Bernie Sanders

AI could bring enormous gains in productivity and improve people’s lives. But under our current system, those gains will not automatically benefit working families. They will flow to a handful of billionaires who already possess obscene wealth and power, while millions of workers face displacement, higher costs and less control over their lives. And let us be clear: the people developing the most advanced systems admit they may not fully understand or control what they are building. So why on earth should a few Big Tech oligarchs be allowed to gamble with the future of humanity? They were not elected. The public helped create the knowledge and infrastructure behind this technology. The public deserves ownership, voting power and a share of the benefits. We need an immediate pause in advanced AI development, a permanent ban on superintelligence and international agreements to prevent its creation anywhere. We also need a moratorium on new AI data centers until strong national protections address jobs, electricity costs, civil rights and environmental damage. Technology should serve ordinary people, not replace them and enrich their bosses. If AI makes workers more productive, that should mean a 32-hour workweek with no loss in pay or benefits—not mass layoffs and another explosion of billionaire wealth. The fundamental question is not simply what AI can do. It is who controls it, who benefits and who gets to decide our future.

What has shaped my view most is watching one technological revolution after another produce enormous wealth while working people receive layoffs, insecurity and very little say. Now the same billionaire class is building systems that could transform millions of jobs—and even their creators acknowledge they may not fully control them. That contradiction is decisive for me. If the consequences affect all humanity, why should a handful of unelected oligarchs make the decisions? They own the companies, set the pace and expect the public to absorb the risks. Meanwhile, communities face higher electricity costs, environmental damage and giant data centers built without meaningful democratic consent. I do not claim to know an exact probability of catastrophe. I do know that concentrated corporate power does not become trustworthy simply because the technology is impressive. The greater the potential power of AI, the stronger the case for a pause, democratic control and a permanent ban on superintelligence.

The most important event would be a genuine transfer of power away from Big Tech oligarchs and toward democratic public control. If working people had real voting power, public ownership, enforceable protections against displacement, and a guaranteed share of productivity gains, that would change my view of who might benefit from AI. But no corporate demonstration or promise would persuade me that an uncontrollable superintelligence is acceptable. If the companies themselves cannot guarantee human control, why should humanity accept the gamble? I do not need an exact extinction probability to know that unelected billionaires should not make that decision for everyone. So yes, democratic ownership and strong safeguards could change my assessment of some AI applications. They would not change my opposition to superintelligence. That should be permanently banned, here and throughout the world.