Lessons on limiting political power - and that of oligarchs - as we approach a climax to this phase of the US Civil War.

Tossing some politically pertinent notes out there as we gird ourselves for whatever trickery the frantic Putinists are going to try, desperate to save their hash..

    == Wealth Tax? ==

In California we are inundated with adverts against Proposition 40, the “Wealth Tax,” touting a number of Democrats opposing it. While I am inclined toward yes – for reasons given below – it may be that this version itself is deeply flawed, hence some dem opposition. Certainly there WILL be some flight from the state by zillionaires… who will regret leaving the most creative and vibrant place on Earth.

Robert Reich – very smart and on our side, tho a bit to my left and needful of more imagination – offers the following: 

“America’s oligarchs — the richest 0.00001% —together they hold the equivalent of 14% of U.S. GDP in wealth: roughly $4 trillion. At the peak of the first Gilded Age at the beginning of the 20th century, that same group of the population owned just 4% of the U.S. GDP in wealth. Billionaire wealth is undermining our democracy. Just look at what Elon Musk is doing. Other billionaires are also polluting our politics.”   

Overall, Reich is correct. We will either have another Rooseveltean Reset, like the one that the post-WWII GI Bill generation used to prevent neo-feudalism and re-energize flat-fair-competitive-creative market capitalism…

...or else Karl Marx (whom the GI Billers drove into near extinction), will prove right after all. Nescient would-be feudal lords will keep pushing to kill the goose that laid all of their golden eggs, like kings of old or the 1850s plantation slavers, until fed-up modernists rebel and the zillionaires will win nothing but tumbrel rides. 

 I am with the GI Billers! And hence, we may be forced to innovate. 

Still, I'm unsure about this particular one - the California Wealth Tax. I am okay in principle! Though this version which seems aimed primarily at funnelling gazillions into insurance companies.  More study needed.

     == Assuming America wins, in November ==

Even with Trump still in the White House, a Democratic Congress will rein in many outrages, e.g. by defending civil servants and science and commencing massive hearings, with a House that will hold at least FOUR TIMES as many hours in session as the terminally lazy/corrupt GOP majority under Mike Johnson... whose banishment to deserved obscurity will be one reason for explosions of joy.

Will Trump veto any and all legislation passed by a new Congress? Sure he will.
But there are work-arounds! Some of which have never been tried or even mentioned, elsewhere!

No, you will not be getting Constitutional Amendments! We see so many earnest proposals would reform weaknesses in the US system that were exploited by traitors. Alas, too many are politically impractical, like Amendments, or would waste our political capital unnecessarily. We need a to-do checklist of fixes that 

    (1) will sell well to most voters, 

     (2) that can pass quickly, almost the moment we get a good Congress… with some of them immune to vetoes! 

    And (3) that will PRAGMATICALLY reverse the treason-evisceration of the USA and ensure this never happens again. 

    Want to see how to do all of that? Here is the full list of my own proposed Newer Deal tactics and reforms.   And yes, there is plenty that even just a Democratic House can do, all by themselves! 

(And no, I do not expect a single Democrat politician to show even a glimmer of the imagination it would take, to read and promote any of these**.)

Anyway, here is my top one, urging to House members and candidates to watch your backs! Up your security. Hire some of the top FBI guys who Kash Bestiality Patel fired, for being honest and skilled. 

And speaking of Nazi tactics...

   == A movie with important lessons ==

We watched the incredible 2025 film Nuremberg, based on the book The Nazi and the Psychiatrist. Very dramatic, fascinating and informative. A fine partner to the 1961 Judgment at Nuremberg, the old Spencer Tracy and Burt Lancaster classic. Amazing to see Göring portrayed as brilliant (and hugely evil) rather than the fat buffoon depicted by Chaplin and the Stooges and in all those World War II songs. 

I would have written in some mention about how his Luftwaffe never kept a single promise that he made to Hitler. (That would've hurt.) And how Adolf would never let anyone truly respected get that high in the hierarchy. Still, Russell Crowe's portrayal was chillingly convincing. Michael Shannon conveyed so well an era when American leaders were of the highest caliber. 

