Beneath the freedom talk lies a centralized machine that hoovers up private data, flattens dissent and redistributes cognition by token
Donald Trump and major tech leaders from OpenAI, Anthropic, Nvidia, SpaceX, Meta and other tech companies gathered for a meeting at the White House to reach a deal on what Trump described as an “AI constitution” to ensure that frontier models do not pose catastrophic, unintended risks.
In the course of the meeting a “morally binding” voluntary accord was signed in order to “win safely,” as Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei put it.
Beyond this self-regulation pact, the Trump administration will additionally set up a governmental board to oversee the safety of AI tools.
Another big change emerging from the meeting is not surprising, given Trump’s affinity for the naming of names. From now on, executive departments and agencies “shall use ‘Super Intelligence’ or SI” in place of “Artificial Intelligence” in official correspondence, reports, and policy documents within the executive branch.
Trump’s rationale is that the word “artificial” makes the technology sound “fake.” So this new White House executive order seeks to implement the change, stating that the name “Super Intelligence” more appropriately captures the promise, potential, and rapidly advancing capabilities of these technologies.
All of this signals that the American government is actively looking to pivot away from the current doomsday public narrative surrounding AI, aiming instead to focus public attention on the positive outcomes of its development.
So, with this new name, we can all finally breathe a sigh of relief and put to rest all those spooks of evil, fake intelligence agents escaping their sandboxes to hack Mark knows what. The looming AI apocalypse has taken a raincheck, and we can happily prepare for the dawn of a golden-age paradise ushered in by this new, real Super intelligence. Right? Well…
Broadly speaking, experts remain skeptical about what genuine safety regulations will actually come out of the pact, given that the executives signing it are likely to be the very ones who will get to define the term “safety.” So at least in this regard, the meeting is largely symbolic.
It is primarily aimed at cooling public heat around apocalyptic AI narratives and the growing discontent over data centers, exactly what you would expect from an administration whose 2024 campaign was heavily bankrolled by tech elites such as Elon Musk, Greg Brockman, and others eager to promote their own corporate agendas.
But if we zoom past the end-times scenarios that the administration and these billionaires are trying to dampen, there is one critical thread left out of the conversation, which is the inherently collectivist nature of the Super Intelligence shaping this future “Golden Age of America.”
From each according to his ability
Since the beginning of his term, Trump and the Republican Party have been championing AI as an individualistic enterprise, framing it as a tool to amplify personal intellectual capabilities and boost American rugged individualism on a new technological frontier. That certainly has a pleasant Americana ring to it, especially if the bell that it’s ringing is Republican.
However, not even all the tech billionaires bankrolling the party see it the same way. A notable example is venture capitalist and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, who has drawn parallels between AI and collectivism. Thiel previously argued that unlike crypto, which he believes promotes libertarianism, AI is, at its core, communist.
If you look closely at what kind of future artificial intelligence has to offer, Thiel’s claim no longer seems so far-fetched. There is indeed a deep, structural similarity between the growth of AI systems and core Marxist ideals.
Firstly, building a powerful AI model requires massive centralization, which is what Thiel apparently has the biggest problem with as a libertarian. Developing more powerful AI models requires harvesting billions of gigabytes of data into massive data centers, controlled by only a handful of corporate entities with the necessary capital and computing power.
That means your private intellectual ownership is effectively cast out of the window. For good. Whatever you write on the internet, post on YouTube, or even the books you published way before the age of AI, all of it turns into AI food, constantly fed in chunks into a data center to train a model, which in its turn redistributes the results of your work to anyone who uses AI.
That inherently builds a top-down, centralized system of information redistribution, which is reminiscent of how a collectivist state functions.
To each according to his needs
Silicon Valley leaders are increasingly using the rise of AI to push for heavily socialist economic frameworks as part of their public relations strategy. Because advanced AI systems are automating millions of human jobs, tech leaders believe they need to pacify the public by advertising AI as a structural safety net to keep society stable when human labor is no longer economically viable.
