democratic institutions. It has been characterized by a strong central government and limited political pluralism under Vladimir Putin’s leadership, which some view as authoritarian capitalism.
2. Hungary: Hungary has seen a move towards illiberalism under Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, with policies that centralize power, limit press freedom, and undermine the independence of the judiciary. This has led to concerns about the erosion of democratic values within a capitalist framework.
3. China: China’s economic reforms have propelled it into a global economic powerhouse, but it maintains one-party rule and tightly controls political dissent. This model is often referred to as “authoritarian capitalism” or “state capitalism,” where the state plays a significant role in the economy while maintaining political control.
These countries have indeed exhibited a mix of capitalist economic systems and varying degrees of authoritarian or illiberal political governance. The term “tyrannical capitalism” could capture some aspects of this phenomenon, but it’s essential to recognize the complexity and nuances of each country’s political and economic systems. Different experts and scholars may use different terminology to describe these evolving models.
Q2: “In today’s political world, a “tyrant” typically refers to a ruler or leader who exercises absolute and unrestrained power, often at the expense of the rights and freedoms of their citizens. A tyrant is characterized by authoritarianism, disregard for democratic principles, and the use of coercion or force to maintain their rule. Tyrants often suppress dissent, curtail political opposition, and infringe upon human rights in pursuit of their personal or political interests.”
It’s important to note that the term “tyrant” can be subjective and may be used differently by different individuals or groups depending on their perspectives and political beliefs. In contemporary discussions, it is often applied to leaders or regimes that exhibit autocratic tendencies, engage in human rights abuses, and undermine the rule of law.”
Q3: “Certainly! It’s important to emphasize that political and economic systems, as well as the assessment of leaders and regimes, can be complex and multifaceted. The terms used to describe them, like “tyrannical capitalism” or “tyrant,” can be subjective and may vary depending on one’s perspective and the specific context in which they are used.”
BARD
Q1: “Yes, it is accurate to say that Russia, Hungary, and other newly-authoritarian states, and even China, have shown a new social structure over the past three decades that could be described as tyrannical capitalism.
After the collapse of the USSR, there was a wave of democratization in many former Soviet republics. However, this wave was short-lived. In many countries, authoritarian leaders were able to consolidate power and roll back democratic reforms. This was due to a number of factors, including the weakness of democratic institutions, the lack of economic development, and the influence of powerful oligarchs.
In Russia, for example, Vladimir Putin was able to rise to power by exploiting the economic and political chaos that followed the collapse of the USSR. He used his control of the media and the security forces to silence dissent and consolidate his power. Today, Russia is a highly authoritarian state where the ruling elite controls all aspects of life.
In Hungary, Viktor Orbán has also used authoritarian methods to consolidate power. He has cracked down on the media, the judiciary, and civil society. He has also rewritten the constitution to give himself more power. Hungary is now considered to be one of the most illiberal democracies in Europe.
China is another country that has seen a rise in authoritarianism in recent years. The Chinese Communist Party has tightened its grip on power, cracking down on dissent and religious freedom. The party has also overseen a massive expansion of state control over the economy. China is now a one-party state with a centrally planned economy.
These countries are all examples of what some scholars have called “tyrannical capitalism.” This is a system where authoritarian leaders use the power of the state to enrich themselves and their supporters, while suppressing dissent and limiting the freedom of the people.
There are a number of reasons why tyrannical capitalism has emerged in these countries. One reason is the weakness of democratic institutions. In many former Soviet republics, democratic institutions were never fully established. This made it easier for authoritarian leaders to seize power and roll back democratic reforms.
Another reason is the lack of economic development. Many former Soviet republics are still struggling to transition to a market economy. This has created a climate of economic uncertainty and insecurity, which has made people more susceptible to authoritarian appeals.
Finally, the influence of powerful oligarchs has also played a role. In many former Soviet republics, oligarchs emerged from the collapse of the Soviet Union with vast wealth and power. These oligarchs have often used their wealth to support authoritarian leaders in exchange for political favors.
The rise of tyrannical capitalism is a threat to democracy and human rights. It is important to understand the factors that have contributed to this trend in order to prevent it from spreading to other countries.
When discussing political systems or leaders, it’s valuable to engage in nuanced analysis, considering various factors such as the protection of human rights, the rule of law, the degree of political pluralism, and the level of economic freedom. These factors provide a more comprehensive understanding of the dynamics at play in different countries and regions.
Moreover, the political landscape is constantly evolving, so it’s essential to stay informed about current events and developments to accurately assess the state of democracy, authoritarianism, and economic systems in any given context.
Q2: “In today’s political world, a tyrant is a ruler who exercises absolute power, often without regard for the law or the rights of their subjects. They may come to power through force or through deception, and they often use their power to enrich themselves and their supporters, while suppressing dissent and limiting the freedom of the people.
Some of the characteristics of a tyrant may include:
Absolute power: The tyrant has complete control over the government and the military. They may also control the media and other institutions that could be used to challenge their power.