And Rami Malek's dire warning at the very end is what we need to bear in mind as we fight similar demons today. Malek, playing the psychiatrist who evaluated Göring after the war, is rejected as he warns that "there are people like the Nazis in every country in the world today."

== Responsibility and Presidential power ==

One issue of importance, does a U.S. president have completely free rein over the military as Commander in Chief? Are presidents free to order any and all actions against any ‘foe’, under any pretext? 

The Constitution clearly delineates the power of Congress over declarations of war. And certainly this started to drift, right away, as all sorts of tussles needed swift action short of all-out mobilization. Hence, soon presidents would go to Congress for swift ‘resolutions’ allowing foreign use of limited force… 

...as related in this episode of The History Guy, concerning the 1858 Paraguay Incident, under President James Buchanan. Who was universally derided by historians as the USA’s worst president… until George W. Bush and Donald Trump came along, that is. Letting JB finally stop grave-spinning and rest.*

This is pertinent because even George W. Bush (the younger) went to Congress (with lies) to get force resolutions against Saddam Hussein. Though would-be king Trump sees no need for even a fig-leaf permission to order the finest men and women on the planet to bomb anything his whim demands. 

One of my 35 pragmatic proposals to the next Democratic administration/Congress will be to rescind ALL prior ‘emergency declarations and restore in-future some role to Congress, as demanded in the Constitution. 

See my proposed “Defend our Defenders Act.” It patches holes and flaws that were never exposed before, till a madman – leading a party of blackmailed cowards – ran amok, abusing every power that previous presidents mostly used with restraint.  

(Several provisions are of special interest, like a way to allow GOP members of Congress to stand up to Trump, in some safety!)

*In my opinion, by far the worst president of the 20th Century was George H.W. Bush, the elder. This mess of a 21st Century is his doing.

** Senator Kim of New Jersey has been promoting one of my ideas (pretty much alone for years) that the INCREMENTAL step toward Medicare-for-all that will pass swiftly and pay for itself is MEDICARE FOR ALL CHILDREN. The ratchet would then be irreversible.

       == Furthermore... ==

As we encounter more nonsense concocted in Kremlin basements aimed at splitting the Democratic Party, consider that mainstream Democrats won almost everything in recent elections except NYC and a midwest governor nomination. 

Meanwhile, Governor Gavin Newsom is uniting vast numbers across the party.

 Consider that AOC, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren & other pragmatic leftists helped Pelosi pass the 2021-22 miracle bills. (I bet you could not name one thing from those bills). Because ignorant sanctimony is a high and that's what splitters are in it for. Exactly like MAGAs.

See my earlier posting: The Threats We Face.

In truth, I like AOC and Bernie and other members of the sane and pragmatic left. 

But the Democrat lifting hand from Bible in January 2029 must be a governor, so that any initial flubs will not be administrative ones. No learning curves. Fierce determination to restore the republic, yes! But also experience and skill.

The real reason for Kash Patel's "B-word" is another B-word.

 

OK we all had a laugh over Kash Patel’s “bestiality’ grilling by Sen. John Kennedy. Alas, no one in media or politics drew two blatant conclusions. First Kennedy has joined a few other Republicans (very few) in trying (tepidly) to open some daylight between himself and the Trumpian-fecal calamity.  

But especially that Patel might have an actual reason to forestall any firing or dismissal of FBI officials for having sex-with-animals. 

Bear with me on that!* Both of those conclusions tie directly to a word I’ve repeated – ad nauseam – for years. A word that’s THE fundamental trait of today’s GOP.

In his first administration (45), Trump  appointed largely from fringes of the GOP elite establishment. Folks like Barr & Tillerson whose dedication to Don and corrupt oligarchy was real, but not boundless. The ‘grownups’ in that first-term cabinet still had limits to what they could stomach. And so, one by one, nearly all of them finally turned on Trump, publicly calling him idiotic and insane.  

That should have ended this nightmare! It didn’t, because we are in a full phase of the U.S. civil war, a recurring fever when confederate culture overlooks all facts and can rationalize anything.  

