After a couple of years working in data and tech at GiveDirectly, I left to work in politics, campaigning for candidates at the state, local, and federal levels. I most recently managed Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s general election campaign, but earlier this year, recognizing the urgency of the AI moment, I began as a senior advisor at Guardrails Alliance. In my new role, I believe the analysis and tactics we’ve long used and studied on the populist left can help us win the fight for AI safety and shared benefits.
The fight for AI regulation is fundamentally the same type of fight against corporate power that the populist left and labor have led throughout history. The message and tactics that win that fight are both effective and incredibly popular, and embracing them will help us put the American people in control of AI today and permanently in control of their futures. Here– in what I am told is likely the shortest LessWrong post of all time– I'll explain what the AI safety movement can learn from the populist left as it attempts to raise the salience of its message, build political power, and ultimately pass transformational legislation.
First, we need to be clear about the nature of the fight: who our opponents are and what they are trying to win. At its core, the fight for AI safety is a campaign to put significant checks on corporate power, which will ultimately curtail these companies’ profits, and limit their ability to consolidate influence and build monopolies. While some draw the distinction between “bad AI” (OpenAI) and “good AI” (Anthropic), both companies are rapidly developing products that put humanity at risk in pursuit of making more money than anyone in the history of the world, and there is reasonable evidence that Anthropic’s pitch to be seen as “good AI” is simply a hollow branding exercise designed to taint its competition (which itself originally claimed to be “good AI”!). The milquetoast bill Anthropic circulated earlier this year makes it clear that its business motives take precedence over concern for the future of humanity. Now that it has IPO’d, the company’s primary incentive, as with any major corporation, is to increase profits through any means necessary.
The reality is that any type of AI safety regulation that meaningfully reduces the chance of existential risk, whether by pausing frontier model development, banning super intelligence, or any other powerful lever, will also meaningfully reduce these companies’ profits. We should not expect either frontier lab to be our ally when substantial checks on their power are on the table. And the fight for AI safety isn’t just a fight to pass one bill– after we pass baseline regulation, it’s going to be a decades-long struggle as technology continues to advance. This means that any type of AI legislation addressing other harms that erode society’s resilience to catastrophic incidents– like denying people health benefits, replacing jobs without recompense, or placing chatbots in schools– will also reduce these companies’ bottom lines and be another front in the battle.
Second, we need to understand that we are waging an ideological and factional fight, not a partisan one. Some in the AI safety community feel that it’s most strategic to pursue a bipartisan approach to pass legislation. But that ignores a basic fact: establishmentDemocrats and Republicans are often equally hesitant to check corporate power, and we can’t rely on them to oppose the industry’s influence. In fact, the only group in American politics over the last decade that has consistently and substantially stood up to billionaires and big corporations is the populist left (sometimes withpartnershipfromthepopulistright).
We have battled with Big Pharma and health insurance companies in pursuit of Medicare for All; with Big Oil in pursuit of a Green New Deal; and with the military industrial complex and the Israel lobby in pursuit of an end to endless wars. It’s clear to us that in the fight for AI safety legislation, and any other legislation that genuinely addresses the impact of AI on our society, our enemies will be Big Tech and the frontier labs. And we know that this fight is likely to be bipartisan in a different way than expected: it may be equally difficult to convince Republicans and establishment Democrats to take real action when they’re dining with Big Tech oligarchs, accepting their campaign donations, and hiring their family members.
If we can accurately understand this as a fight against corporate power and for populist ends, we have effective messages and tactics to form the basis for our campaign. Democrats across the ideological spectrum triggered an unprecedented blue wave election by using the economic populist message that Bernie Sanders and other leftists have been beating the drum on for decades (and that Republicans used to win in 2024). This election didn’t just demonstrate the effectiveness of an anti-corporate message; it reminded us of the blueprint for tactics. The waveofactivism against AI data centers caused Republicans and Democrats alike to reverse their pro-data center messaging in the face of voter anger, with many of those fights carrying new elected officials to victory. When the populist left has won major fights against powerful enemies in the past, we have relied on confrontational and aggressive tactics like boycotts, strikes, sit-ins, civil disobedience, and arrests– the same kinds of tactics that are now winning the anti-data center war.
Using this playbook, we will be able to hold Democratic majorities accountable to the populist ideas they ran on, passing legislation that addresses voters’ anger and economic anxiety and meaningfully curtails the risks and harms caused by AI. In particular, I encourage anyone reading this who feels deep urgency around the need for AI safety regulation to explore using the political tactics and messaging discussed above. This is a moment in which we can take our fight directly to the people, rather than relying on inside games, op-eds, or campaign donations, none of which match the scale or power of what is needed to meaningfully rein in these companies on the timeline required.
I have spent most of my career working for progressive politicians, but I joined the AI fight earlier this year because I am clear on the risks of letting these companies accelerate unchecked. I am just as clear on the role of this fight in a broader realignment around an anti-corporate agenda. Our work at Guardrails began as a successful attempt to toxify AI money because we understood that Leading the Future’s undue influence would curtail our ability to pass meaningful regulation. Now, we’re looking to build on the opportunities we have preserved. As 2028 approaches, we plan to continue organizing, holding power to account, and remaining clear-eyed about our oligarch enemies. My hope is that the AI safety community can see themselves in our movement against corporate power and work with us to create a safer, more resilient, just, and equitable society.
hi! this is maya (op) - i gave a talk last week in the bay with a similar thesis, and sparked some robust debate and thoughtful follow-up questions, so i thought i'd memorialize it here for discussion! the thing i'm most interested in is the idea that people are underestimating how hard it's going to be to get ANY establishment politicians to take meaningfully curtailing corporate power seriously. welcome your feedback :)
After a couple of years working in data and tech at GiveDirectly, I left to work in politics, campaigning for candidates at the state, local, and federal levels. I most recently managed Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s general election campaign, but earlier this year, recognizing the urgency of the AI moment, I began as a senior advisor at Guardrails Alliance. In my new role, I believe the analysis and tactics we’ve long used and studied on the populist left can help us win the fight for AI safety and shared benefits.
