I’ve been immersing myself in the whole gamut of takes regarding AI. The doomers, the skeptics, the accelerationists. There’s a lot of hype, a lot of hyperbole. See: If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies. And I get it, the desire to convey the gravity in an attention economy where your audience is more likely to register titles and tweets than to read the entire article or book. If AI’s advancements fit the pattern, this catastrophizing will fade, another relic to join the ranks of Cold War duck and cover drills.

America has spent four decades debating where agricultural labor should come from. A durable immigration strategy must also address how farms can need less of it.

Tech companies and other industries downstream of the AI-sector economic boom risk seeing data centers banned entirely. Congress should consider passage of a bill which transforms the Ratepayer Protection Pledge into a certification program.

Removal cases take four years, and the administration has promised millions of them. A machine can decide one in four seconds — lawfully. The case for Deportation AI.

Everyone we spoke with agreed that reward hacking is real and routine. They disagreed, sharply and on the record, about what it means for what comes next.

The AI doomers are saying that AI is going to take your job. I don’t necessarily disagree with them. I just think escaping these jobs and reclaiming our souls is the best thing to happen to America in 100 years, and we should be rejoicing...These doomers have it completely backwards. AI isn’t pushing safe people into a scary, risky world. It’s offering hard-working Americans who are in a fragile work situation their first shot at *real* security. They are sitting ducks and AI will give those ducks wings. Sadly, you sold your soul for something that turned out to not even give you the stability you thought you were getting in return. As Dostoevsky said, "Your worst sin is that you have destroyed and betrayed yourself for nothing.” AI will help us atone for these sins.

Last week was the third annual Reindustrialize Summit hosted by the New American Industrial Alliance. This wasn't another conference about theoretical innovation or corporate release of an app destined to underwhelm. On contraire, it was a gathering of builders, entrepreneurs, hardware startups, engineers, investors, and policymakers who aren't just talking about America's industrial future, but actively constructing it.

No amount of GDP growth is worth losing our republic. Conservatives should therefore follow Hawley’s lead and build out a vigorous, comprehensive program to ensure that AI works for Americans—not the other way around.

Today, as Ohio and others states in the region weigh tax break repeals for data centers and even total moratoria, they would do well to take a more holistic view of their competitive advantages. The Buckeye State has earned a hard-won second chance at economic greatness. It may not get a third.

Only if we put the soul first will we escape the death trap of rebellion – gaining the ability to have nice things (like robot servants) without discovering one day that, through them, we have destroyed ourselves.

The Founders built a system on the consent of the governed. For a century, a competing tradition argued that consent was a fiction best left unexamined. A twenty-dollar AI subscription has now made the specialized class optional.

Every economic revolution reorganizes labor, money, and the prevailing economic order. The AI revolution will be no different. Except that it is happening faster and to a society less equipped to absorb the shock. This essay examines the three reckonings the AI age will force: how we navigate a transition that is already displacing the workforce America spent the last fifty years building, what comes after a fiat monetary system that has concentrated rather than distributed wealth, and what economic framework can succeed capitalism when the scarcity that capitalism was designed to allocate begins to disappear.

Technology does not necessarily have to compete with family, faith, or human connection. In an unexpected twist, it may end up strengthening them, especially for the women who have borne the hidden costs of this new labor market of the last sixty years.

For better or worse, artificial intelligence is the force likeliest to produce a unipolar world governed by one hegemonic civilization.

While Americans are told to fear displacement by artificial intelligence in the future, many are already being displaced in the present by hiring practices of the very firms building it.

AI is making it easier to build real things again. It is proliferating outside of Silicon Valley and has ignited a promise for exportation across the nation: any community can become a hotbed for innovation and opportunity.

The Right often talks about building a worker-centered coalition. Agriculture is where that idea could actually take shape...[but]...America is preparing for the AI age everywhere—except the place that feeds the country.

For at least a decade now, commentators on the political right have called for the reindustrialization of America, for putting our people to work building things in the real world. Now the digital and physical economies are converging, and the time has come to forge a worker-centered coalition focused on development and opportunity.

The frustration over data centers is both real and earned, in large part because the initial expansion of data centers came with tax handouts, no energy supply, and a culture of secrecy, bound by non-disclosure agreements, that exacerbated distrust in communities across the country. But the people cheering these delays have badly misread what is actually happening, who it hurts, and what it means for America's position in the world.

Rivers of bits pound through the air into the smallest channels, twisting and turning upon themselves, throwing themselves against our minds through great bright screens that never flag or tire. This great psychic Borg is changing us and everyone knows it.

One of the great opportunities for statesmanship in coming years is the forging of such an alliance.

The delegation of AI alignment responsibility to a small, ideologically homogeneous research community that is largely irreligious, disproportionately progressive, and nearly entirely unaccountable to democratic institutions is the most disastrous governance failure of our time.

While our federal bureaucracy hums along, a man who helped bring this issue to a head last year, Elon Musk, believes that AI has the power to replace all jobs and “make work optional.” But are we ready to use that power to shrink the federal workforce?

For two hundred and fifty years, America has vaulted forward on waves of innovation. Steam engines, the internet. We controlled them all, constructing a superpower. But with AI, for the first time, we might be at the mercy of the machine. What happens when it truly learns to think, to create, to decide? It's time for a real plan. We must harness AI's inevitable power in the interest of life and liberty. Or else.

Anthropic’s Claude stands, by most credible accounts, as the most capable AI model currently operating in classified military systems. The Pentagon reportedly used it in the January 2026 capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Eight of the ten largest American corporations rely on it. And yet the company that builds this tool now presumes to tell the Department of War when and how the military may employ it in defense of the United States. This is an extraordinary claim. It deserves an extraordinary response.

If you're reading this and feeling anxious about your own career, your own mortgage, your own kids' future (good). That means you're paying attention. The worst thing any of us can do right now is assume this doesn't apply to us. It applies to almost everyone. The best thing we can do is start talking about the gap honestly, without pretending we have answers we don't have. Because the gap is coming. And the only question is whether we build a bridge or fall in.

Hegseth was essentially ordering Anthropic to build a new capability—one that contravenes its most deeply held ethical principles, and lies outside the scope of its current contracts—and make that available to the U.S. military. If any party is radically revising the nature of defense contracting, it is the U.S. government.