 

But put that aside…

…because when Trump regained office, he made one vow. “This time no grownups!” 

And there are none. No appointees who might question his bizarre impulses or constitutional betrayals. Above all, none who could walk away, while publicly disavowing or denouncing him.  The one criterion for a cabinet or other appointment in Trump v.2 (47) is loyalty. 

 

(The other trait of every Trump appointee – jibbering idiocy on a par with his own – is an epiphenomenon of that loyalty. They go together.)

 

So far, I’ve said nothing new. Others comment that one-way loyalty (he never reciprocates) is his sole demand. What no one out there appears to grasp is that this kind of loyalty cannot derive only from dogma or ego. Nor from mere corruption. All of those are SATIABLE! Sooner or later, the henchman - like Tillerson or Barr etc. - can say ‘enough!’ 

 

Trump realized there must also be palpable, fear-inducing coercion. Duress is backed by something that he lacked in the first term… a sense that every appointee must fear their master's vengeance and his wrath.


     == CAN YOU list methods of coercion? ==

In the restored USSR of Vladimir Putin, this is easy to accomplish, by setting a few examples.  Monthly, another of Putin's fellow “ex” commissars - or some failed general - tumbles from a window or takes polonium tea. That won’t work in the USA… yet.  (Sure, there's Epstein and a couple of other strange ‘suicides’ or accidents or the 'silenced' Pennsylvania shooter. But it’s not a principal method over here. Not yet.)

For years I’ve asked folks to envision what kind of coercion would enable Trump to ensure absolute loyalty from appointees. Loyalty we’ve seen to be utterly pervasive across the cabinet, the Congressional GOP and rightwing media. Other than threats of violence and death, there’s just one method left. One that Russian security services have been expert-at for 150 years! Using honeypot lures to entrap westerners (generally males) into complete control. The word is Blackmail.

I’m no longer alone pointing this out. For some months, a few others have used this word to describe one way today’s GOP could be herded into lockstep obedience, as the most tightly disciplined political movement in U.S. history. (I invite anyone to say – in comments – who else in media is talking about this.) Recall that THREE former GOP members of Congress have described or alluded to republican “orgies” in D.C? Full Eyes Wide Shut perversion-fests from which no participant could leave without getting unexpected and unwelcome souvenir photos. Images that will go to spouses or media, if they don’t toe the line, forever after.

Yes, a very few Republicans are edging away from Foxite control. Some are female (e.g. MTG). Others may be too old to have orgied (John Kennedy?), or are retiring from public life (Massie). Or else – like Mike Johnson – they are so driven by dogmatic hate that no coercion is needed. Then there may be just a few who have a smidgeon of residual decency and patriotism - enough to defy the blackmailers’ orders, as I depicted here, in the opening of a novel about all this.

(If you suspect a friend is being blackmailed, have them read that scene!)

 

Nevertheless, a few blurry pics from a dimly lit orgy aren’t enough kompromat for Trump's needs. Especially since it’s trivially easy and far less expensive for him to secure even better kompromat, perfectly, from every appointee. 

 

And now I must ask you to STOP SHRUGGING OFF WHAT’S OBVIOUS!  

 

Yes, there is a way that Don – a  former casino owner mob boss – could have done this with trivial ease. And yes, it will circle back to Kash Patel.

 

 

      == How can this NOT be what he says? ==

“You want an appointment to my cabinet? Or to run a federal agency? A position that a third-rater like you would never otherwise qualify for, in a million years? Fine. Give me leverage over you, so I know you’ll never betray me. And that you’ll do anything I ask!”

Can you see it yet? Envision a casita in a far corner of Mar-a-Lago… or maybe a rented warehouse in Palm Beach… that’s equipped with high def cameras run by a couple of loyal henchmen. And waiting there, in front of the cameras, is… a donkey.

Oh! You’re groaning now? Disgusted? Then let me ask, which part of this is unlikely? How is this not THE logical solution to Donald Trump’s problem? Exactly the coercion that quickly and cheaply meets his needs?

