AI as the Next Amplifier?

Like weapons, Artificial Intelligence can also act as an amplifier.

Poorly regulated: AI increases tensions.

Examples:

• Deepfakes: Fake videos discredit politicians

• Algorithms: Show everyone only what makes them angry

• Surveillance: Authoritarian states use AI to control their citizens

Well regulated: AI could help stabilize societies.

• Transparency

• Fairness

• Safeguards against abuse

But historically, new technologies have often been used for control — not for participation, and not

for social progress.

Authoritarian states already use AI for surveillance.

Democracies must be careful not to follow the same path.

Here is an image showing AI as an amplifier of social tensions:

Source: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/15/3/62

Historical Patterns

Over the past 200 years, one pattern has repeated itself:

Every 50–70 years, there are major upheavals.

Examples:

• 1800–1850: Industrial Revolution → nationalism, colonialism, wars

•  1914–1945: Electricity and mass media → world wars, system shifts (communism, fascism, democracy)

• 1970–2000: Digitalization and globalization → polarization, information crises, identity politics

• 2020–?: AI and climate change → ?

Area	Development	Tendency
Institutional Neutrality	Supreme Court increasingly ideologically stuffed, judiciary as a political tool	Weakness
Media System	Polarized Information Spaces, disinformation, algorithmic echo chambers	Weakness
Elections and Legitimacy	Doubts about election results, delegitimiziation of electoral processes	Erosion Risk
Executive Power	Presidential decrees instead of consensus politics; Congress blockades	Power Concentration
Social Cohesion	Polarization, identity politics, militia movements	Fragmentation
Economy and Lobyism	Large corporations (Tech, Defense, Pharma)	Power Asymmetry

Here is a simple graphic showing cycles of social change:

What happens in these phases?

Each time, the balance shifts between:

• Freedom vs. security

• Openness vs. control

• Innovation vs. tradition

Some countries find a new balance. Others collapse.

Are these laws? No — they are not natural laws.

They are patterns, guiding frameworks that help us recognize similarities.

They do not predict the future.

And Now: The AI Era

We are facing a new transformation.

This time, it may happen faster:

Technology: AI is changing everything — work, communication, power

Environment: Climate change threatens resources and stability

Society: Polarization is increasing

When these factors intensify at the same time, they reinforce one another.

Two Scenarios

Wrong Regulatios

• Liberal countries: Too open 

→ AI is misused due to excessive freedom 

→ inequality grows

• Conservative countries: Too controlling 

→ AI is used for surveillance and state power 

→ inequality grows too

Result:

In both liberal and conservative systems, imbalance emerges.

Power concentrates in the hands of a few.

Power attracts corrupt people — like a magnet.

Tensions escalate. Societies tip over.

The Right Balance

So how can a society maintain equilibrium?

Hybrid systems:

• Transparency (liberal) + protection against abuse (conservative)

• AI is regulated — but not suffocated

• Innovation remains possible — but fair

Result: Stability.

Maybe even a constructive renewal.

KI als nächster Verstärker?

 

Ähnlich wie Waffen kann auch Künstliche Intelligenz wirken.
Falsch reguliert: KI verstärkt Spannungen
Beispiele:
• Deepfakes: Falsche Videos, die Politiker diskreditieren
• Algorithmen: Zeigen jedem nur, was ihn wütend macht
• Überwachung: Autoritäre Staaten nutzen KI, um Bürger zu kontrollieren
Gut reguliert: KI könnte stabilisieren
• Transparenz
• Fairness
• Kontrolle gegen Missbrauch
Aber: Historisch wurden neue Technologien oft zur Kontrolle genutzt. Nicht zur Teilhabe und nicht für gesellschaftlichen Fortschritt.
Autoritäre Staaten nutzen KI zur Überwachung.
Demokratien müssen aufpassen, nicht denselben Weg zu gehen.

Dieses Bild zeigt KI als Verstärker von Spannungen:

Quelle: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4698/15/3/62

Historische Muster
In den letzten 200 Jahren wiederholt sich ein Muster:
Alle 50–70 Jahre gibt es große Umbrüche.
Beispiele:
• 1800–1850: Industrielle Revolution → Nationalismus, Kolonialismus, Kriege
• 1914–1945: Elektrizität und Massenmedien → Weltkriege, Systemumbrüche (Kommunismus, Faschismus, Demokratie)
• 1970–2000: Digitalisierung und Globalisierung → Polarisierung, Informationskrisen, Identitätspolitik
• 2020–?: KI und Klimawandel → ?

Bereich	Entwicklung	Tendenz
Institutionelle Neutralität	Supreme Court zunehmend ideologisch besetzt, Justiz als politisches Werkzeug	Schwäche
Mediensystem	Polarisierte Informationsräume, Desinformation, algorithmische Echokammern	Schwäche
Wahlen und Legitimität	Zweifel an Wahlergebnissen, Delegitimierung der Wahlverfahren	Erosionsgefahr
Exekutive Macht	Präsidentielle Dekrete statt Konsenspolitik; Kongressblockaden	Machtkonzentration
Gesellschaftliche Kohäsion	Polarisierung, Identitätspolitik, Milizbewegungen	Fragmentierung
Wirtschaft und Lobbyismus	Große Konzerne (Tech, Rüstung, Pharma) beeinflussen Politik massiv	Machtasymmetrie

Hier eine einfache Grafik zu den Zyklen der gesellschaftlichen Veränderung: 

Was passiert in diesen Phasen?
Jedes Mal wird das Gleichgewicht verschoben:

Freiheit vs. Sicherheit
Offenheit vs. Kontrolle
Innovation vs. Tradition

Manche Länder finden eine neue Balance. Andere zerbrechen.

