How Do You Want to Be Remembered?

"The best way to honor Charlie’s memory," California Governor Gavin Newsom said, "is to continue his work." And so we've seen in the last week: the targeted harassment of those who've spoken out about Kirk's overt racism, his Christian Nationalism, his stoking of patriarchal and transphobic furor. Those on the right are making lists – ah, the very way to honor the man who created Turning Point USA's "Professor Watchlist" – in an attempt to silence and punish. It's not just teachers and university faculty who've been fired or put on leave in the wake of Kirk's murder; it's not just students who face expulsion. Journalists, analysts, columnists, nurses, office workers, restaurant workers, spokespersons for sports teams, athletes, Jimmy friggin' Kimmel.

These are, no doubt, incredibly dangerous times, as the Right in the US is fully committed to using all the power and violence in its means – and that includes the power and violence of the state – to suppress those it's decreed the enemy. Kirk, now their martyr, provides as good an excuse as any. It's worth stating here, particularly in light of Trump's tweet declaring "antifa" a terrorist organization, that there is no organized "Left" in the US. Not really. Nothing like there is on the right, at least, what with its think tanks, law schools, billionaires, militias, podcasts, judiciary, legislators, etc. What there is of a Left has none of the structural power and certainly none of the institutional, state power that the Right currently holds. None.

It's a cliché – one that Charlie Kirk and his ilk have long leaned into – that universities are the "bastion of the Left"; that education is the primary site in which indoctrination of the youth occurs – now that we've drained rock-n-roll of all its rebellion, or some such nonsense. Universities are full of, well, fill in the blank with whatever the catchphrase boogey-man of the day might be: "cultural Marxism," "radical environmentalism," "identity politics," "gender ideology," "the trans agenda". Professors don't indoctrinate, of course; they can't. Universities aren't hothouses for radicalism; they never have been. Indeed now, some of the most powerful, wealthiest educational institutions in the country are those most readily reprising McCarthyism by "naming names."

Charlie Kirk will be martyred, his legacy of bigotry weaponized, turned on the marginalized, to be sure, but also on anyone deemed "oppositional."

The Trump Administration has already vastly expanded the reach and power of the surveillance state, of the police state in the form of ICE. There is already a growing system of private and state-run prisons, sites into which people – up until now, primarily immigrants and foreign nationals – have been effectively "disappeared." People are already being snatched off the streets. The US government has already begun the extra-judicial killing of people it's decreed terrorists.

They want us afraid, because they want us compliant. They want us to fear harassment – not just imprisonment or violence, not just bodily harm or death. They want us afraid, because they want us silent.

Too often, those who talk and write about education technology (in short, those who advocate for education technology) neglect to talk about the context in which the technology is developed, funded, or implemented. Ed-tech is depicted as some "magic bullet" that appears out of nothing, that costs next-to-nothing, but that --poof! presto! – changes everything. And it is absolutely imperative (honestly, it's always important, but I'll scream and yell louder at this juncture) that we put "AI" in context: that we talk about how it has been developed, how it is funded, how it is implemented; that we talk about who is pushing for this technology and how they imagine the future they're so eagerly engineering.

The Trump Administration is profoundly anti-science. We see that in its dismantling of science- and research-related institutions and agencies (including, of course, universities). We see that in its attacks on weather data, labor statistics, and of course on medical information – from vaccines to gender-affirming healthcare.

So it is, I must say, a bit of a stretch to believe that these same folks are embracing "AI" because of their resolute faith in science and technology. Rather, what they find so very appealing – "White House AI Task Force Positions AI as Top Education Priority," Government Technology reports – is that "AI" is a tool of behavioral engineering, data surveillance, and total information control. It is – this isn't some imagineering of the marketing department. It is already being weaponized, and when one advocates for "AI" in the classroom, this is in fact what one is calling for because that is its context, its ideology, its purpose, although maybe not its magical aura.