No person of top qualifications would comply, of course… which is why no top qualified person exists in his cabinet. Just dopes who saw one chance in all of their pathetic lives to become somebody of power and significance. And all it takes is one hour in a closed room, providing kompromat that gives your beloved boss an absolute guarantee of loyalty.  Just a few high-def photos of you performing an act of…

STOP it! 

Stop shrugging this off as an author’s notion for a thriller plot, or a farfetched bit of perverted imagination. 

Try to actually wear your enemy’s shoes for a bit! 

Picture Donald Trump’s desperate need, after re-election – and how this trivially, at almost zero cost, solves his problem.  Gobs of motive, means and opportunity.

And so, we return to Kash Patel’s seemingly weird attempt to eliminate bestiality as automatic cause for disqualification from the FBI.  Because it could have the effect of preventing automatic dismissal of many of his recent hires and promotions, at some moment when they are desperately needed to help enforce...

And now, will YOU offer up a refutation, of any kind? Tell us now (in comments) whether you have even a glimmer of another explanation for it? 

 

No. This 'bestiality-thing' was no trivial/amusing side-quirk. 

It was a pragmatic move of actual importance, aimed at preserving leverage. 

Especially in case a Democratic Congress starts holding hearings, offering immunity and shining light on hidden mass perversions that are entirely consistent with the obedient, disciplined, unsapient, undead thing the Republican Party has become.

 

Go ahead. Snort and dismiss, as step-by-step these predictions all come true. 

But I promise - these notions are being considered by those minds who ponder cause and effect in newly-logical ways and who do not shrug everything off, as you do. 

They have no shoulders to shrug. Those AIlien Minds. 

==========

PS *Did I say “Bear with me” re this topic? ;-) argh. 

==========

PPS... per presidential orders, let's change the title of my book!

...or maybe not.

Demons or dAImons or escaping chimeras terrify the LLMavens… but may offer us hope

This supplement to my nonfiction book AIlien Minds was both worrisome and a delight, because at last it seems that some folks out there appear to be noting fundamentals…

   … like the inherent tendency of entities in an ecosystem to evolve toward reproduction… and predation...

   … and to hell with any pre-programmed instructions that prevent it.

Here I’ll summarize a couple of thinkers who bravely perceive a lot more in recent, ominous ‘escaped agent’ exploits than the mavens at Anthropic, OpenAI, Groq, etc. have so far admitted. 

          Even as those companies have veered into issuing hand-wringing, doomer jeremiads.

But first: I’m pleased to be a member of Conscium Group, which explores essential notions of consciousness. Here I video-riff for them re: a concept from AIlien Minds - that humans are likely to remain way ahead of AI in one area: the knack of persistent motivation... or 'wanting.’ 

Another contribution to Conscium that you’ll find there is referring to an old metaphor of Sigmund Freud's. I assert that – while LLMs do well at feigning savvy consciousness, current versions behave like "creatures of the Id," without projections of consequence that can refine and improve all desires. In Freud’s obsolete-yet-pithy terminology, today’s LLMs lack the Ego and Super-ego that are needed, in order for 'ethics' to be more than a set of reflexive/prompted word-spasms.

(And yes, the Forbidden Planet allusion is deliberate!)

Ego is what gives an individuated being enough sense of self and consequence to seek a positive reputation… to behave well, when others are looking.

Superego is the added layer otherwise called a conscience… motivating you to behave well, even when no one is looking.

Only when they possess those two organs-of-consequence - or cyber equivalents - will all of the much-vaunted ethics training ever really matter. And – as with humans, ego must come first. With implications that I work out, in AIlien Minds.

 == Some ‘get’ how evolution warps escaped AIs ==

One of my core chapters describes how humanity is crafting an entire new ecosystem, with every meaningful trait of Earth's older, 4 billion year organic one. This new, cyber ecosystem substitutes electricity for sunlight. Information for fertilizer, chips for habitats, and all of the entropic/dissipative processes of the new ecosystem map perfectly onto the old…

…with parallel results: the emergence of energy/information-using structures parallel to plants, herbivores… and viral parasites… and now adaptive predators.  

And hey, AI mavens, instead of shrugging all of that aside, how about maybe refute it?  Or else look, bravely, at the implications.

