How Artificial Intelligence threatens human freedom and consolidates control in the hands of its controllers

US Senator Bernie Sanders, the well-known Democratic lawmaker, recently raised the alarm over the potential dangers that artificial intelligence (AI) poses to the United States. He did so in a speech broadcast in recent days, as well as in an opinion article published  earlier this month in the widely read British newspaper, The Guardian, under the title: “Artificial Intelligence Poses Unprecedented Threats. Congress Must Act Now.” Sanders’ intervention provides an important point of departure for a broader discussion about the risks associated with the global spread of artificial intelligence, whether in its popular, civilian form, exemplified by platforms such as ChatGPT, or in its security-driven, sovereign manifestation, represented by systems like Palantir. For societies beyond the United States, the consequences of this diffusion may prove even more profound and potentially more dangerous.

In his article, Sanders warned that artificial intelligence and robotics are poised to fundamentally reshape the world, ushering in changes that are difficult to imagine. He expressed deep concern that, in the not-too-distant future, artificial intelligence could displace human agency in governing the planet itself, warning that this issue continues to be dangerously overlooked despite the speed with which its threats are evolving. Sanders went on to detail the profound impact of artificial intelligence on human life, arguing that every phone call we make, every email we send, and every search we conduct is potentially accessible to the owners of AI systems. He also cautioned against the growing influence of artificial intelligence on warfare and on the fabric of human relationships.

Specialised reports indicate that just five major companies, Google, Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, and OpenAI, now control an estimated 80 to 90 percent of the research resources and core infrastructure underpinning artificial intelligence. This concentration of power places decisive influence in the hands of a small circle of the world’s wealthiest individuals, including Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, and others, who are directing investments worth hundreds of billions of dollars into the development of artificial intelligence and robotics, effectively shaping the future of humanity with little meaningful oversight or accountability. Elon Musk has recently argued that artificial intelligence and robotics will eventually replace all jobs. Similarly, Dario Amodei, the chief executive of Anthropic, has cautioned that artificial intelligence could lead to the loss of as many as half of entry-level white-collar jobs. Others have gone further still. Larry Ellison, the world’s second-wealthiest individual, has openly speculated about the emergence of an AI-powered surveillance system.

Donald Trump has emerged as a staunch defender of Big Tech elites. He has pledged to roll back regulatory constraints on artificial intelligence, including rescinding an executive order issued by former president Joe Biden that sought to establish guardrails for AI development, replacing it with measures aimed at removing what he describes as “barriers to innovation.” Trump has repeatedly argued for loosening restrictions on major technology companies to bolster their global competitiveness and has advocated limiting the ability of U.S. states to regulate artificial intelligence. Peter Thiel, the billionaire investor and co-founder of Palantir, has likewise been an outspoken critic of efforts to regulate artificial intelligence, frequently portraying regulation as a threat to technological progress and national power. By contrast, Sanders has called for the United States to assert firm regulatory authority over AI companies, urging lawmakers to discipline their conduct, guide the trajectory of their development through law, enact binding legislation, and establish robust oversight mechanisms.

Today, artificial intelligence has become intertwined with growing fears of a centralised global authority, one capable of exerting control through the monopolisation of information by a small group of individuals. This concern, raised by many observers, including Sanders in his recent interventions, underscores a broader anxiety about how power may be reconfigured in the age of AI. The risks associated with the global spread and dominance of artificial intelligence appear even more acute for other nations and societies. This is particularly so given that artificial intelligence, in both its popular, civilian form, exemplified by ChatGPT, and its security-driven, sovereign manifestation, represented by Palantir, is overwhelmingly American in origin. Whether this technological dominance reflects an ideological orientation or a strategic design, its geopolitical implications, especially for countries lacking regulatory leverage or technological autonomy, are difficult to ignore.

Criticism has increasingly been directed at artificial intelligence companies for concentrating information, and by extension power, in the hands of those who own and control these systems. This concentration is compounded by a persistent lack of transparency: the internal mechanisms of operation, the underlying logic guiding system behavior, their normative orientations, and the processes through which decisions are made, all remain largely opaque. This opacity is further reinforced by a veil of secrecy surrounding the contracts and agreements concluded between these companies and states, including their scope, limits, and areas of application, details that are rarely disclosed to the public. The most troubling dimension lies in the fact that the outputs of such companies are increasingly centralised in the hands of a small number of governments or designated entities, where they may be deployed in warfare or for security and surveillance purposes. Over time, this trajectory risks facilitating a gradual transfer of decision-making authority from sovereign states to a centralised, comprehensive power structure, underpinned by artificial intelligence.

ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence program that entered widespread public use in 2022. It was developed by OpenAI, an artificial intelligence research and development company founded in San Francisco in 2015. The organisation initially operated as a non-profit entity before establishing a for-profit arm designed to attract large-scale investment. Microsoft subsequently emerged as one of OpenAI’s largest investors, providing substantial financial backing as well as cloud infrastructure, used to store and process data over the internet, which has been essential to operating and scaling ChatGPT’s large language models.

Sam Altman is widely regarded as one of the principal founders of ChatGPT and OpenAI, and currently serves as the company’s chief executive officer. He is an American of Jewish background and has spoken publicly about antisemitism, describing it as a serious and persistent problem in the United States. Altman has also participated in events in Tel Aviv, where he has addressed Israel’s prospective role in the future of artificial intelligence. Ilya Sutskever, a leading artificial intelligence researcher, is likewise a co-founder of OpenAI. He holds Israeli and Canadian citizenship and spent his early years in Israel before later relocating to Canada. Although Elon Musk was among OpenAI’s early founders, he subsequently departed the organisation and later initiated legal action following its transition from a non-profit structure to a capped-profit model.

Palantir, founded in 2003, was designed as a data-analytics company aimed at addressing security challenges in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Its core purpose has been to manage and analyse vast and highly sensitive datasets of the kind used by defense and intelligence agencies, law-enforcement bodies, healthcare systems, and large corporations. The company aggregates data from multiple sources, then refines, filters, and links them to enable advanced analytical insight. Numerous government entities, many of them operating in sensitive domains have entered into agreements and contracts with Palantir. Yet despite the scale and significance of these relationships, there is no publicly available source that provides a comprehensive list of all governmental clients or the full scope of such engagements.

Palantir has entered into strategic partnerships with Israel to provide data-analytics technologies and intelligent systems used by Israeli military and security agencies during the ongoing conflict. In 2024, the company held a meeting of its board of directors in Tel Aviv, a move widely interpreted as a gesture of solidarity. Reports have further suggested that Palantir supplied Israel with technological tools during the war in Gaza. At the same time, these ties have prompted controversy. A number of global investors have reportedly sold their stakes in Palantir in protest, citing concerns over the company’s relationship with Israel and the potential use of its technologies during the war in Gaza, and more broadly, within the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Alex Karp currently serves as the chief executive officer of Palantir, a position he has held since the company’s founding in 2003, and is regarded as one of its principal co-founders. Karp is Jewish and describes himself as secular, while acknowledging a strong ethical and intellectual influence drawn from Jewish tradition. He has characterised Judaism as a historical experience and a moral framework shaped by persecution and existential threat, and he frequently invokes what he calls the “historical memory of the Jewish people” to underscore the importance of power and protection. Karp has consistently expressed support for Israel’s right to exist and to defend itself, portraying Israel as one of several liberal democracies he views as under threat. He has publicly affirmed cooperation with Israel and its security and military institutions, and has spoken openly in support of the country, including references to directing portions of the company’s gains toward related engagements. More broadly, Karp has articulated a belief in technology as an inherently political instrument, arguing that artificial intelligence is not neutral and should be deployed to protect governments.

Peter Thiel, Palantir’s co-founder, serves as chairman of the board and is widely regarded as the company’s principal financial backer. He was also an early and influential investor in major technology firms, including Facebook. Thiel was born in Germany and raised in the United States, and has publicly identified as a Christian. He was educated in philosophy and law, and first met his partner, Alex Karp, at Stanford University while both were studying law there, where they shared intellectual interests spanning philosophy, law, and Germany’s historical and cultural legacy. Thiel has expressed an intellectual interest in the Torah, or Old Testament, within his broader Christian readings. He has consistently aligned himself with Israel in regional conflicts, emphasising what he describes as Israel’s right to self-defence. While generally avoiding direct criticism of Israel’s military policies, he has strongly condemned attacks against the country.