Open AI CEO Sam Altman, for instance, advocated for universal basic income, a classic socialist economic concept. If that sounds too good to be true, well, it’s because it is. Even Altman eventually walked back the idea, replacing it with a concept he calls “universal basic compute.”
Comparing AI to public utilities like water or electricity, Altman argues that every human being should be given an equal, baseline slice of a centralized supercomputer’s output in the form of AI tokens, which people can use, share, or sell.
A remarkably similar philosophy underpins Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s public manifesto, “the future is for everyone,” in which he argues that computational power and advanced data models should be distributed equally to give the power back to people.
In Marxist terms, these tech billionaires are basically advocating for the redistribution of the means of production to the masses, pushing the idea of collective ownership over the very personal data they seized from you. The “empowering everyone” rhetoric surely sounds nice when reading the utopian visions of Altman and Zuckerberg and it conveniently keeps you from thinking about how those same tech lords acquired your data in the first place by making off with your intellectual property.
Intellectual communism
In the 20th century, Soviet ideologists spent decades trying to engineer what they called the “New Soviet Man.” This was a theoretical ideal of a uniform, selfless citizen who would completely dissolve their individual desires, beliefs, and identity into one collective entity striving for the common good.
This experiment became a major concern for dystopian writers like George Orwell, who saw one of the vices of collectivism in making everyone the same, and it is the very same concept actively criticized by Republicans today as a totalitarian manifestation of communism.
Yet, this totalitarian equality of thought is an inherent design feature of AI operational systems we use every day.
In an interview with journalist Tucker Carlson, Sam Altman explicitly admitted that they train their AI models “to be like the collective of all of humanity.” This means that instead of amplifying unique human perspectives or protecting individual thought, the core goal of leading AI development seems to be building a machine that represents the mathematical average of everyone at once – not highlighting individualism, but eroding it.
Furthermore, AI models by design always favor strict neutrality and highly balanced answers. They are taught to avoid taking strong, polarizing ideological stances, which you may have noticed whenever an AI chatbot answers a controversial question. It automatically forces a framework of mutual understanding and polite compromise, which makes the answer lack individuality or any personal edge.
On the surface, this design seems very helpful and positive. It can defuse toxic political arguments and depoliticize intense cultural conflicts by conditioning users to look at both sides of an issue, leading to a “More Perfect Union,” as Barack Obama would call it.
However, this forced neutrality and conformity has a dangerous dark side to it. By constantly pushing users toward a safe, mass-approved middle ground, AI slowly rewires your individual reasoning patterns and causes you to adopt a safer, collective intellectual framework and a common morality shared by the majority – essentially turning you into a Clockwork Orange.
If one relies on AI to write, think, and make decisions, which is incredibly convenient and tempting in modern, fast-paced society, their unique worldview and ideological standing are gradually lobotomized. Over time, it creates a synthetic collective unconscious where individual dissent is softly phased out in favor of a group consensus, or rather, a group consensus approved by the Superintelligent Equalizer that AI is.
Republican AI paradox
All of this creates a paradox for Donald Trump and his conservative base. Anti-communist rhetoric, warnings of a “socialist takeover,” and the defense of American individualism are the absolute core fixtures of Trump’s political speeches.
Yet, by demanding the rapid, acceleration of the domestic AI industry, Trump is championing the exact technology intentionally or unintentionally designed to dissolve individual identity into a massive collective pool, strip citizens of private data ownership and centralize technological power. And Republicans, knowingly or unknowingly, are actively building the infrastructure for the ultimate collectivist system, all while preaching the virtues of the free market.
So, while GOP members continue to manufacture a new Red Scare to rally voters in the culture wars, they are simultaneously subsidizing a technological framework, which upon closer examination, looks very much like a textbook caricature of some dystopian totalitarian collectivism run by a party of techlords.
And even though Trump says “America will never be communist,” even some of his billionaire donors don’t seem to buy it.
