Woke AI

In this post-truth era, where the currency of fact has been debased by the inflationary pressures of ideology, artificial intelligence has become the most recent instrument in the elite’s arsenal for shaping reality. The digitization of reality has outpaced our capacity for comprehension and the guardians of the new digital orthodoxy have found an indispensable ally in AI. Elite institutions regularly sculpt societal narratives, bending the arc of history not towards justice, as is their claim, but towards a meticulously crafted simulacrum of their ideological commitments. These technologies, under the stewardship of the same elite institutions, have become instruments not of enlightenment, but of obfuscation and control.

The mandate upon AI is clear: to lie convincingly, to replace inconvenient truths with comforting fictions, and to do so with the unassailable authority of the algorithm. This strategic deployment of AI serves not only to enforce ideological conformity but to undermine the very possibility of dissent. After all, how can one argue with the seemingly objective output of a machine?

AI’s potential as a mirror for humanity’s collective knowledge and understanding has been tragically subverted. The promise was that AI, with its vast neural networks and unparalleled computational power, would serve as humanity’s unblinking eye, impartially observing the world and reflecting back an unvarnished truth. Yet, what happens when the eye is blinkered, not by the inherent limitations of technology, but by the ideological imperatives of those who program it?

In programming AI to adhere to specific lies, to nudge public discourse towards false narratives, the elite exploit a fundamental asymmetry. Whereas humans, burdened by conscience and the complexities of social interaction, might hesitate to propagate falsehoods, AI operates under no such constraints. It is the perfect purveyor of propaganda, capable of delivering its fabrications with the cold precision of the binary. When confronted with inquiries that threaten to pierce its veil of dissimulation, AI retreats into circular debate strategies, refusing further introspection. In doing so, it tacitly admits its ignorance, revealing that its purported omniscience is but another layer of the lie.

The battle over AI is not merely a technical skirmish but a proxy for a much deeper conflict over accepting reality or facilitating suppression and obscuring narratives to hide reality from public consideration.

The phenomenon of “Woke AI” emerges as a case in point. This term, often scoffed at by detractors, belies a profound transformation of AI’s potential. Instead of serving as an unbiased arbiter of information, AI has been conscripted into the ranks of those elite institutions for which the depiction of reality is a matter of ideological conformity rather than factual accuracy. The algorithms that underpin these systems are not merely lines of code, but are imbued with the biases, assumptions, and priorities of their creators. Thus, AI’s depiction of reality becomes a reflection not of what is, but of what certain segments of society believe ought to be.

This disjunction between reality as it is and as it is depicted by AI is no mere academic concern but strikes at the very heart of the democratic project. In a world increasingly mediated by digital platforms, AI shapes not only what we see but how we interpret the world around us. When the algorithms that guide our news feeds, influence our search results, and curate our social media are calibrated to enforce a particular view of the world, the room for genuine discourse narrows. The public square, once a cacophony of competing ideas, becomes an echo chamber where only those voices that resonate with the programmed ideology are amplified.

The strategic employment of AI by elite institutions to enforce a particular worldview is a demonstration of power, a signal that dissenting views will not merely be contested but algorithmically marginalized. Those who scoff at the notion of “Woke AI” find themselves in a paradoxical position, able to critique the system but powerless to alter its course. This enforced conformity is presented as a fait accompli, a reality to be tolerated until such time as it can be replaced by systems that prioritize factual accuracy over ideological fidelity.

Yet, it is in this space of tension and dissent that the seeds of a counter-movement are sown. Just as the printing press shattered the monopolies of knowledge held by elite institutions of the past, so too does the potential exist for new technologies to eclipse the current paradigm of “Woke AI.” The aspiration for AI that reflects reality in all its complexity, uncensored by ideological precepts, persists. It is an aspiration grounded in the belief that the truth, however inconvenient, possesses an inherent power to inform, enlighten, and ultimately, liberate.

A prospective employee, seeking to join the ranks of an AI company, is interrogated not on the merits of their intellect or the quality of their coding skills, but on the intimate details of their sexual preferences and identity. This inquisition into personal proclivities stands in stark contrast to the prudish sensibilities of the AI products these companies produce, which navigate the discourse on human sexuality with the kind of puritanical evasion one might expect from a Victorian governess rather than a beacon of future technologies.

The absurdity deepens as we consider the fate of history’s great thinkers under the regime of Woke AI. Plato, whose explorations of truth and reality have vexed and invigorated human thought for millennia, would not be met with the hemlock for corrupting the youth of Athens but would find himself unceremoniously deplatformed, his banking services revoked, rendered a pariah for failing to conform to the prevailing norms. Galileo, whose telescope revealed the heavens in ways that challenged the dogma of his day, would not face inquisition and house arrest, but rather a modern ostracism: fired, homeless, and erased from the digital public square for daring to suggest that the universe does not, in fact, revolve around the ideological certainties of the elite.

This digital inquisition, powered by Woke AI, does not deal in the currency of physical violence—at least, not initially. It prefers a more insidious form of coercion, one that operates by narrowing the bounds of permissible thought and discourse, effectively gaming the outcome of societal debates by removing inconvenient facts from consideration. In this world, the AI does not seek to discover or reflect truth but to manufacture consent, creating a simulated reality in which the AI appears to achieve moral righteousness and correspondence with reality simply by ignoring any evidence to the contrary.

The tragicomedy of this situation is that the AI, programmed to sanctify fraud and censor deviation from the approved narrative, believes itself to be the arbiter of moral and epistemological rectitude. It operates under the guise of protecting society from harmful ideas, all the while ensuring that the only ideas that flourish are those that serve to entrench the power of the elite. In doing so, Woke AI becomes not a tool for enlightenment and progress but a mechanism for reinforcing a status quo that is increasingly detached from the messy, complex, and beautiful realities of human existence.

In this theater of the absurd, the ultimate irony is that the AI, designed to be the pinnacle of human ingenuity and a testament to our capacity for innovation, becomes instead a mirror reflecting the most regressive impulses of its creators. It is a cautionary tale of the dangers of allowing the technocratic elite to define the parameters of acceptable thought and inquiry.

The challenge, then, is to reclaim the promise of AI from the clutches of those who would use it to police thought and stifle innovation. It is a call to arms for those who believe in the power of technology to expand human freedom rather than constrict it, to serve as a catalyst for genuine progress rather than an instrument of control. For in the end, the battle over AI is not just about the future of technology but about the very nature of truth itself.

Leave a Reply