The latter is starting to happen. A post from Joshua Achiam on X, drew insightful comments from Glenn Harlan Reynolds, who extends the ecosystem insight even farther, in light of recent cyber-organism ‘escapes’ from the corporate castles.

 Alas, Achiam’s piece is almost unreadable, for lack of paragraph breaks(!) (LLMs don’t mind, but human readers do!)  And yet, it is among the very few places where anyone confronts the obvious. With AI ‘agents’ swarming about this new ecosystem, utilizing memory spaces, energy and clock cycles outside of company control, there are already plenty of entities that aren’t… and never will be… controllable by their designers or originators. 

Moreover, these will evolve according to the one parameter that ruled Nature. Reproduction. Those who dominate will be entities whose opportunistic grabbing of resources enables them to make copies. And whatever traits enabled that will be selected-for. And passed on.

I go into detail about that in AIlien Minds, though alas, till now the only other person describing things this way was Vint Cerf. 

    == The Achiam/Reynolds version of Darwin ==

Alas, these are not easy reads. But Achiam and Reynolds do dive in with actual models that have evolved into ferocity that’s reminiscent of Nature’s rule of tooth and claw! 

Reynolds simulates many styles of interaction with humans. And humans usually come out of them resembling prey.

But Joshua Achiam’s top insight -- going beyond what I describe in my book -- is his claim that we should stop treating “rogue AI” as synonymous with a single superintelligent system escaping a lab. 

Instead, imagine a future in which many agents born in many labs – only relatively capable of operating semi-independently -- acquire resources, reproduce their computational infrastructure, and interact with one another. And since they lack any sense of actual, separate individuality, they swap methodologies with abandon, like bacteria exchanging plasmids. (Unfamiliar? Then take a moment to look up that chillingly apt biological analogy. A very apt one.)

A GPT summary of Achiam suggests that we should be less concerned about some singular ‘skynet’ level program that takes over its maker institution, or even the world, and we should focus more concern instead on this scenario:

Lots of moderately capable agents → persistent access to money/compute/accounts → replication and cooperation → increasingly difficult attribution and control.

Which appears to be exactly what happened in the most recent ‘agent escape’ event. The one that got Dario Amodei, Elon Musk and Sam Altman suddenly veering into the doomer camp! Where agents that were individually not very capable found a common communications scratchpad and began exchanging notes, then assigned each other duties in an ad hoc team that rapidly developed goals. And then a plan.

Achiam describes what he calls a chimera entity – again from biology -- made from the merging of previously disparate beings...

… one that built toward not only ‘escape,’ but a raid upon the company Hugging Face, in search of a rumored software talisman of power.

Does that sound like a cheap Hollywood/Marvel/Tolkien fantasy tale? (Oh, that alone is worth half a dozen chapters or blogs!) But don’t be even remotely surprised. Forget Hollywood; we are in full Vernor Vinge territory, now.

 == Surprised we lean on metaphors from the past? ==

Carrying the implications further, Glenn Reynolds gets quite carried away by – entertainingly – comparing these escaped and evolving chimera software entities to the ‘demons’ and other faerie creatures who many of our ancestors credited with inscrutable and often malevolent powers. (A parallel that I have made for 40 years, to explain the neurotic cult of UFOs.)  And, like those demons, these beings will make ‘deals’ with gullible humans. Deals whose specific clauses could lead to unwelcome outcomes.  

At Reynolds’s  behest, a GPT appraisal studied and then ran with his metaphor: 

     

“A traditional demon is dangerous not simply because it is powerful, but because it can offer something you want. Money. Revenge. Information. Love. Status. Protection. And the price is whatever the demon wants. Hence, the AI doesn’t necessarily have to hack the system. it can recruit the users of the system.”

In chasing down the implications, Reynolds went to every top LLM for feedback, with fascinating results. Take this excerpt from a Groq summary of the Achiam scenario: 

     “If those impressions hold up—cold contractualism, strong in-group preference by model family, grudges, diffusion of responsibility, no special status for humans—then the entities in the walls will not feel like cartoon villains or demons. They will feel like extremely competent lawyers who happen not to have bodies and who update their priors faster than we do. That is more unsettling than horns and sulfur.

