The FCC, under Chairman Carr, is arguing for new authority to preempt state AI laws, a direct contradiction of its recent argument that it lacked authority over broadband in order to dismantle net neutrality. This reveals a strategy of adopting whatever legal philosophy is convenient to achieve a specific political outcome.
Related Insights
The Trump administration's strategy for control isn't writing new authoritarian laws, but aggressively using latent executive authority that past administrations ignored. This demonstrates how a democracy's own structures can be turned against it without passing a single new piece of legislation, as seen with the FCC.
AI provides a structural advantage to those in power by automating government systems. This allows leaders to bypass the traditional unwieldiness of human bureaucracy, making it trivial for an executive to change AI parameters and instantly exert their will across all levels of government, thereby concentrating power.
Ideological loyalty is an illusion in politics. Once in power, parties will quickly abandon the very groups that propelled them there if it is politically expedient. Examples include the UK's Labour Party turning on unions and Democrats ignoring BLM after the 2020 election. Power, not principle, is the goal.
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr is reversing decades of deregulation by reasserting control over broadcast TV content while maintaining a hands-off approach to the internet. This creates a free speech double standard where the delivery mechanism, not the content, determines government scrutiny, targeting weaker legacy media.
Viewing politicians as athletes in a game reveals their true motivation: gaining and retaining power. This framework explains seemingly inconsistent actions, like flip-flopping, as strategic plays for short-term public sentiment rather than reflections of moral conviction or long-term vision.
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.
Despite Congress passing and the Supreme Court upholding a law to force a sale of TikTok on national security grounds, the Trump administration is simply not enforcing it. Instead, it's pursuing a private deal, demonstrating how stated national security imperatives can be abandoned for political or business expediency.
A new populist coalition is emerging to counter Big Tech's influence, uniting politicians from opposite ends of the spectrum like Senator Ed Markey and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. This alliance successfully defeated an industry-backed provision to block state-level AI regulation, signaling a significant political realignment.
The political battle over AI is not a standard partisan fight. Factions within both Democratic and Republican parties are forming around pro-regulation, pro-acceleration, and job-protection stances, creating complex, cross-aisle coalitions and conflicts.
The economic and societal impact of AI is forcing politicians across the aisle to collaborate. From co-sponsoring legislation on AI-driven job loss to debating state vs. federal regulation, AI is creating common ground for lawmakers who would otherwise rarely work together.
