What do you think?
Rate this book
Why We Fear AI: On the Interpretation of Nightmares
Fears about AI tell us more about capitalism today than technology in the future.
Will AI come and take all our jobs? Will it dominate humanity, hack the foundations of our civilization, or even wipe humans of the face of the planet? All kinds of people seem to think so. From academics to billionaires, artists to fraudsters, journalists to the pope, AI nightmares have gripped the popular imagination. Why We Fear AI boldly asserts these fears are actually about capitalism, reimagined as a kind of autonomous intelligent agent.
Science and tech industry insiders Hagen Blix and Ingeborg Glimmer dive into the dark, twisted, and arcane world of AI nightmares in order to demystify what people say about it. They combine expertise in cognitive science and machine learning with political and economic analyses to cut through the hype and technobabble, and show how fears about AI reflect very different economic from venture capitalists to AI engineers, from artists to warehouse workers at Amazon. If we want to understand the fears and potential impacts of AI, we must think about capitalism, the economy, and class power in real terms we can confront and wage our struggles on.
Blix and Glimmer argue that AI nightmares reveal the terrifying underbelly of our current society, of the violence and alienation at the root of capitalism and its way of organizing our world in its image. If we simply let capitalism and tech billionaires run wild, we can expect the automated bureaucracies that protect the powerful and punish the poor; an ever-expanding surveillance apparatus; the cheapening of skills, downward pressures on wages, the expansion of gig-work, and crushing inequality. But that outcome is not inevitable, however much capitalist may dream of it. Why We Fear AI points the way to a different and brighter future, one where our labor, knowledge, and technologies serves us, rather than us serving capital and its owners.
Will AI come and take all our jobs? Will it dominate humanity, hack the foundations of our civilization, or even wipe humans of the face of the planet? All kinds of people seem to think so. From academics to billionaires, artists to fraudsters, journalists to the pope, AI nightmares have gripped the popular imagination. Why We Fear AI boldly asserts these fears are actually about capitalism, reimagined as a kind of autonomous intelligent agent.
Science and tech industry insiders Hagen Blix and Ingeborg Glimmer dive into the dark, twisted, and arcane world of AI nightmares in order to demystify what people say about it. They combine expertise in cognitive science and machine learning with political and economic analyses to cut through the hype and technobabble, and show how fears about AI reflect very different economic from venture capitalists to AI engineers, from artists to warehouse workers at Amazon. If we want to understand the fears and potential impacts of AI, we must think about capitalism, the economy, and class power in real terms we can confront and wage our struggles on.
Blix and Glimmer argue that AI nightmares reveal the terrifying underbelly of our current society, of the violence and alienation at the root of capitalism and its way of organizing our world in its image. If we simply let capitalism and tech billionaires run wild, we can expect the automated bureaucracies that protect the powerful and punish the poor; an ever-expanding surveillance apparatus; the cheapening of skills, downward pressures on wages, the expansion of gig-work, and crushing inequality. But that outcome is not inevitable, however much capitalist may dream of it. Why We Fear AI points the way to a different and brighter future, one where our labor, knowledge, and technologies serves us, rather than us serving capital and its owners.
208 pages, Paperback
Published March 11, 2025
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
October 26, 2025
This is fantastic and a must-read for those alive in 2025. Spoiler: the issue is AI in the context of neoliberal capitalism. Maybe we could imagine an utopian vision of AI for the common good, freeing humans from drudgery and toil, but that's obviously not the world we're going to get. Even if it lives up to anywhere close to the hype, AI is just a continuation of technology owned by capital to accelerate inequality and obfuscate the oppression of everyone else.
June 13, 2025
The somewhat hyperbolically-titled new book "Why We Fear AI: On the Interpretation of Nightmares" (by Hagen Blix and Ingeborg Glimmer, 2025) examines the discourse about AI systems and Large Language Models (LLMs), focusing on the narratives of fear and existential annihilation that are espoused all along the spectrum, even by those who are actively developing the technologies themselves.
Blix and Glimmer offer a critical examination and interpretation of the current state of AI hype that works to position AI/LLM technology historically, politically, and economically within the neoliberal tradition to "remake all relations between people and things into market relations,, and relations of private property."
Fundamentally, the authors posit that LLMs exist as a way to "industrialize the production of language" and "enable new value to be extracted from the raw resource that is the information of our daily lives."
"Why We Fear AI" contains some insightful critical analysis of the current hype-filled discourses around AI technologies, but suffers from some questionable analogies, digressions, and a lack of focus and organization in the presentation of its critique. To be fair to the authors, though, there is a lot to be concerned about in this space, and the core of their historical and economic arguments are interesting and worthy of engagement and reflection. These technologies are not neutral "long text summarizing machines" – they are a manifestation of a set of hyper-growth-fixated ideologies that are contributing to a fundamentally unsustainable economic model.