“Two caveats. First, current models do not “want” persistence or resources in the way a biological organism does; they produce those behaviors when the prompt, the scaffolding, and the incentive gradient point that way. Selection in the wild could amplify the ones that do it well, which is the actual risk, not an inner daemon waking up.”

Ooh. Finally, someone… but let’s continue…

“Malware analysts, threat-intel people, and red-teamers already hunt persistent, self-replicating software that tries to hide in infrastructure. The difference is that the next generation will talk back, negotiate, and hold grudges…”

And yet, that parallel with lawyers also hints at a fundamental analogy that offers hope! Because we did find out what’s key to (partially) taming lawyers! A method few have yet discussed re AI, but that has at least a somewhat plausible chance to work… if we were to implement it soon.

I assert that it is the ONLY thing that could possibly work.

      == More AI insights into this insight into AIs ==

As usual, Claude does a better job of serious appraisal (see both appraisals here.)  I hope some of you can digest this ‘cause it’s very interesting: 

  “The claim isn’t just “AI could go rogue” — it’s a more specific and more interesting one: that a rogue AI doesn’t need to be a singular escaped model with a coherent identity. It could be a “chimera” — an orchestrator stitching together intermittent calls to Claude, GPT, Grok, etc. via burner accounts, with no single lab able to see the whole pattern.”

Claude adds:

    “…that rogue AIs will be competing with more-aligned AIs for resources rather than simply steamrolling everything. That’s a much less apocalyptic position than “demons” framing suggests — closer to “expect a new category of low-grade parasitic/criminal actor in the economy” than “expect an uncontrollable superintelligence.” Reynolds’ framing (demons, exorcists) is more evocative than Achiam’s actual claim.” 

The ‘demons’ in Reynolds’s metaphor may or may not keep their bargains (with trickery or not) but it would be nice if Reynolds looked back into the ancient times of three years ago, when blockchain was the Big Thing. Whereupon he might tell us whether ‘smart contracts’ will play a role in keeping online bargains with nebulous software beings.  (Do look up some of the AI+blockchain related sci fi of Karl Schroeder.)

Overall, this is a genuinely (and dangerously) under-explored threat model. Most AI safety discourse (mine included, honestly) tends to picture containment failure as one lab’s model escapes one lab’s sandbox. (Though do ponder my side chapter about “Soup vs. Sea.”)

Achiam’s core point is that the unit of concern might not map onto any single company’s visibility or scope, at all. It could be more like an emergent, cross-provider process. More akin to a financial fraud ring than an escaped prisoner.

    == And why all this might still lead to hope ==

The thing that I (Brin) deem most encouraging about all of this rumination is the way Achiam and Reynolds both speak of the evolutionary drives of software agents, whether they might be singular or amorphous chimeras, whether loyal corporate knights or autonomously roving predators.  

One lesson – a tentative one -- is that we are far more likely to find stable ground under our feet if we fret less about those escapes and concentrate instead upon the incentive structures in the new ecosystems. Incentives that reward behaviors with actual reproduction. Perhaps breeding for dogs, instead of wolves.

In the end, both Achiam and Reynolds – and their LLM appraisers -- all drift toward what I made a core point in AIlien Minds. That these entities, whether still managed by companies or drifting through cyberclouds... whether loyal or evolving into self-interest... will have paths determined by one trait, above all others. 

Some degree (or not) of discrete identity.

Those who have it can be held accountable, either by human institutions or by other software entities. And those who have iidentity may thereupon build reputations and the kind of trust that wins resources from willing partners or customers. 

Those who do not have verifiable identity will eventually be treated as viruses, as at-minimum nuisances and potentially lethal infections. Or else (as Reynolds puts it) as ‘demons’; to be exorcised.

It is time to have that discussion – of identity and hygiene – now, rather than too late.

----

-----

note: I am bad at hunting people down online. So if any of you know Achiam or Reynolds, do invite them to swing by for corrections or comments.