In my lifetime, the movement’s theorists have worked far more slowly on how to integrate the effect of those changes into its vision. That means when some new transformative tool comes along outside that vision, the left’s cultural norms err on the side of critique. Which is fine, but it makes any other expression both hard to convey, and instantly suspect in those communities.

I saw this in the early Web, where from a small group of early adopters of all political slants, it was the independents, heterodox leftists (including anarchists), and the right, — and most vocally, the libertarians — who were able to most quickly adapt to and adopt the new technology. Academic leftists, especially Marxists, and those who were inspired by them, took a lot longer to accomodate the Net into their theses (beyond disregarding or rejecting it) and even longer to devise practical uses for it.

It wasn’t that long, I should say — a matter of months or years, and any latent objections were quickly swamped by younger voices who were familiar with the power of the Net; but from my point of view it seriously set back that movement in practicality and popularity during the 80s and 90s.

I see the same with AI: the left has attracted a large generational of support across the world from providing an emotionally resonant and practical alternative to the status quo many people face. But you quickly lose the mandate of heaven if you fail to do more than just simplistically critique or reject a thing that the average person in the world comes to feel they know better, or feels differently toward, than you do. This is something to consider, even if you still strongly believe yourselves to be correct in the critiques.

Socially, critiques of the outside world bond us together: they give us a counter-narrative, and help supply arguments and language for opposition. But critique can’t be enough; technology is a tool for action, and the skills and deep intuitions about it was always fall to those who study and adopt it over those who stand athwart it, and yell stop — whichever euclidean politics you fall back upon.

Danny O'Brien's Oblomovka » Blog Archive » we find our own use for things
https://www.oblomovka.com/wp/2025/06/02/we-find-our-own-use-for-things/

🤯 - this is a resonant argument. My biggest takeaway is that critiques alone don't generate progress. The ability to be resourceful and wield the technology available to generate progress for your cause is what matters. Using the technology matters, even if to be good critics of it.

Growing up, on a daily basis I saw this quote on my living room wall. Idk if it was hung by my dad / mom.

Meaningful Data becomes Information.
Repeatedly using Information develops Knowledge.
Leveraging Knowledge to live your Life leads to Experience.
Lived Experience becomes Judgement.
Applying Judgement helps you make Good Decisions.

As I get older, that quote feels ever more relevant.

I've personally navigated the following changes in my lifetime from birth:

I believe that successfully navigating through this was me repeating the loop of data > information > knowledge > experience > judgement > decisions over and over again.

This doesn't mean that I make perfect decisions - far from it. I think it comes with it an inherent ability to be comfortable with ambiguity and still moving forward. To gather more data and keep repeating that loop until you develop the capability to make stronger decisions.

This is the best metaphor for life that I can think of.