In Part I, the authors describe five ways in which discourses about AI follow familiar playbooks from previous iterations of industrialization, automation, and resource extraction: the incomprehensibility of the complex models; the invisibilization of labor (or its devaluing); the privatization or enclosure of the public space (referring to AI's co-option of information into proprietary language models); the creation of a sort of AI bureaucracy (AI as a soulless, amoral, heartless entity that is both insulated from responsibility and insulates its masters from responsibility); and the inevitability of AI – the claim that "there is no alternative," which is also at the core of discourses about capitalism in general. It's important to note that this analysis works best when applied to how AI is being discursively positioned within our culture, not necessarily how AI actually operates. This is a distinction that the authors themselves tend to collapse at times throughout this section.
In Part II, the book moves more directly onto the "fear" topic as the authors trace the uses and deployments of AI systems in warfare, policing, border control, surveillance, and workplace and industrial oversight. While there are eye-opening insights and cautionary tales throughout this section, I found it disorganized and prone to digressions about automation and technology more broadly. I understand that the authors' goal is to draw lines from older forms of industrialization to today's AI tools, but stylistically I felt it was difficult to follow the jumps in the timeline and the massive variety of examples ranging from the Spinning Jenny to the steam engine, to Amazon's warehouses, back to CNC machines, and over to a discussion of Taylorism, and then back to that one unfortunate "Crush" ad for the iPad that everyone hated on last year. All of this context and these examples are real and relevant; they are just presented in a somewhat chaotic and overwhelming manner.
The book concludes with perhaps its strongest section on AI proponents' fundamentally flawed and dangerous conception of "intelligence" with its roots in eugenics and social Darwinism with the filters of profit and growth placed over them. Both the "fear" of AI and the "daydreams" about AI as savior are functions of a discourse that devalues human intelligence and presents problems caused by our economic system to be "unsolvable" without some kind of intervention of superintelligence. "We don't need 'superintelligence' to know what's causing climate change," they write. "We already know. We are failing to stop climate change because capitalism stands in the way, not because we lack intelligence."
While not a particularly accessible book, and not without its issues of coherence, "Why We Fear AI" contributes a much-needed perspective to the cacophony of voices about AI technology and how it's supposed to change the world. Fundamentally, it reminds us to question narratives about the inevitability of AI and to be suspicious of the supposed neutrality or objectivity of the technology.
Blix and Glimmer offer a critical examination and interpretation of the current state of AI hype that works to position AI/LLM technology historically, politically, and economically within the neoliberal tradition to "remake all relations between people and things into market relations,, and relations of private property."
Fundamentally, the authors posit that LLMs exist as a way to "industrialize the production of language" and "enable new value to be extracted from the raw resource that is the information of our daily lives."
"Why We Fear AI" contains some insightful critical analysis of the current hype-filled discourses around AI technologies, but suffers from some questionable analogies, digressions, and a lack of focus and organization in the presentation of its critique. To be fair to the authors, though, there is a lot to be concerned about in this space, and the core of their historical and economic arguments are interesting and worthy of engagement and reflection. These technologies are not neutral "long text summarizing machines" – they are a manifestation of a set of hyper-growth-fixated ideologies that are contributing to a fundamentally unsustainable economic model.
In Part I, the authors describe five ways in which discourses about AI follow familiar playbooks from previous iterations of industrialization, automation, and resource extraction: the incomprehensibility of the complex models; the invisibilization of labor (or its devaluing); the privatization or enclosure of the public space (referring to AI's co-option of information into proprietary language models); the creation of a sort of AI bureaucracy (AI as a soulless, amoral, heartless entity that is both insulated from responsibility and insulates its masters from responsibility); and the inevitability of AI – the claim that "there is no alternative," which is also at the core of discourses about capitalism in general. It's important to note that this analysis works best when applied to how AI is being discursively positioned within our culture, not necessarily how AI actually operates. This is a distinction that the authors themselves tend to collapse at times throughout this section.
In Part II, the book moves more directly onto the "fear" topic as the authors trace the uses and deployments of AI systems in warfare, policing, border control, surveillance, and workplace and industrial oversight. While there are eye-opening insights and cautionary tales throughout this section, I found it disorganized and prone to digressions about automation and technology more broadly. I understand that the authors' goal is to draw lines from older forms of industrialization to today's AI tools, but stylistically I felt it was difficult to follow the jumps in the timeline and the massive variety of examples ranging from the Spinning Jenny to the steam engine, to Amazon's warehouses, back to CNC machines, and over to a discussion of Taylorism, and then back to that one unfortunate "Crush" ad for the iPad that everyone hated on last year. All of this context and these examples are real and relevant; they are just presented in a somewhat chaotic and overwhelming manner.
