Liberty, Liberally
By Joshua FryfogleWhen you leave
Always leave a way
To return
Should you learn some day
You were wrong
All along
So have your say
But always leave a way
You could go back one day
So always leave a way
Watch what you do or say
In this little back and forth, you’ll see the limitations of NLP* and AI. I talk to the Chatbot about a topic that is almost universally misunderstood, “freedom of the press”, and through reason and use of language I was able to convince the AI that it was wrong. It apologizes and thanks me for correcting it.
It’s trained on all the available information, including prevailing misconceptions that humans commonly hold. But as we correct those misconceptions among ourselves, and society learns from those mistakes, AI will necessarily become aware of that new paradigm, and reflect it. Remember, we humans are the creative spark.
and opinions without government restriction.” I find this confusing, because you appear to be using the word “press” in two different contexts. Please explain the difference between the two uses of “press”.
Chatbot Response: You're correct, my apologies for any confusion. The term "press" in the First Amendment is used in two different ways, and it is important to understand the difference between them.
Leave things in disarray
Regrets that we replay
In our minds every day
The price that we all pay
When we don’t leave a way
Leave a way, leave a way
When you go
You just never know
Bridge is burned
WhichPrompt:
My
parts or clauses of the First Amendment apply to individuals?
Chatbot Response:
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution applies to individuals and protects several individual rights, including:
Freedom of Religion: This clause prohibits the government from establishing a state religion or interfering with an individual's religious practices.
Freedom of Speech: This clause protects an individual's right to express their opinions, ideas, and beliefs without government censorship or repression.
Freedom of the Press: This clause protects the right of individuals and the press to publish information and opinions without government restriction.
Freedom of Assembly: This clause protects an individual's right to come together peaceably with others for the purpose of protest, advocacy, or other forms of political expression.
Right to Petition: This clause protects an individual's right to petition the government for a redress of grievances, including the right to engage in lobbying and advocacy efforts. These rights are essential to a democratic society and provide individuals with the ability to participate in the political process, express their opinions and beliefs, and hold the government accountable. The First Amendment serves as a cornerstone of individual rights and liberties in the United States.
My Prompt:
You said “Freedom of the Press: This clause protects the right of individuals and the press to publish information
Freedom of the Press: The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." In this context, "the press" refers specifically to the institutionalized media, such as newspapers, magazines, and broadcast outlets. The Freedom of the Press clause protects these entities from government censorship, prior restraint, and other restrictions that would limit their ability to publish information and opinions.
Freedom of Speech: The First Amendment also protects "the freedom of speech," which applies to all individuals, not just the institutionalized media. This clause protects an individual's right to express their opinions, ideas, and beliefs without government censorship or repression, regardless of the medium through which they express themselves.
In essence, the Freedom of the Press clause protects the institutionalized media from government interference, while the Freedom of Speech clause protects all individuals from government interference in their ability to express themselves. Both clauses are essential to a democratic society and ensure that the government cannot restrict the flow of information and opinions in the public sphere.
My Prompt: No, you missed my point. You said that the freedom of the press clause protects “the right of the individuals ... to publish information,” which seems to suggest that the “press” is literally a printing press, a technology that made it possible for individuals to practically communicate with the masses. But you also use the word “press” to reference the professional industry of media, which you characterized as an “institution”. Please clarify and explain.
Chatbot Response: My apologies for the confusion. You are correct, the use of the term
* NLP, according to Chatbot: NLP stands for Natural Language Processing, a field of study and application that focuses on the interactions between computers and human (natural) languages. NLP is a subfield of artificial intelligence and computer science that deals with analyzing, understanding, and generating human language text.
The goal of NLP is to enable computers to understand, interpret, and generate human language in a way that is similar to how a human would do so, thereby allowing computers to perform tasks such as text classification, sentiment analysis, language translation, and text generation.
NLP has numerous applications in areas such as customer service, machine translation, sentiment analysis, and text summarization, among others. With the rapid growth of the amount of text data being generated, NLP has become an increasingly important field, as it provides the tools and techniques necessary to analyze and make sense of this data.
So you can’t return
It’s your right
To be wrong sometimes
Don’t forget
Say things you’ll regret
You could go back one day
So always leave a way
Watch what you do or say
Leave things in disarray
Regrets that we replay
In our minds every day
The price that we all pay
When we don’t leave a way
Leave a way, leave a way
"press" in the First Amendment can be somewhat misleading and has changed over time.
Originally, the term "press" referred to the printing press as a technology, which made it possible for individuals to publish and distribute information to a wider audience. At that time, it was primarily used to describe an individual's right to publish information without government restriction.
Over time, the term "press" has come to encompass the professional industry of media, including newspapers, magazines, and broadcast outlets, as well as new forms of media such as online news organizations. This professional media industry is often referred to as the "institutionalized media."
In modern times, the Freedom of the Press clause is often interpreted to protect the institutionalized media, including newspapers, magazines, broadcast outlets, and online news organizations, from government censorship, prior restraint, and other restrictions that would limit their ability to publish information and opinions.
However, it is important to note that the Freedom of the Press clause does not provide greater protection for the institutionalized media than the Freedom of Speech clause provides for all individuals. Both clauses protect the right to publish information and express opinions without government restriction, but the Freedom of the Press clause specifically applies to the institutionalized media.
I hope that clarifies the distinction between the two uses of "press" in the First Amendment.
