AI: The New Culture War

The rhetoric is nothing short of eschatological.

From the digital pulpits of the conservative movement, a new demon is being summoned, not from the depths of hell, but from the gleaming server farms of Silicon Valley.

Artificial intelligence, a technology increasingly woven into the fabric of modern life, has become the latest flashpoint in America’s enduring culture wars, igniting fears of an “apocalypse” and a profound transformation of human existence itself.

At the vanguard of this alarm is Steve Bannon, the former Trump strategist, who, with characteristic bombast, declares AI to be the “most fundamental radical transformation in all human history.”

On his “War Room” podcast, Bannon casts tech titans like Elon Musk and OpenAI’s Sam Altman as modern-day “four horsemen of the apocalypse,” accusing them of pursuing “eternal life” and unchecked power, driven by a disregard for “Judeo-Christian West” tenets.

This is not merely technological advancement, Bannon asserts; it is a blasphemous quest that “must be stopped.”

The conservative apprehension towards AI is multifaceted, rooted in a deep-seated distrust of Big Tech, a skepticism that predates the current AI boom.

For years, the right has railed against the perceived ideological bias and monopolistic tendencies of social media giants.

Now, AI presents a new, more existential threat.

Concerns range from the mundane – the potential for AI to defame or manipulate information – to the truly cosmic: its role in the “end times.”

Central to this burgeoning fear is the concept of the AI “singularity,” a hypothetical point where artificial intelligence becomes capable of improving itself exponentially, leading to an uncontrollable cascade of advancements that could render human intellect obsolete.

This idea, popularized by figures like mathematician Vernor Vinge in the early 90s, envisioned a future where machines could surpass human intelligence by 2030, ushering in a “post-human era.”

While Vinge’s original premise was more about a profound shift in human potential, it has been co-opted and amplified by those who see it as a harbinger of doom.

Elon Musk, a figure frequently invoked in these critiques, famously predicted in 2014 that “with artificial intelligence we are summoning the demon,” a quote that now serves as a foundational text for the AI doomsayers on the right.

His past social media profile, featuring the esoteric Sigil of Baphomet, only adds to the mystique and suspicion.

Yet, amidst the fiery rhetoric, there’s a crucial distinction to be made.

Daron Acemoglu, an MIT economist who studies AI and automation, suggests that much of the apocalyptic language emanating from the AI industry itself might be little more than a sophisticated marketing ploy.

Hyperbolic warnings of “white-collar bloodbaths” and “superintelligence escaping human control” serve to elevate these companies, helping them secure funding and status.

Nevertheless, Acemoglu concedes that the pace of AI development has indeed accelerated, leading to genuine uncertainty about its future trajectory, even if the current generation of AI’s calculations remain fundamentally different from human thought.

Within conservative circles, the spectrum of opinion on AI is broad.

Joe Allen, a writer focused on transhumanism and AI, observes that while figures like Alex Jones might take the singularity concept “entirely too seriously,” many “normie-cons” remain blissfully unaware or simply uninterested.

However, a significant demographic of “traditional Christians, traditional Jews and traditional Muslims” share a profound apprehension, whether driven by fears of job displacement, surveillance, or the profound theological implications of transhumanism – the pursuit of eternal life through technology – which some, like Bannon, consider a “blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.”

This widespread suspicion, transcending partisan lines, is now registering in public polling.

A recent Pew Research survey revealed that majorities of both Democrats (64%) and Republicans (56%) are concerned about insufficient AI regulation.

Across the general American adult population, 58% worry that regulation won’t go far enough, compared to a mere 21% who fear it might overreach.

Despite this clear public sentiment, legislative action remains largely elusive.

The Biden administration has been criticized for its cautious approach, and Congress has largely stalled.

In a perplexing twist, the House-passed GOP budget bill includes a 10-year moratorium on state-level AI regulation – a provision that seems to fly in the face of the very fears articulated by prominent conservatives.

The Senate has softened this, proposing to withhold broadband funding from states that choose to regulate AI, but the underlying intent remains to stifle local oversight.

However, this legislative maneuver is not without its internal critics on the right.

Figures like Senator Josh Hawley, Senator Marsha Blackburn, and even Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene have voiced opposition to the moratorium.

Greene, despite initially voting for the bill, has since branded the AI regulation moratorium a “poison pill,” arguing it has “no place in this legislation” and diverges from the Trump administration’s priorities.

This internal dissent offers a glimmer of hope for those pushing for greater oversight, suggesting an opportunity to amend the bill during the reconciliation process.

The AI debate, therefore, is more than just a technological challenge; it’s a crucible for existing political rivalries and ideological battles.

The ongoing struggle for influence between Steve Bannon and Elon Musk, for instance, finds a new front in the realm of AI policy.

For Bannon, who has previously called for the nationalization of Musk’s SpaceX, AI becomes another weapon in his arsenal against perceived unchecked power and the erosion of traditional values.

Ultimately, the future of AI in America will hinge on whether the pervasive public apprehension, now filtering into the political discourse, can finally translate into meaningful legislative action.

Or will the allure of technological progress, coupled with the industry’s powerful lobbying, continue to outpace the cautious and often apocalyptic warnings from those who fear the demons being summoned might just answer the call?

The silence from Capitol Hill, punctuated by the occasional rhetorical flourish, suggests that for now, the future of artificial intelligence remains largely unaddressed by the very lawmakers tasked with shaping society’s response to its most profound transformations.