A rapid, significant (e.g., 5%) spike in unemployment over a short period (e.g., 6 months) due to AI would trigger an immediate and massive political and economic response. This would be comparable in speed and scale to the multi-trillion dollar stimulus packages passed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Like railroads, AI promises immense progress but also concentrates power, creating public fear of being controlled by a new monopoly. The populist uprisings by farmers against railroad companies in the 1880s offer a historical playbook for how a widespread, grassroots political movement against Big Tech could form.

Initial public fear over new technologies like AI therapy, while seemingly negative, is actually productive. It creates the social and political pressure needed to establish essential safety guardrails and regulations, ultimately leading to safer long-term adoption.

Unlike previous technologies like the internet or smartphones, which enjoyed years of positive perception before scrutiny, the AI industry immediately faced a PR crisis of its own making. Leaders' early and persistent "AI will kill everyone" narratives, often to attract capital, have framed the public conversation around fear from day one.

The rhetoric around AI's existential risks is framed as a competitive tactic. Some labs used these narratives to scare investors, regulators, and potential competitors away, effectively 'pulling up the ladder' to cement their market lead under the guise of safety.

Influencers from opposite ends of the political spectrum are finding common ground in their warnings about AI's potential to destroy jobs and creative fields. This unusual consensus suggests AI is becoming a powerful, non-traditional wedge issue that could reshape political alliances and public discourse.

Unlike the early internet era led by new faces, the AI revolution is being pushed by the same leaders who oversaw social media's societal failures. This history of broken promises and eroded trust means the public is inherently skeptical of their new, grand claims about AI.

Public backlash against AI isn't a "horseshoe" phenomenon of political extremes. It's a broad consensus spanning from progressives like Ryan Grimm to establishment conservatives like Tim Miller, indicating a deep, mainstream concern about the technology's direction and lack of democratic control.

Unlike other tech rollouts, the AI industry's public narrative has been dominated by vague warnings of disruption rather than clear, tangible benefits for the average person. This communication failure is a key driver of widespread anxiety and opposition.