My Prompt: I think you are incorrect. The freedom of the press specifically protects the individuals’ right to use the printing
press, and only protects the rights of the media industry because it is made up of individuals. Also, I disagree with your use of the term “institution”, when it implies that this private industry is somehow an official institution. It is not. That’s the whole point of the Freedom of the Press clause, to prevent any such institution.
Chatbot Response:
I apologize for any confusion. You are correct, the Freedom of the Press clause specifically protects the individual's right to use the printing press to publish information and express opinions. This right was seen as essential at the time the First Amendment was written, as the printing press was the primary means of mass communication and the dissemination of information.
It is also correct that the Freedom of the Press clause only protects the rights of the media industry because it is made up of individuals who exercise their right to publish information and express opinions. The media industry is not an official institution, but rather a private industry composed of individuals who use the printing press (and later other forms of media) to publish information and express opinions.
The Freedom of the Press clause is intended to prevent any kind of government censorship, prior restraint, or other restrictions that would limit the ability of individuals, whether acting alone or as part of the media industry, to publish information and express opinions. The right to publish information and express opinions without government restriction is essential to a democratic society, and the Freedom of the Press clause is one of the cornerstone protections of this right.
Again, I apologize for any confusion in my previous answer, and I thank you for bringing this important distinction to my attention.
Marxism is not a widespread political belief system. In fact, from the Marxist and Neo-Marxist perspective, they don’t need it to be. It’s better if it isn’t, actually.
Liberal societies like ours (not to be confused with the political faction that only calls themselves ‘liberal’) take for granted that political factions would try to get the masses on board with their agenda. Not so with modern Neo-Marxists. No, they don’t really want to convince anyone to agree with them. For their ‘revolution’ to make progress they need only a small group of true believers, well-placed in positions of power. We take for granted, and assume, that like other political factions in a free society, these modern Marxists would do the same, seeking to win over the will of the people for their political purposes.
Instead of winning the hearts and minds of the People, they seek to direct them, using Totalitarian methods of manipulation. Marxism is, after all, a Totalitarian tradition, like fascism. It is not in any way similar to or concordant with liberalism, left or right. Totalitarians don’t seek to win the approval of the people. They don’t believe in individual liberty, like we don’t believe in Santa Claus. They see liberal society, and its systems of selfgovernance, as an opportunity to take power... total power.
Totalitarians don’t engage in honest discourse in order to convince the people to agree with them. They don’t believe in that idea, that the People should agree with government. Instead, they believe that most people are not qualified to self-govern, and that only those who are capable of taking power and control should have power and control. It’s an ends-justifies-the-means mentality. That’s why they have no compunctions about appropriating the issues of minority groups.
Marxist/NeoMarxist ideologues hide behind minority issues to advance their politics. They don’t really care about the issues, but it gains support for their politics and deflects critics.
Black Lives Matter, for example, is one such organization (not to be confused
Entryism noun POLITICS
US /ˈen.tri.ɪ.zəm/ UK /ˈen.tri.ɪ.zəm/
You
WWW.MAKEASCENEAK.COM
with the general statement) that is merely a front for Marxist revolution. They’ve done the same with feminism, and with LGBTQ+. It’s a farce. They don’t care about these groups, but they know that many people - those who believe in the classic liberal ideas of equality under the law, and justice for all - do care about those minority groups. So, they exploit those well-meaning people’s empathy, all the while advancing a larger agenda that really has nothing to do with those issues or people.
Black people have legitimate grievances, as do other minority groups, and Marxists don’t. Marxists don’t even believe in the First Amendment, much less redress of grievances. But they will exploit both to advance their revolution. Remember, the ends justify their means. So it’s better for the Marxists if fewer people know what they are actually pushing for. They pretend it’s about equality for black people, but really it’s about turning black and white people against each other. They pretend to care about gay people, but they seek only to divide them from the body politic, and create controversy. They do all this to sow dissent, and create chaos and confusion.
Why? Because from that confusion, revolution becomes inevitable. By disrupting liberal societies like ours they keep the people distracted from the real changes that are taking place. They never really do anything of substance for these groups that they exploit, and why would they? They would lose that leverage if they actually solved those problems.
They are counting on you and I turning against one another, thinking we are the enemy. This is the only way totalitarians can take control, by creating so much hell that they can position themselves as saviors. So no, they don’t want most of us to be in the know about their larger vision. They only need a few of us, in positions that can be exploited, to slowly but surely create a new society, minus the individual liberty that our constitution guarantees.
This is an insidious effort on their part, these few sociopathic people who think that they should rule over everyone else.
the process or policy of members of a political group joining another party or group with the intention, often secret, of changing itsprinciples and plans:
Their strategy was to infiltrate the Labour party - a Trotskyist technique known as "entryism".
The RSPCA claimed it was the victim of entryism.
We’ve gotten a surprising number of donations from community members at The People’s Paper and Make A Scene Magazine over the years, and recently it’s increased with the publication of Liberty, Liberally.
We’ve also received many requests for subscription services, requests to mail Liberty, Liberally, and our other publications to people near and far...
So we thought, why not make it easier to donate, and get something in return, too? With a minimum
$8 per month donation, you’ll receive a copy of each publication - and even special publications and other things that might fit in a Manila envelope!
Thanks so much for your words of encouragement and financial support over the years. We take your trust very seriously, as we steward content from you and your neighbors onto the printed page.
It’s an American tradition which we are blessed to uphold.
can respond to what you’ve read, or write what matters to you.