(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Imitative AI and Labor Day [1] ['Greg Dworkin', 'Angela Marx'] Date: 2026-09-07 This is longer than I intended, but if you are an American, you likely have today off and therefor have the time. Labor Day, as you probably already know, is a uniquely American holiday. It exists, at least in part, because of the deep hatred the holders of American capital have for the American workers that make capital useful. And that is why imitative AI, despite its economic issues, is still having a moment. Labor Day was an American replacement for the European May Day. May Day had become associated with communism, socialism (not the same things, whatever Fox News would have you believe) and labor unionism. When the labor pressure in the nineteenth century became too great to ignore completely, political and economic leaders created Labor Day rather than recognize May Day. They hoped to both quiet the labor movement and to break its association with the international movements. To a certain degree, that worked. But more importantly, it shows that capital in American cannot stand even the appearance of worker strength. Hence, imitative AI. One of the lessor told stories about imitative AI is how strongly bosses reacted against the gains American workers made around the pandemic. People were allowed to work from home, and it made them more productive in many cases. It certainly made them happier. America had something resembling, likely for the first time in its history, certainly for the first time since Reagan, a normal if limited welfare state. Employers hated the limited freedom that such provisions granted workers. The push to return to the office, the push to end the COVID-era benefits came from much the same place as the history of anti-unionism and the push for imitative AI — the desire to control and exploit labor. Capital has always pushed automation as a way to discipline workers. All the way back to the Luddite era, and including the American anti-union push of the late 19th century, the owners of capital have used machines that were more expensive, produced lower quality goods, or both, to break unions and workers. There is a reason that the American tax system favors putting in a machine over hiring a person, after all, and it is not because the owners of capital are pushing us forward on the long march to Utopian Space Communism for Everyone. Imitative AI is a similar tool — it promises to remove a significant chunk of workers and thus can be used as a rod to discipline the rest. People often wonder why the doyens of imitative AI went all in on the “everyone will be replaced” mantra early in the process. It was because their targets were not normal Americans, but the owners of capital and their management class. Their is a conflict between wanting to break workers and wanting to be a successful business person. You cannot generally get away with, long term, an economically inefficient setup. Sooner or later, someone will take advantage of your inefficiencies and take market from you. Being in a monopoly or near monopoly, as many industries in the 19th century and the 21st century are, helps alleviate that problem. Having a government that sides with capital, even when it breaks the rules, as in the Luddite period and the 21st century, also helps. But there always exists the collective action problem, Most firms may want a more easily controlled, less financially rewarded working class, but taking the steps to that goal does not always make the most business sense. However, the push to use imitative AI has, for now, eliminated that collective action problem. A couple decades of politicians, popular media, and Silicon Valley itself waxing on about the magical powers of software created an environment where it was easy for firms to go all in on imitative AI. The leaders of Silicon Valley said it was going to remove the need for entire sectors of employees — so who were they to question? And since the firms pushing these stories were close to being monopolists (or in some markets, legally found to be monopolies) or supported by said monopolies, that made it even easier. That fact that imitative AI shows no-to-minimal economic value is being held at bay by the combination of desire, near-monopoly power, and a story that keeps at bay, for now, the collective action problem. The problem for imitative AI is that it is, at best, a normal technology. This means that it is merely going to automate some work. The jobs apocalypse is a function of executives making narrative-driven decisions, not economic reality. Companies that lead the way with AI firings have already walked some of those back as imitative AI failed to live up to the hype. The pain is being inflicted for ideological reasons, not economic ones. In the end, since labor is what makes capital useful and is therefore superior to capital, to paraphrase a fairly famous president, it will likely survive these attempts to remove it. But the damage in the meantime will be real. Which brings us to the datacenter backlash. There is a trend, now, in technocratic liberal circles, to decry the data-center backlash because some portions of it are not entirely based on factual reasons. Some factions over-state the water usage (though it should be noted that the water usage impact is contingent on the area. There are places where data centers have gone or plan to go where their water usage would have a real impact), for example. This is to be expected — no movement is entirely reality-based or correct about everything that every member believes. That goes for the technocrats as well. What these technocrats miss, however, is that the data center outrage is largely based on the correct feeling that the people in charge do not care for the input of their lessors. No one in charge cares if the data center is bad for the local environment or the people living near it, nor do they care that they are part of the machine that they claim will eliminate everyone’s jobs and make them part of a permanent underclass. People, unsurprisingly, are doing what people have always done in the face of a direct attack — resisting. The resistance matters. Technology does not guarantee a better life for everyone automatically. The benefits of technology have always flowed to those who can exercise control over said technology. The industrial revolution did not benefit most people — it took a hundred years of work, blood, tears, and resistance to make the benefits of technology flow down. We are in a similar situation today. And whatever the flaws of some elements of the larger data center resistance movement there may be, the resistance is based on real concerns, real issues, and hopes to solve real problems. If there are aspects that the technocrats do not like, they are much better off joining the movement and getting a seat at the table rather than merely expressing disdain. Because the concerns are real and the resistance is one way to force the technology to benefit people, not capital. Since it is Labor Day, and since imitative AI is a huge labor concern, I thought I would end with some recommendations. Brian Merchant is an excellent commentator on technology and labor. And he has written the definitive book on the Luddites. Luiza Jarovsky has an excellent newsletter focused on AI regualtions. Gary Marcus does a good job of explaining AI even if I do not always agree with his positions. And Hamilton Nolan is the premier commentator on labor in Amercia. If you are in the US, I hope you enjoy your Labor Day. Want more oddities like this? You can subscribe to my free newsletter [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2026/9/7/800094901/community/imitative-ai-and-labor-day/ Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/