AI & Open Borders

We see it everywhere in the memeplex. Cognitive dissonance occurs when individuals hold conflicting beliefs or ideas. In the context of advocating for open borders while automation and artificial intelligence (AI) threaten job opportunities, a sense of cognitive dissonance arises. It is easy to see the apparent contradiction of promoting open borders to spur economic growth while corporations eagerly adopt AI technologies, potentially rendering many jobs obsolete. It challenges the notion that importing more individuals to fuel economic growth is a valid justification, questioning the sustainability and ethical implications of such a stance. AI should be another reason to pause all immigration.

Advocates for open borders often champion the economic benefits it brings. There are only three reasons to act as America does: cheap labor, political gain for patrons and skimming the cream of competitors. Economic benefits is the safe answer. They argue that by allowing the free movement of labor across borders, nations can experience a boost in economic growth. We have seen decades of growth that concentrates the gains in the upper crust while the mass surge in labor supply crushes the rest. The entire 2016 Bernie-Trump insurgency moment expressed this awareness. However, this incorrect perspective or focus on growth disregards the potential negative consequences of mass migration in an era dominated by automation and AI.

The rapid advancement of technology and the tantalizing next steps over the horizon have led to a growing concern about job displacement. Automation was an issue that first affected blue collar sectors and as computing advanced, affected the paper pushing sectors. A wide range of industries, from manufacturing to customer service, is increasingly reliant on automation and soon AI, which can perform tasks more efficiently and at a lower cost. As a result, many jobs that were once performed by humans are at risk of disappearing.

Considering this landscape, it seems paradoxical to advocate for open borders as a means of stimulating economic growth. Importing more workers may provide temporary benefits in terms of labor supply, but it fails to account for the long-term ramifications. To whom do these benefits go? With AI poised to replace numerous jobs, the sustainability of an open borders approach becomes questionable.

Using economic growth as the primary justification for importing people amidst the rise of AI reveals a shortsighted perspective. America, and the West as a whole, is asking for a welfare class. This is the goal of the parties that control the state, but it is such a small minded goal. Power and some small GDP points. While open borders may lead to short-term economic gains, it fails to address the fundamental issues of job displacement and the future of work. Relying on economic growth alone as a rationale neglects the broader consequences of such a policy. We have not even discussed social cohesion, which is evaporating.

The reliance on economic growth perpetuates a flawed system that values profit over human welfare. This narrow focus on GDP and corporate success disregards the societal impacts of incorporating entirely new populations after failures to assimilate prior groups and the looming challenge of deep and widespread automation. By prioritizing economic growth without considering the implications of job displacement and what to do with populations that are replaced by algos, advocates for open borders display a disconnect between their purported goals. Add workers with limited skills to boost the economy just as AI forces workers to be highly skilled to remain employed.

The concentration of power and wealth in the hands of corporations through the widespread implementation of AI exacerbates existing social and economic inequalities. This odd distribution of resources is incompatible with the principle of open borders, which should ideally promote equal opportunities for all individuals. It might be that the elite lacked a proletariat or lumpenproletariat for a proper revolution they can manage so they need to import one.

The cognitive dissonance observed in individuals advocating for open borders while AI threatens jobs highlights the need for a nuanced and forward-thinking approach. Rather than prioritizing short-term economic growth, a broad strategy should consider the long-term implications of automation on employment. It is essential to address the challenges associated with job displacement and wealth concentration. This is about power for the ruling elite. They can speak out of both sides of their mouths about this. It is up to the right or anyone capable to spotlight this conflict in the goals of the system, exposing them for its naked power play. Our ruling elite has its rigged system for consent. We must use every tool at our disposal to delegitimize it and offer an alternative.

-By Henry Delacroix

3 comments

  1. The powers that be want to replace White professional workers with Indian engineers while also replacing White working-class people with labor from Mexico. When is the last time you spoke to a white American when you called about a credit card problem or a computer technician over a computer problem? You even have to select English when using an ATM now. It is little things like that which accumulates and contributes to revolutionary discontent.

    1. The problems you encounter when interacting with these various non-White store clerks or phone help-line people aren’t even limited to their not speaking English natively– although it certainly doesn’t help

      Like, I go into gas stations and such a lot and when I try to interact with the various Indians and Muslims who work there… the problems that arise aren’t a result of their not being good English speakers. I can tell pretty well the difference between a person whose confused because they’re non-English and between a person who is, for lack of a better term, freaking dumb

      A LOT of these people are just DUMB

Comments are closed.