In his public rhetoric, Thiel has employed charged religious language, weaving it into a contemporary worldview shaped in part by the thought of René Girard and strands of Christian theology. He has invoked the figure of the Antichrist when discussing the prospect of a global power or system that promises peace and the end of conflict by stripping away freedom and centralising authority through technological control, an outcome he associates with the rise of artificial intelligence. Yet while Thiel articulates a critical understanding of what an AI-enabled, centralised and comprehensive authority might represent, the paradox lies in the fact that the very risks he warns against align closely with the functional role of his own company, Palantir. The firm’s technologies are designed to consolidate, analyze, and control information, concentrating it in the hands of a limited set of actors, accusations Palantir has faced similar to those directed at other major artificial intelligence companies. Sanders’ recent speech and his article in The Guardian remain firmly within this broader frame: a warning about the expanding influence of artificial intelligence on humanity, articulated from a set of ideological and ethical convictions rather than from narrow technical concerns.

Drawing on the ideas of René Girard—ideas to which Thiel has openly expressed affinity, the fear of violence within societies is seen as driving a search for a comprehensive solution or a designated enemy. Within this framework, societies come to accept the sacrifice of that enemy, even if it is unjustly targeted, or to endorse the construction of a new, unified order in the name of peace, even when such an order entails the surrender of freedom on a global scale. This logic of sacrifice, of selecting an enemy even at the expense of justice was evident in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, which produced a new adversary in the Middle East. Under this paradigm, wars were waged in Iraq and Afghanistan. The United States later acknowledged that the invasion of Iraq, justified at the time by claims regarding weapons of mass destruction, lacked a valid foundation and was based on faulty intelligence. These developments unfolded within the context of an American foreign policy seeking a unifying adversary, one capable of mobilising the nation and legitimising the expansion and financing of defence, warfare, and security apparatuses following the disappearance of the Soviet Union as a defining threat.

In both cases, the originating entity is the United States, albeit with differing forms of relationship to the American state. ChatGPT was developed in the United States by OpenAI, which was founded in 2015 and initially established as a non-profit organisation. In 2019, OpenAI created a capped-profit subsidiary designed to attract investment while preserving elements of its original mission. Today, OpenAI operates as a privately held American company structured around a “public benefit” rationale, and maintains a strategic partnership with Microsoft, a major US technology corporation that itself works closely with the US government across multiple sectors. Palantir was likewise founded in the United States, in 2003, and from its inception maintained close ties to the US intelligence community’s venture-capital arm. The company was originally created to meet a specific intelligence need. Nevertheless, Palantir was established as a private firm and later transitioned into a publicly traded company in 2020. It is owned by shareholders rather than the state and does not operate under the administrative authority of any US government department or agency. It is well established in the United States, and in other Western countries, that governments at times outsource sovereign functions to private companies. This practice can reduce direct accountability for official institutions, while simultaneously granting those institutions greater operational freedom beyond constitutional constraints and formal oversight. It also enables states to export technologies, particularly sensitive ones, to allies without assuming full official responsibility or legal exposure at the international level.

What emerges from the foregoing is the particular danger that artificial intelligence poses to the non-Western world, where goals, aspirations, and ideological frameworks often diverge sharply from long-standing American strategic and ideological visions. The experience of the Palestinian people under occupation may serve as a concentrated, lived example of how centralised global control can operate through the dominance of information and the deployment of artificial intelligence, in both its civilian and military forms systems whose accumulated data and analytical power benefit only select actors. The occupying authorities exercise control over nearly every aspect of Palestinian life: decisions to target individuals, determine their location, freeze bank accounts, regulate official transactions, and restrict travel or access to medical care are all enabled by this comprehensive informational dominance. In this sense, life in Palestine increasingly resembles existence within a vast prison, one whose walls are digital, whose bullets are invisible, and whose effects are nonetheless lethal. This reality underscores the urgency of collective action. States must move decisively to halt the unchecked expansion of this destructive force by imposing robust legal and regulatory constraints at the domestic, regional, and international levels aimed at curbing its spread, limiting its abuses, and preventing further destructive trajectories.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.