The coming rise of anti-AI populism

{"text":[[{"start":null,"text":""}],[{"start":5.55,"text":"More than 70 per cent of Americans already think AI is developing “too fast”. As the technology becomes more powerful and trillions of additional dollars are spent on its infrastructure, the anxiety will only intensify."}],[{"start":19.05,"text":"In time, the technophobia could be seized upon by populists, who might echo the anti-immigration rhetoric and manufacturing nostalgia that have shaped politics over much of the past decade. Slogans such as “human jobs first” and policy proposals ranging from AI taxes to sector-specific bans may soon become widespread."}],[{"start":40.1,"text":"Most fears centre on the prospect of bots replacing jobs. This worry is most prevalent in advanced economies, where a greater share of economic activity comes from services and knowledge-intensive occupations. These roles tend to be more exposed to AI disruption. Gen Z is concerned that AI is already reducing its access to entry-level jobs in professional services, while Goldman Sachs estimates that 300mn jobs worldwide could be exposed to automation over the coming decade."}],[{"start":null,"text":""}],[{"start":70.45,"text":"But in the US — which is likely to be a test bed for anti-AI politics, given Silicon Valley’s central role in the technology — the anxieties run deeper than job losses alone."}],[{"start":81.85000000000001,"text":"The data centre build-out is raising worries about rising energy costs and land use in some states. Other concerns include privacy violations, the potential for higher inequality and wider threats to humanity. More than 40 per cent of Americans do not trust AI and they are sceptical of the technology in every sector, according to polling by YouGov."}],[{"start":104.30000000000001,"text":"This distrust is already influencing politics and regulation. According to the US Data Center Moratorium tracker, 19 US states have or are considering restrictions on the server farms. On the left, politicians Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have called for a national moratorium on their construction, while Democratic senator Elizabeth Warren last month proposed taxing AI companies directly. "}],[{"start":129.20000000000002,"text":"Mark Muro, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, notes that localities most exposed to the positive and negative effects of AI tend to vote for Democrats. “This means the party has more to gain from anti-AI politics,” he says. “But it could also divide the party between those who want to develop pragmatic policies to reap the benefits of AI, versus populists taking a firmer stance.” "}],[{"start":153.10000000000002,"text":"The technology will also divide the more pro-business right. In April, senator Josh Hawley urged his fellow US Republicans to refuse money from pro-AI groups, warning of a “political cost”. And last week, US President Donald Trump backed an idea in which stakes in AI companies would be given to the public."}],[{"start":null,"text":""}],[{"start":172.65000000000003,"text":"Anti-AI discourse could expand globally, as other rich nations increase their investments in the technology. For example, a South Korean official last month floated the possibility of a tax on the excess profits of the country’s chip giants, Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, describing it as a “national dividend”."}],[{"start":192.75000000000003,"text":"Matt Gertken, chief geopolitical strategist at BCA Research, explains that in the US there is enough negative sentiment about AI to mobilise voters. This could happen in a few ways."}],[{"start":205.90000000000003,"text":"“First there may be a galvanising event, such as a big AI-related economic dislocation, a cyber security breach or other nefarious application of the technology, like we saw with the Three Mile Island accident for nuclear power, or the subprime mortgage crisis for banks,” he says. “Or, political pressure on AI might build more gradually as discontent grows with job losses, rising inflation due to high capital expenditure and a perception of rising inequality.”"}],[{"start":null,"text":""}],[{"start":234.45000000000005,"text":"The challenge for proponents of AI is that the economic pain will be more frontloaded and visceral than any gains in productivity and jobs. It takes time for industries to optimise their use of technology to create new value and openings. Automation also threatens elites in influential white-collar sectors, amplifying potential resistance."}],[{"start":256.20000000000005,"text":"But heavy-handed responses to AI risk diluting its benefits. A balanced approach would support people and businesses to better adapt to the technology, alongside measured frameworks to regulate it. This would involve support for widespread retraining initiatives and reforms to boost start-ups, job creation and infrastructure development."}],[{"start":278.35,"text":"However, governments in advanced economies have a poor record of managing economic transitions brought about by significant shifts, such as globalisation or decarbonisation. In turn, the protectionist instincts of populists tend to become most appealing."}],[{"start":294.25,"text":"With AI developing faster than policymakers can respond, the politics surrounding the technology will feel familiar. Bots may soon be added to the list of things voters want to be insulated from — and the professional classes might finally empathise with those who railed against immigration and offshoring."}],[{"start":312.25,"text":"Send your thoughts in the comments, to freelunch@ft.com or via X @tejparikh90."}],[{"start":318.9,"text":"Food for thought"}],[{"start":320.34999999999997,"text":"This column highlights how developments in the US space industry in the 1990s provided a launch pad for commercial firms to enter the sector."}],[{"start":null,"text":"

---

"}],[{"start":329.09999999999997,"text":"Free Lunch on Sunday is edited by Harvey Nriapia"}],[{"start":null,"text":""}],[{"start":338.3999999999999,"text":""}]],"url":"https://audio.ftcn.net.cn/album/a_1780881590_6496.mp3"}