Who’s Really in Control? The Threat Behind AI and American Democracy

The Real Danger Isn’t AI—It’s Who’s Trying to Control It

As I write this blog post, I’m actively researching something I heard earlier today on historian Heather Cox Richardson’s livestream. She had a guest on named Gil Duran, and he talked about someone I had never heard of until now—a man named Curtis Yarvin. The conversation was eye-opening and honestly pretty scary for both me and Josh.

I’ve never read or heard any of Duran’s work before today, but what he discussed made me realize just how much influence dangerous ideas can quietly gain behind the scenes—especially when powerful people with tech money start pushing them.

Who Is Curtis Yarvin and Why Does It Matter?

Curtis Yarvin is a former software engineer and political theorist who’s gained attention for promoting something called the “Dark Enlightenment” or the neoreactionary movement. He believes that democracy is broken—and that we should replace it with a system where a single powerful leader (think: CEO of the country) makes the decisions. No Congress. No voting. Just top-down rule by a so-called ‘smart elite.’

That idea sounds extreme, and it is. But what’s more troubling is that these ideas aren’t just floating around on obscure blogs anymore. They’ve made their way into serious political conversations—especially among a growing faction of right-wing populists, libertarian billionaires, and tech elites.

Vice President J.D. Vance and the Rise of Authoritarian Influence

As of January 20, 2025, J.D. Vance serves as the Vice President of the United States under President Donald Trump. Vance’s rise to this role is especially important when discussing Curtis Yarvin’s influence—because Vance has expressed open interest in Yarvin’s writings and ideas. He once called them “interesting,” and his political language often echoes neoreactionary talking points: that democracy is too messy, that elites should rule, and that strongman leadership is preferable to consensus-driven government.

He’s also aligned with Peter Thiel, the billionaire tech investor who’s long backed politicians sympathetic to authoritarian models of governance. Thiel supported both Vance and Arizona’s Blake Masters, and he has funded Curtis Yarvin’s work in the past. These aren’t isolated dots—they’re part of a growing ideological network.

Vance has also supported ideas like “RAGE”—Retire All Government Employees—advocated by Yarvin, which aims to strip out experienced civil servants and replace them with partisan loyalists. This thinking underpins Project 2025, a sweeping plan being promoted by the Heritage Foundation to reshape the U.S. government around a more centralized executive branch.

And now, Vance isn’t just a senator. He’s one heartbeat away from the presidency. That’s not an exaggeration. It’s something we need to think about seriously.

What Worries Me the Most

When Trump was first elected, I believed the American people would only let him go so far—even if he had radical views. I figured the system would hold him in check. But now, in his second term, I’m not so sure. And that’s why I think this kind of information matters so much.

There are things many of us just don’t know. I didn’t know about Curtis Yarvin until today. I didn’t realize how deeply some of these ideas had taken root in political and tech circles. I’m not someone who supported Trump—I didn’t vote for him in 2024, though I admit I was unsure in 2016. But what I’m learning now makes me even more concerned than I was during the election.

I’m not an alarmist by nature. I want to believe people are good and that our system will hold. But burying my head in the sand won’t help—and if most of us do that, we risk losing the very democracy we depend on. That’s why I think it’s so important to stay aware. Who we vote for matters. What we say to our officials matters. What we pay attention to, what we question, what we speak up about—it all matters.

Project 2025: A Roadmap Toward Centralized Control

Project 2025 is a blueprint for what Trump-aligned conservatives want to do with the federal government. It includes:

“Schedule F” — a plan to give the president power to fire tens of thousands of career federal workers
Replacing nonpartisan officials with political loyalists
Consolidating executive power to reduce oversight and independent agencies

This isn’t just theoretical. It’s written out in detail and backed by major policy think tanks. And now, the people who support it are in office.

And this is where something I used to joke about doesn’t feel so funny anymore. Back when Trump started firing large numbers of federal workers, I remember saying, “I think Trump’s trying to shut down the whole government.” At the time, it felt like a sarcastic comment. But now, seeing what’s happening with Project 2025 and the influence of people like Curtis Yarvin and J.D. Vance, I’m starting to wonder if there’s a serious goal behind it all—to hollow out our institutions and rebuild them in a way that serves only the powerful few. It’s a sobering realization, and not one I wanted to come to. But ignoring it won’t make it go away.

Want to Learn More?

Here are a few sources I’ve found helpful while researching this post:

Final Thoughts

I’m not writing this to scare anyone—but I do think we all need to pay attention. These movements may seem fringe, but they’re not anymore. And if we care about democracy, we have to stay involved, informed, and vocal. Not because it’s easy, but because it’s worth it.

Thanks for reading—and stay awake.