It is entirely possible – and yes, I know plenty of people love to lean into the "inevitability" mantra – that LLMs (as we know them at least) today will go away. The finances, as Ed Zitron keeps yelling and pointing at (bless his heart), simply do not make sense. It is entirely possible – let me repeat, let us keep open possibilities – that OpenAI goes bankrupt (and entirely possible that the bust takes with it the US economy).

Whatever happens to generative "AI," who knows – there are other avenues, other directions in which "AI" research might go;. And whatever happens to those who've outsourced their thinking and their agency to this machinery, I guess we'll see.

But for "AI" in general – or at least, the predictive "AI" that is bound up in surveillance, assessment, policing, and war – I don't foresee a "bust" anytime soon. Indeed, the marketing hype for chatbots and text- and image-generation might serve to soften us up for this more authoritarian automation. (This is what happens to those who've outsourced their thinking and their agency to this machinery.) As such, "AI" will continue to be sold to schools until the context of schooling changes – how violently that will be weaponized, again, remains to be seen. "AI" will continue to be sold to schools because under a Christian Nationalist, techno-fascist police state, the purpose of education is compliance and control.

This is, in part, why I utterly refuse the framing of "AI" as a "normal technology." This is, in part, why I would not want my legacy to be as someone who advocated for "AI" in education.

Political scientist Henry Farrell wrote in his newsletter yesterday that

The authoritarian who wants to build a ruling coalition needs not only to make her success seem like a fait accompli. She also needs to persuade others that they will prosper rather than suffer from joining. The aspiring authoritarian needs to persuade allies that she (and they) will predate on outgroups, and that she will not predate on the allies themselves.

This explains some of the behavior of universities, perhaps, who believe they'll be safer by placating the MAGA crowd. It might explain the behavior of pundits like Ezra Klein as well, who want to stay in the good graces of the wealthy no matter how politics shakes out around them. And I daresay it explains a lot of the "AI" evangelism in education circles right now: this assurance that you will prosper, or at least that you will be spared, if you go along with these powerful forces. You'll still get grants. You'll still get speaking gigs. You'll still keep your job. There's a good bit of "magical thinking" about the technology; and there's a good bit of magical thinking about the politics too, no doubt.

Or maybe it's pragmatism: the opposition to techno-fascism is not strong – among the powerful, the wealthy, at least.

However, let's never forget that much like Trump himself, "AI" remains wildly unpopular among the general populace.

Usually on Fridays, I usually gather up links to all the "'AI' in education" news. But there hasn't been much lately. (It's not just the Charlie Kirk thing. "The vibes" shifted after the launch of ChatGPT5.) A few news items of note: "NEA receives Microsoft grant to expand AI literacy and leadership" – that story's a few weeks old now. There was this beauty from Canada: "Education report calling for ethical AI use contains over 15 fake sources." The Washington Post reported that "Teachers got mad about a cheat button in Chrome. Now Google’s pausing it." OpenAI issued a report on "How People Use ChatGPT" (but just because the font and layout make it look like academic research paper does not mean it is). "FTC Launches Inquiry into AI Chatbots Acting as Companions" – I'm going to write about chatbots more in Wednesday's newsletter.

I wish I could say that the lack of "'AI' in education" stories was good news, that the bullshit bubble has maybe burst a little. But I fear that, as I argue above, it's more likely that the generative "AI" hustle is being squeeze out for a more overtly fascist one.

Let's not call any of this "normal."

"More hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than in the name of rebellion" – CP Snow

Stay safe out there.

Thanks for reading Second Breakfast. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber, as your financial support allows me to do this work.

If you're interested, you can also sign up for an additional email from me – it'll come on Monday and in it, I talk about more personal stuff: the marathon training, what I'm reading, and this week, what I thought about Keanu Reeves and Alex Winter's Waiting for Godot. (In a word: "Excellent" [air guitar]) You can sign up by clicking on your account in the upper right-hand corner.

Today's bird: the mountain chickadee is a small songbird in the tit family. According to Wikipedia, its song sounds like it is whistling the word "cheeseburger." Research has found these birds to have remarkable memories and spatial cognition, recalling in winter the exact spots in which they stored food during warmer months, even when buried under deep, deep snow.