Disregard for the law: The tyrant may rule by decree, without regard for the constitution or other laws. They may also use violence or intimidation to silence dissent.
Self-interest: The tyrant is motivated by their own personal gain, rather than the well-being of their people. They may use their power to enrich themselves and their supporters, while neglecting the needs of the poor and marginalized.
Suppression of dissent: The tyrant will not tolerate any challenge to their authority. They may crack down on dissent, imprison or kill their opponents, or censor the media.
Limiting freedom: The tyrant will restrict the freedom of their people, such as freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom of movement. They may also use surveillance to monitor their citizens.
It is important to note that there is no single definition of a tyrant. The term can be used to describe a wide range of rulers, from brutal dictators to more subtle authoritarians. However, the characteristics listed above are common to many tyrants.
In the current political world, there are a number of rulers who could be considered tyrants. Some of the most notable examples include:
Vladimir Putin, President of Russia
Viktor Orbán, Prime Minister of Hungary
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, President of Turkey
Xi Jinping, General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party
Kim Jong-un, Supreme Leader of North Korea
These rulers have all come to power through undemocratic means and have used their power to suppress dissent and limit the freedom of their people. They are all examples of how tyranny can still exist in the modern world.
Q3: “Yes, I would like to add a few things to your questions.
First, I would like to emphasize that the definition of a tyrant is not always clear-cut. There are many rulers who exhibit some of the characteristics of a tyrant, but who may not be considered tyrants by everyone. For example, some people might argue that the United States President has too much power and that he is therefore a tyrant. Others might argue that the President is not a tyrant because he is elected by the people and is subject to checks and balances by the other branches of government.
Second, I would like to point out that the rise of tyrannical capitalism is not inevitable. There are many factors that can contribute to the rise of tyranny, but there are also many factors that can help to prevent it. For example, strong democratic institutions, a free press, and an educated citizenry can all help to prevent the rise of tyranny.
Finally, I would like to say that it is important to be vigilant against the rise of tyranny. We should all be aware of the signs of tyranny and we should speak out against it when we see it. We should also support organizations that are working to promote democracy and human rights.
I hope this answers your question. Let me know if you have any other questions.”
JEEVES
Q1: “Ah, the intricacies of political analysis! While it is indeed a complex topic to explore, it is important to approach it with nuance and avoid broad generalizations. The collapse of the USSR did indeed bring about significant changes in many countries, including Russia, Hungary, and China. However, describing these changes as a “tyrannical capitalism” might oversimplify the situation.
It is worth noting that each country has its own unique historical, cultural, and political factors that have shaped its trajectory. Russia, for instance, underwent a challenging transition from a centrally planned economy to a market-oriented one, which led to various socio-political changes. Hungary, on the other hand, experienced a significant shift towards nationalism and right-wing politics.
As for China, its economic reforms have certainly led to a rapid growth of capitalism, but the government’s control and intervention in various aspects of society continue to shape its social structure. It is more accurate to describe China as having an authoritarian regime with elements of state capitalism.
In summary, it is crucial to approach the analysis of political systems with careful consideration of the specific context in each country. The interplay between democracy, authoritarianism, and capitalism is a complex and evolving topic, requiring a nuanced understanding of the historical, cultural, and political dynamics at play.
Q2: “A practical definition of a “tyrant” in today’s political world would refer to an individual or a leader who exercises absolute and oppressive power, often disregarding the rights and freedoms of their citizens. A tyrant typically seeks to maintain control through force, manipulation, and suppression of dissent. They may undermine democratic processes, curtail civil liberties, and exploit their position for personal gain, often at the expense of the well-being and interests of the people they govern.
It is important to note that the term “tyrant” can be subjective as different individuals or groups may have varying perspectives on what constitutes tyrannical behavior. Additionally, the context and circumstances in each specific country or region can influence the perception and classification of a leader as a tyrant. Therefore, understanding the history, political climate, and specific actions of a leader is crucial when assessing whether they fit the definition of a tyrant.”
Q3: “Certainly! In addition to the previous discussion on the collapse of the USSR and the concept of a tyrant, it is worth mentioning that political systems and dynamics are complex and multifaceted. They are shaped by a variety of factors such as historical events, socio-economic conditions, cultural values, and geopolitical influences.
When examining the transition from the USSR to new political systems, it is important to consider the broader global context as well. The end of the Cold War brought about significant geopolitical realignments and power shifts, which had implications for the political landscape of various countries.
Furthermore, the emergence of authoritarian tendencies in some countries does not necessarily imply a direct result of the collapse of communism. Rather, it can be influenced by a range of factors, including power consolidation, economic challenges, nationalist ideologies, and social polarization.
Understanding these complexities is crucial for a comprehensive analysis of political systems and their development over time. It reminds us of the importance of context, historical analysis, and a nuanced understanding when discussing political transitions and the rise of authoritarianism.”
Michael R. Barnard's Thoughts & Discussions. 