The book concludes with perhaps its strongest section on AI proponents' fundamentally flawed and dangerous conception of "intelligence" with its roots in eugenics and social Darwinism with the filters of profit and growth placed over them. Both the "fear" of AI and the "daydreams" about AI as savior are functions of a discourse that devalues human intelligence and presents problems caused by our economic system to be "unsolvable" without some kind of intervention of superintelligence. "We don't need 'superintelligence' to know what's causing climate change," they write. "We already know. We are failing to stop climate change because capitalism stands in the way, not because we lack intelligence."
While not a particularly accessible book, and not without its issues of coherence, "Why We Fear AI" contributes a much-needed perspective to the cacophony of voices about AI technology and how it's supposed to change the world. Fundamentally, it reminds us to question narratives about the inevitability of AI and to be suspicious of the supposed neutrality or objectivity of the technology.
May 12, 2026
Love how this book (Alice) lifts the curtain (AI) to show the Wizard (capitalism).
January 2, 2026
I really wanted to like this book, as there is an enormous lack of in-depth leftist writing on AI, but unfortunately it missed the mark for me.
The central question of the book is "why do tech elites say they fear AI?" with an eye specifically toward the "doomer" types who say that AI may surpass humans and take over the world. I was pretty disappointed to see that at no point do the authors seriously engage with arguments about existential risk from AI. Instead, they clearly start from the premise that existential risk is absurd, and try to explain the existence of AI doomers through a strictly Marxist psychoanalytical frame. The angle is interesting and contains many truths, but is enormously reductive and, like all psychoanalysis, largely bullshit. The book also largely ignores the fact that genuinely working class people have a lot of fears about AI, including fears about loss of control (see the Searchlight survey from December).
At one point they bring up Geoffrey Hinton's claim that, in general, more intelligent things control less intelligent things, and go on a very long psychoanalysis predicated on the obvious misunderstanding that he's talking about individual members of society, rather than species. They acknowledge that he may have been talking about species, but counter this with a very Zen argument - who can say whether people control potatoes or the other way around? And pursue the argument no further, as if it's not patently obvious that humans exert biblical levels of control over the planet because of our intelligence.
I thought the authors treated Hinton very unfairly. They bring him up several times with straw man claims to say that he only thinks these things because subconsciously he's justifying his class position. Are the authors aware that Hinton regularly advocates for socialism? I hate to defend a celebrity (and I disagree with many of his *actual* positions), but his treatment is just absurd.
The authors decline to articulate any practical approach for what should be done about AI today, or indeed whether anything should be done specifically about AI at all. The only concrete recommendation they seem to make is to build labor power, which, great, we should have already been doing. If they were to mention any specifics about steps we should take with respect to AI today, the authors would run into something awkward -- they would basically agree with the doomers that heavy regulation and/or an outright research halt were necessary. But because the doomers tend to come from the capitalist and professional class, they can't imagine there is any common ground to be had, so prefer to not talk about solutions at all (my own psychoanalysis). I believe there is a great need for coherent leftist perspectives on AI, but such a view requires holistic (however skeptical) engagement with the problems.
On the positives, I think the authors are totally correct that *part* of why AI elites are worried about AI is that they see the gears of capitalism coming for them too. I thought the view of AI as a means to deskill workers and make them replaceable was insightful. I also thought the framing of technology as a form of capital (not just its tool) was interesting, though some of the Marxist implications of this are surely over my head.
If you are someone already fairly knowledgeable about AI and AI risk, this is a worthwhile read to challenge your views and gain new insights, especially from a perspective pretty different from most writing out there. If you are not already familiar with AI and AI risk, I can't recommend this book, since you will walk away with deep misconceptions of the problems.
The central question of the book is "why do tech elites say they fear AI?" with an eye specifically toward the "doomer" types who say that AI may surpass humans and take over the world. I was pretty disappointed to see that at no point do the authors seriously engage with arguments about existential risk from AI. Instead, they clearly start from the premise that existential risk is absurd, and try to explain the existence of AI doomers through a strictly Marxist psychoanalytical frame. The angle is interesting and contains many truths, but is enormously reductive and, like all psychoanalysis, largely bullshit. The book also largely ignores the fact that genuinely working class people have a lot of fears about AI, including fears about loss of control (see the Searchlight survey from December).
