Is AI, like radio and social media before it, a “threat” to democracy?

Artificial intelligence’s rapid advancement presents a looming threat to democratic institutions, far beyond concerns about labor or dignity. Pope Leo XIV‘s recent warning about AI’s challenges to humanity only scratches the surface of a deeper danger: the potential weaponization of these powerful technologies by authoritarian interests to systematically undermine democratic processes. As AI systems scale in capability and reach, they represent unprecedented tools for manipulation, surveillance, and disinformation that could fundamentally destabilize democratic societies unless rigorous regulatory frameworks are established.

The big picture: AI represents the latest evolution in the authoritarian playbook, following radio in the 1930s and social media in the 2010s as tools exploited to consolidate power and undermine democratic institutions.

• The technology isn’t merely another innovation but represents “power, scaled” – particularly dangerous when wielded by far-right or authoritarian interests.
• Pope Leo XIV has identified AI as one of humanity’s main threats, specifically citing concerns about “human dignity, justice and labor,” though the article argues the dangers extend much further.

Why this matters: Without proper safeguards and regulations, AI systems could become the most effective tools ever created for dismantling democratic processes through sophisticated manipulation of public opinion and information.

• The ability to generate convincing deepfakes, targeted disinformation, and manipulation at unprecedented scale presents existential threats to free and fair elections.
• These capabilities dramatically exceed previous technologies in their potential to erode trust in democratic institutions and processes.

Key recommendations: The article outlines several critical regulatory approaches to mitigate AI’s threats to democracy.

• Implementing comprehensive bans on deepfakes in political advertising would help prevent the most egregious forms of voter manipulation.
• Enforcing algorithmic transparency standards would allow public scrutiny of how AI systems make decisions that affect democratic processes.
• Developing unbiased public, open-source AI alternatives to corporate-controlled models would provide democratic alternatives to proprietary systems.
• Creating robust disinformation prevention infrastructure with the same urgency as biological or nuclear weapons defense systems.
• Requiring social media platforms to publish their algorithms for public review and accountability.

The historical context: Each generation witnesses democracy’s enemies adopting new technological tools while maintaining consistent strategies of division, intimidation, and exploitation.

• The pattern of authoritarian exploitation of new communication technologies has repeated from radio to social media and now to AI.
• Understanding this historical continuity is essential for developing effective democratic safeguards against AI’s misuse.