Sind das Gesetze? Nein. Das sind keine Naturgesetze.
Das sind Muster – Orientierungshilfen.
Sie unterstützen uns, Ähnlichkeiten zu erkennen. Aber sie sagen nicht die Zukunft voraus.

Und jetzt? Die KI-Ära

Wir stehen vor einem neuen Umbruch.
Diesmal könnte es schneller gehen:
Technologie: KI verändert alles (Arbeit, Kommunikation, Macht)
Umwelt: Klimawandel bedroht Ressourcen und Stabilität
Gesellschaft: Polarisierung wächst
Wenn diese Dinge gleichzeitig stärker werden, verstärken sie sich gegenseitig.

Zwei Szenarien:

1. Falsche Regulierung
   Liberale Länder: Zu offen → KI wird wegen zu großer Freiheiten missbraucht → Ungleichheit wächst
   Konservative Länder: Zu kontrollierend → KI wird zur Überwachung und Stärkung des Staates genutzt → Ungleichheit wächst auch
   Ergebnis: Bei beiden, Konservativ und Liberal, kommt es zu einem Ungleichgewicht. Macht haben nur wenige. Macht zieht korrupte Menschen an, wie ein Magnet. Spannungen eskalieren. Länder kippen.
2. Die richtige Balance
   Oder: Wie hält eine Gesellschaft das Gleichgewicht?
   Hybride Länder: Transparenz (liberal) + Schutz vor Missbrauch (konservativ)
   KI wird reguliert – aber nicht erstickt
   Innovation bleibt möglich – aber fair
   
   Ergebnis: Stabilität. Vielleicht sogar eine konstruktive Erneuerung.

When Do Societies Tip Over?

Hybrids are stable—but not indestructible.

They tip when certain things get out of control:

a) Polarization

People stop talking to each other. They end up just insulting one another.

Every group says: “The others are guilty and evil.”

Compromises become impossible.

b) Institutions Fail

Courts, the police, and parliaments lose credibility.

Either: They’re overwhelmed.

Or: They’re seen as corrupt.

People think: “The folks up there don’t care about us!”

c) Information Chaos

Too many news stories. Too many lies. No one knows what’s true—or who to trust—anymore.

Social media makes it worse:

Algorithms only show you stuff that gets you riled up.

Fake info spreads faster than facts.

The result: Trust fades. In everything and everyone.

Example: The USA

The USA is a good example—not because it’s unique, but because you can really see what’s happening there. The USA also provides plenty of data to analyze.

For a long time: Stable hybrid

• Liberal economy (freedom, markets, individualism)

• Conservative order (patriotism, tradition, strong institutions)

It worked. Both sides respected each other.

Even if you disagreed, you talked it out. You looked for solutions and compromises.

Free speech worked—because respect was the foundation. Respect not because you expected it, but because you were willing to give it to others.

You could disagree without insulting someone or seeing them as an enemy.

This unwritten rule made debates possible without the society breaking apart.

Then Came the Tipping

Trump Era:

Conservatism turned populist. Institutions got attacked (“Fake News,” “Deep State”).

Biden Era:

Tried to rebuild trust. But: Polarization got even worse. Every reform is seen as a threat by the other side.

Result:

Formally, everything’s stable. The USA isn’t a dictatorship. The institutions still function (for now).

But: Socially, the country is super tense. Like a rubber band stretched to its limit.

Guns: A Warning Sign

In the USA, there are about 120 guns per 100 people.

Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/gun-ownership-by-state-2015-7

Gun Sales Rise After Crises

After the 2016 election, the 2020 protests, the 2021 Capitol storming, the 2024 assassination attempts:

Each time, more people buy guns.

Many arm themselves for the first time.

They say: “I don’t trust the government anymore. The government can’t protect me.”

Studies on new gun owners show: These folks are more ready to use guns for their beliefs.

Guns Aren’t the Cause—But an Amplifier

Guns don’t start fights.

But: The more guns there are, the quicker words turn into deadly threats.

• A protest can turn into a shootout.

• An argument ends deadly faster.

Political Uncertainty → People get scared

Fear → They buy guns

Arming Up → Mistrust grows (“If they’re arming up, I have to too.”)

Mistrust → Even more political uncertainty

It repeats. Faster and faster.

Guns as a Social Seismograph

Gun ownership shows:

• How much do people still trust their government?

• Do they believe police and justice will protect them?

• Or are they preparing to defend themselves—against other citizens or the state?

The higher the gun ownership, the less trust in the political system.

Exception: Countries with high gun ownership AND stable society. There, trust in society is intact. Guns are, for example, a tradition. Guns aren’t the symptom there.