At one point they bring up Geoffrey Hinton's claim that, in general, more intelligent things control less intelligent things, and go on a very long psychoanalysis predicated on the obvious misunderstanding that he's talking about individual members of society, rather than species. They acknowledge that he may have been talking about species, but counter this with a very Zen argument - who can say whether people control potatoes or the other way around? And pursue the argument no further, as if it's not patently obvious that humans exert biblical levels of control over the planet because of our intelligence.
I thought the authors treated Hinton very unfairly. They bring him up several times with straw man claims to say that he only thinks these things because subconsciously he's justifying his class position. Are the authors aware that Hinton regularly advocates for socialism? I hate to defend a celebrity (and I disagree with many of his *actual* positions), but his treatment is just absurd.
The authors decline to articulate any practical approach for what should be done about AI today, or indeed whether anything should be done specifically about AI at all. The only concrete recommendation they seem to make is to build labor power, which, great, we should have already been doing. If they were to mention any specifics about steps we should take with respect to AI today, the authors would run into something awkward -- they would basically agree with the doomers that heavy regulation and/or an outright research halt were necessary. But because the doomers tend to come from the capitalist and professional class, they can't imagine there is any common ground to be had, so prefer to not talk about solutions at all (my own psychoanalysis). I believe there is a great need for coherent leftist perspectives on AI, but such a view requires holistic (however skeptical) engagement with the problems.
On the positives, I think the authors are totally correct that *part* of why AI elites are worried about AI is that they see the gears of capitalism coming for them too. I thought the view of AI as a means to deskill workers and make them replaceable was insightful. I also thought the framing of technology as a form of capital (not just its tool) was interesting, though some of the Marxist implications of this are surely over my head.
If you are someone already fairly knowledgeable about AI and AI risk, this is a worthwhile read to challenge your views and gain new insights, especially from a perspective pretty different from most writing out there. If you are not already familiar with AI and AI risk, I can't recommend this book, since you will walk away with deep misconceptions of the problems.
Read
July 7, 2025pretty solid, made my way here via the ep of this machine kills where blix discusses this topic. definitely refreshing in a sea of ai "critiques" that miss the point at best and are often comically out of touch (respectfully!!!!). i read this on the tail of matteo pasquinelli's "the eye of the master," which was a nice companion. published two years apart (eye of the master in 2023, this book in 2025), it's interesting to see the throughlines that connect these books in a fairly fast-moving sphere of technology/politics/etc
January 5, 2026
I felt that this book really excelled in its analysis of AI as an extension of neoliberal society and the ruling class' desire to dominate, privatize, and increase profits -- making AI's goals deskilling, preventing working class knowledge of how technology works making us increasingly reliant and diminishing critical thinking skills on a mass scale. The later half of the book sought to explain how capitalism and AI are different sides of the same coin, but I found that the argument lacked significant depth as it didn't bring in a racial analysis which was especially shocking considering their argument was built upon a critique of eugenics, social darwinism, and the role of the sword/police (and one of the authors studies political economy). I did appreciate how it brought in militarism and AI, talking about domestic policing in the US and internal uses of US-based AI technologies deployed by the IDF. This book utilized metaphors to break down and root AI developments in other important historic technologies (transitor, steam engine, etc) - which was useful towards the beginning, but I felt that it got repetitive in the later half. This book was rather short, and I do think it's worth a read especially if you're looking for a Marxist perspective of the dangers of AI and the fears of both the working and capitalist classes surrounding AI development. I liked the writing sytle, it felt personable and not too jargony, so I'd condier it a more accessible read.
April 26, 2026
I wrote up a ~4 page review as to why 95% of this book is nonsensical but here's what it all boils down to: the labor theory of value was incorrect from its inception pre industrial revolution and it's only getting more giganuked over time. the authors are framing every side effect of rising species-level progress, like technologies getting more complex, academic research becoming computational, or more work becoming abstract "knowledge work", as a conspiracy engineered to disempower noble subsistence farmers rather than a positive deliberate consequence of our ape brains putting together more powerful tools. marxism is a completely unserious ideology and there's nothing to be gained engaging with crabs in a bucket
January 1, 2026
A solid analysis of the power dynamics at play as we imagine what a future with AI looks like. At times lengthy and overly ideological (in a Marxist fashion, the class-based analysis is pushed to an extreme), it nonetheless provides some key insights (eg, the doomsday vision of AI is really a reflection of the anxiety of the managerial class, which is expected to see knowledge transferred from its hands to those of machines, thereby depressing its wages). A good read, but to approach with sufficient critical distance
March 12, 2025
Simultaneously deep, accessible, and even funny. I quite enjoyed this one
December 27, 2025
DNF, tobe honest
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews