(Christian Tieber hat eine deutsche Übersetzung des Textes angefertigt: “KI” als faschistisches Artefakt. Vielen Dank Christian!) (This is a bit of a merger of two talks I recently gave about fascism and AI. One was in German at the Cables Of Resistance conference, one in English at the Milton Wolf Seminar on Media and Diplomacy. […]
AI: The New Aesthetics of Fascism
It's embarrassing, destructive, and looks like shit: AI-generated art is the perfect aesthetic form for the far right.
AI as Christian Heresy
A pocket history of the rise of artificial intelligence, and some strategies for resistance.
We Need to Talk About How We Talk About 'AI'
We share a responsibility to create and use empowering metaphors rather than misleading language, write Emily M. Bender and Nanna Inie.
"AI" is bad UX
teapot from the cover of Don Norman’s “The Design of Everyday Things” clumsily ‘shopped by me "AI" means bad UX There is an emergent strain of thought in...
New York Times Accused of Running AI-Generated Article
People are speculating that an essay published in the New York Times' "Modern Love" was AI-generated. What's definitely real? AI paranoia.
AI as the new avatar of American capitalism
Why "AI populism" is just "populism"
The rise of AI sovereignty: Authoritarian technological imaginaries as a form of reflexive control
Recent literature increasingly examines generative artificial intelligence's (AI's) role in disinformation and propaganda as a key driver of digital authoritarianism. Yet, less attention has been paid to how authoritarian regimes may influence the global governance of AI itself. This essay addresses this gap by analysing the impact of authoritarian technological imaginaries, focusing on the rise of ‘AI sovereignty’ as a central concept shaping global AI governance. It adopts a conceptual framework that combines the notion of imaginaries with the concept of reflexive control, originating in Soviet strategic thought and referring to influencing an adversary's perceptions so they act in ways aligned with the initiator's goals, to study authoritarian diffusion and the global politics of AI. Through an examination of public statements by the Russian president, the study shows how Russia constructs an AI imaginary that extends Cold War logics of nuclear competition into the digital era, framing AI as a matter of security and survival rather than ethics or rights. Drawing on the Russian case, the analysis identifies three frames that underpin the authoritarian AI imaginary: AI as a tool for power and domination; Western AI as a cultural threat; and AI as a guarantor of state efficiency. The article argues that such imaginaries shape the cognitive environment of global policy debates, promoting sovereignty-centred and securitised approaches to AI governance. It suggests that recognising the role of reflexive control in authoritarian diffusion helps distinguish legitimate Global South concerns from authoritarian influence and supports more inclusive and resilient models of AI governance.
The rise of AI sovereignty: Authoritarian technological imaginaries as a form of reflexive control
Recent literature increasingly examines generative artificial intelligence's (AI's) role in disinformation and propaganda as a key driver of digital authoritarianism. Yet, less attention has been paid to how authoritarian regimes may influence the global governance of AI itself. This essay addresses this gap by analysing the impact of authoritarian technological imaginaries, focusing on the rise of ‘AI sovereignty’ as a central concept shaping global AI governance. It adopts a conceptual framework that combines the notion of imaginaries with the concept of reflexive control, originating in Soviet strategic thought and referring to influencing an adversary's perceptions so they act in ways aligned with the initiator's goals, to study authoritarian diffusion and the global politics of AI. Through an examination of public statements by the Russian president, the study shows how Russia constructs an AI imaginary that extends Cold War logics of nuclear competition into the digital era, framing AI as a matter of security and survival rather than ethics or rights. Drawing on the Russian case, the analysis identifies three frames that underpin the authoritarian AI imaginary: AI as a tool for power and domination; Western AI as a cultural threat; and AI as a guarantor of state efficiency. The article argues that such imaginaries shape the cognitive environment of global policy debates, promoting sovereignty-centred and securitised approaches to AI governance. It suggests that recognising the role of reflexive control in authoritarian diffusion helps distinguish legitimate Global South concerns from authoritarian influence and supports more inclusive and resilient models of AI governance.
The Scaling Era: An Oral History of AI, 2019–2025
An inside view of the AI revolution, from the people an…
‘I Don’t Think We’re All F***ed Anymore’
Kevin Roose’s new book explores the terrifying implications of AI, but he’s feeling a bit more sanguine these days.
Your Favorite Science YouTubers Are Wrong About AI, (e.g. SciShow, Kurzgesagt, and Kyle Hill )
afra wang on Twitter / X
a great @NewYorker essay by Becca Rothfeld on the humanistic reasons behind the anti-AI movement: AI is arriving too early in young people’s lives, and they fear it will prevent them from growing into fully fledged humans—in a sense, an existential threat.… pic.twitter.com/LgqL4TgJEJ— afra wang (@afrazhaowang) October 9, 2026
AI is not superhuman
What metaphor should drive the field of AI research?
AI Bros Wanted Trump. Now They Learn What Happens When You Tell Him No.
Last year, in Fascism For First Time Founders, I warned the tech industry what happens when you cozy up to authoritarians. As I wrote then: Innovation requires trust. Not just between individuals, …
"The forces that are now shaping AI are the same forces that turned the open internet into monopolistic platforms, converted peer-to-peer participation into precarious labor, and enclosed the digital commons. They are now threatening to capture and enclose thought itself." osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/qahd3_v1/
AI* and fascism/discrimination/bias/politics
See also law enforcement/surveillance/war: semble.so/profile/aiueo.ooo/collections… * I’m neither “pro-AI” nor “anti-AI.” I’ve been blocked for being perceived as both. —Actually, I’m honestly more anti-AI than pro-AI thus far, aside from specialized models and specific use cases, but I’m willing to consider information that’s new to me
How the unholy alliance of Big Tech and the far right threatens the world
Las denuncias de sesgo contra plataformas digitales se multiplican en las elecciones de Brasil
Why did Meta change its moderation system before Brazil’s elections?
Muse, in its own files
Black Migrants Bear Brunt of ICE's Facial Recognition Push
The LA Times’ Political Rating “AI” Is A Silly Joke Aimed At Validating Wealthy Media Ownership’s Inherent Bias
