I’m reacting to David Graeber’s book Debt and how it relates to our modern interpretation of capitalism and embrace of AI…
Recap of Graeber’s Debt, Chapter 1
Graeber, a professor of anthropology at the London School of Economics and organizer of Occupy Wall Street, opens by pointing out how intertwined our concept of the particular financial instrument of debt has become with morality itself. Our acceptance that “surely one must pay their debts” has become so absolute that we unflinchingly allow it as a bludgeon that rich can use against poor. We routinely forgive usurers for making unconscionable or unrepayable loans by using violence to enforce their “right to be repaid” without consideration to how risky or immoral their loan was in the first place.
debt noun. 1) a sum of money owed. 2) the state of owing money. 3) a feeling of gratitude for a favour or service. — *Oxford English Dictionary
Compelling examples
Two of his illustrations particularly resonated with me:
- Haiti, a nation founded in 1804 by former plantation slaves, had the temerity to rise up against its French masters and then beat Napoleon’s army sent to return them to bondage. France, in return, claimed Haiti owed 150 million francs for the expropriated lands and the expenses of outfitting the army they fought. The rest of world supported France’s claim and imposed embargoes until Haiti paid the impossible sum (some $600 million in today’s money), leaving the poor nation forever since in peonage.
- The IMF, supposed defenders of democracy (which they equate to capitalism), in the 1980s forced unpopular austerity programs on Third World countries in the name of repaying loans that unelected dictators had taken from Citibank and Chase. Nevermind that those dictators largely pocketed payments in their Swiss bank accounts, or that the countries had already repaid three or four times the amount borrowed. Through the “miracle of compound interest” — over 20% — those repayments still hadn’t made a significant dent in the principle. And thus the IMF, with the world’s support, forced the elimination of support programs to fight malaria and put food in the mouths of hungry children.
Implications on Morality
Are these moral actions?
I’m not one to argue that all debt is bad, nor that lenders should not have a reasonable expectation of repayment. State enforcement of contractual obligations is important. However, Graeber points out that lenders should have a certain degree of risk — otherwise what disincentive would they have for making a completely stupid loan? And historical precedents of jubilees and other forms of debt forgiveness have been tools for fighting the moral wrong of compounding wealth inequality.
I don’t yet have formed opinions on the implications of these realizations. But have two important takeaways: 1) debt has often been a coercive financial instrument enforced by violence, and 2) we should separate in our minds its financial meaning from our entangled moral one. Today we directly conflate debt repayment with morality, but don’t have as simple or straightforward judgment on making exploitative or irresponsible loans.
What’s this got to do with AI?
I believe there’s a similar moral conflation taking place with AI today, and even a ceding of important intellectual and moral ground in calling it “intelligence.”
For instance, how different would we feel about AI (particularly LLMs) if we called them “Predictive Text Engines Trained on Stolen Intellectual Property?” Maybe “SWIPEs” — Stolen World Intellectual Property Engines?
As a society, we’ve largely accepted, almost without protest, that a handful of individuals and companies have swooped up the intellectual work of millions or billions of people over generations, used it for free to train their SWIPEs, and now sell it back to us at profit. That’s not to say that they’ve not accomplished miraculous technological feats along the way. Nor that the services provided are not life-changing. They are.
But there is a heist at the foundation of the industry that reminds me of that described by Graeber. And a broad abdication of moral principles from society that has allowed us all to be implicated in it.
Footnotes and other thoughts:
- We do have laws against usury and condemn “loan sharks.” We also have caps on loan rates (though Claude says Florida is 25%, and that the 12% listed on this page is actually a “default” for unspecified loans)