happy to be presented with counterevidence
offer people what AI cannot offer: relationships, fun, belonging, relief. If your political organizing is less enjoyable than talking to a chatbot, people will stick to the chatbot.
How do you explain to yourself that religious and spiritual people are the drivers of mainstream politics and new political ideologies, while atheists/modernists/disenchanted are pretty much either irrelevant or clinging desperately to their position of vaning power, paralyzed, and often depressed?
did you ever organize a strike in a big company?
You live in a world of fantasy. Fascists are taking over the whole of the West. Do something about it and stop larping.
You're fetishizing Non-Westeners because the strategy you want to use work there and not here, and instead of changing strategy, you project yourself into a different context. The article is clearly about the Global North, for which what you described has failed over and over. You make politics with the people you have, not with the people you would like to have. Blaming workers for not being receptive to your strategies is delusional.
for me it is freely accessible. I didn't know there was a paywall
Not sure what kind of humans you know, but nobody likes for a stranger to get there, push their political opinions, call it science, say it's for their good, and imply you know fuckshit in the process. It's fine for edgy debates on the internet, but it doesn't fly to build relationships in the real world. Especially if on the other side there's somebody saying "You're fine as you are, come with me, I will make you rich."
For the same reason we don't use tractors in union organizing, we also don't use AI.
because your coworkers are more likely not leftist and talking about ideological points doesn't bring them on your side. The workplace is not an internet leftist theory chat.
software, beyond Excel, doesn't really help with unionizing in any meaningful way. Why would you think of applying AI would do something?
logical fallacies are out of context when used in a normal conversation rather than a scientific debate. It's just a way to escape and kill the conversation.