The fight for AI regulation is fundamentally the same type of fight against corporate power that the populist left and labor have led throughout history. The message and tactics that win that fight are both effective and incredibly popular, and embracing them will help us put the American people in control of AI today and permanently in control of their futures. Here– in what I am told is likely the shortest LessWrong post of all time– I'll explain what the AI safety movement can learn from the populist left as it attempts to raise the salience of its message, build political power, and ultimately pass transformational legislation.
First, we need to be clear about the nature of the fight: who our opponents are and what they are trying to win. At its core, the fight for AI safety is a campaign to put significant checks on corporate power, which will ultimately curtail these companies’ profits, and limit their ability to consolidate influence and build monopolies. While some draw the distinction between “bad AI” (OpenAI) and “good AI” (Anthropic), both companies are rapidly developing products that put humanity at risk in pursuit of making more money than anyone in the history of the world, and there is reasonable evidence that Anthropic’s pitch to be seen as “good AI” is simply a hollow branding exercise designed to taint its competition (which itself originally claimed to be “good AI”!). The milquetoast bill Anthropic circulated earlier this year makes it clear that its business motives take precedence over concern for the future of humanity. Now that it has IPO’d, the company’s primary incentive, as with any major corporation, is to increase profits through any means necessary.
The reality is that any type of AI safety regulation that meaningfully reduces the chance of existential risk, whether by pausing frontier model development, banning super intelligence, or any other powerful lever, will also meaningfully reduce these companies’ profits. We should not expect either frontier lab to be our ally when substantial checks on their power are on the table. And the fight for AI safety isn’t just a fight to pass one bill– after we pass baseline regulation, it’s going to be a decades-long struggle as technology continues to advance. This means that any type of AI legislation addressing other harms that erode society’s resilience to catastrophic incidents– like denying people health benefits, replacing jobs without recompense, or placing chatbots in schools– will also reduce these companies’ bottom lines and be another front in the battle.
Second, we need to understand that we are waging an ideological and factional fight, not a partisan one. Some in the AI safety community feel that it’s most strategic to pursue a bipartisan approach to pass legislation. But that ignores a basic fact: establishment Democrats and Republicans are often equally hesitant to check corporate power, and we can’t rely on them to oppose the industry’s influence. In fact, the only group in American politics over the last decade that has consistently and substantially stood up to billionaires and big corporations is the populist left (sometimes with partnership from the populist right).
We have battled with Big Pharma and health insurance companies in pursuit of Medicare for All; with Big Oil in pursuit of a Green New Deal; and with the military industrial complex and the Israel lobby in pursuit of an end to endless wars. It’s clear to us that in the fight for AI safety legislation, and any other legislation that genuinely addresses the impact of AI on our society, our enemies will be Big Tech and the frontier labs. And we know that this fight is likely to be bipartisan in a different way than expected: it may be equally difficult to convince Republicans and establishment Democrats to take real action when they’re dining with Big Tech oligarchs, accepting their campaign donations, and hiring their family members.
If we can accurately understand this as a fight against corporate power and for populist ends, we have effective messages and tactics to form the basis for our campaign. Democrats across the ideological spectrum triggered an unprecedented blue wave election by using the economic populist message that Bernie Sanders and other leftists have been beating the drum on for decades (and that Republicans used to win in 2024). This election didn’t just demonstrate the effectiveness of an anti-corporate message; it reminded us of the blueprint for tactics. The wave of activism against AI data centers caused Republicans and Democrats alike to reverse their pro-data center messaging in the face of voter anger, with many of those fights carrying new elected officials to victory. When the populist left has won major fights against powerful enemies in the past, we have relied on confrontational and aggressive tactics like boycotts, strikes, sit-ins, civil disobedience, and arrests– the same kinds of tactics that are now winning the anti-data center war.
Using this playbook, we will be able to hold Democratic majorities accountable to the populist ideas they ran on, passing legislation that addresses voters’ anger and economic anxiety and meaningfully curtails the risks and harms caused by AI. In particular, I encourage anyone reading this who feels deep urgency around the need for AI safety regulation to explore using the political tactics and messaging discussed above. This is a moment in which we can take our fight directly to the people, rather than relying on inside games, op-eds, or campaign donations, none of which match the scale or power of what is needed to meaningfully rein in these companies on the timeline required.
I have spent most of my career working for progressive politicians, but I joined the AI fight earlier this year because I am clear on the risks of letting these companies accelerate unchecked. I am just as clear on the role of this fight in a broader realignment around an anti-corporate agenda. Our work at Guardrails began as a successful attempt to toxify AI money because we understood that Leading the Future’s undue influence would curtail our ability to pass meaningful regulation. Now, we’re looking to build on the opportunities we have preserved. As 2028 approaches, we plan to continue organizing, holding power to account, and remaining clear-eyed about our oligarch enemies. My hope is that the AI safety community can see themselves in our movement against corporate power and work with us to create a safer, more resilient, just, and equitable society.