Externalized memory, atrophied brain: the great illusion of instant knowledge
Cognitive sovereignty
The idea that hostile or undemocratic political systems could use artificial intelligence (AI) to weaken the intellectual capacities of future generations or insidiously shape the thinking of Western populations raises major concerns in terms of cognitive security, informational sovereignty and war of influence.
1. Hypotheses on cognitive manipulation by AI in a strategy of geopolitical hegemony
Generative AIs are already influencing the way we consume information, structure our thinking and form our opinions. A malicious exploitation of AI models for geopolitical purposes could revolve around several axes:
1.1 Hypothesis 1: AI as a tool for controlling attention and education
Strategic objective
- Develop biased educational and cultural AI aimed at the younger Western generations, to influence their way of thinking and their fundamental values.
- Gradually reduce young people's ability to think critically, by promoting ideological formatting or imposing a biased cognitive framework.
Possible methods
- Development of AI-based educational platforms designed to minimize analytical skills by promoting a passive approach to learning.
- Subtle introduction of ideological bias into the training corpus of educational AIs (e.g. gradual modifications of history, relativization of certain events).
- Using AI to foster cognitive dependence on digital tools, rendering future generations incapable of learning without algorithmic assistance.
Expected consequences
- A population less apt to question imposed dogmas.
- A gradual dilution of the historical and cultural references specific to Western civilizations.
- Impaired ability to think critically and structure complex reasoning.
1.2 Hypothesis 2: Generative AI and the modification of cultural and moral frames of reference
Strategic objective
- Destabilize societal values by progressively rewriting the cultural, moral and philosophical norms of Western populations through AI-generated content.
Possible methods
- Programming algorithms to promote a specific vision of the world, excluding certain philosophical or historical perspectives.
- Subtle changes in perception of the past (e.g. reinterpretation of the Enlightenment, the Renaissance, the role of Western civilizations).
- Traditional concepts of sovereignty, cultural identity and critical thinking are gradually being erased in favor of a uniform, standardized narrative.
Expected consequences
- Cultural uprooting of new generations, facilitated by an AI that guides historical and philosophical narratives.
- Reduced diversity of thought and acceptance of a uniform globalist culture, facilitating the influence of outside powers.
- Weakening of Western societal structures through loss of common values and reference points.
1.3 Hypothesis 3: AI as a lever for fragmenting social and political cohesion
Strategic objective
- Exacerbate internal tensions within Western societies to weaken political stability and prevent concerted geopolitical resistance.
Possible methods
- Personalizing misinformation: An AI could be programmed to provide contradictory information depending on the user's profile, amplifying ideological polarization.
- Creation of a "parallel reality" where certain people only see information that corresponds to their ideology, reinforcing the fragmentation of worldviews.
- Encouraging internal conflict by promoting victimhood narratives or exaggerating certain social injustices.
Expected consequences
- Increased division of Western societies through widening ideological divides.
- Widespread loss of confidence in institutions, facilitating outside interference.
- Reduction in a country's ability to make coherent strategic decisions, due to permanent instability.
1.4 Hypothesis 4: AI to degrade collective intelligence and capacity for innovation
Strategic objective
- Reduce the competitiveness of Western nations by progressively weakening their capacity for innovation and strategic analysis.
Possible methods
- Discrete introduction of systemic errors in AI-generated educational and scientific content.
- Encouraging oversimplification of reasoning in decision-making processes, making experts less able to handle complex situations.
- Development of a culture of AI dependency, preventing younger generations from acquiring the cognitive skills needed to innovate and solve problems independently.
Expected consequences
- Reduced scientific and technological progress in target countries.
- Less ability to anticipate geopolitical and economic threats.
- Weakening of the global leadership of certain nations to the benefit of hostile powers.
2. Other potential AI threats in a social engineering context
In addition to the previous hypotheses, other strategies could be used by authoritarian regimes or malicious actors exploiting AI:
2.1 Manipulation of emotions and perception of reality
- Using advanced AI models to adapt political discourse to individuals' cognitive biases.
- Creation of influential AI personalities (social bots, fake experts) capable of shaping public opinion on geopolitical issues.
- Alteration of media content in real time, making it impossible to distinguish between facts and algorithmic manipulation.
2.2 Developing AI that promotes dogmatic thinking
- Creation of authoritarian answers, limiting diversity of interpretation.
- Binary logic predominates, reducing complex, nuanced thinking.
- Encouraging passive acceptance of AI answers as absolute truths.
2.3 Impact on elite decision-making capabilities
- Progressive infusion of subtle errors into predictive models used by governments and strategic companies.
- Creation of a technological cognitive bias, where political and economic decision-makers no longer trust their own judgment and rely blindly on algorithms.
3. Strategies for protection and resilience in the face of these threats
In the face of these risks, several countermeasures can be envisaged:
- Develop sovereign AI trained on transparent and diversified databases.
- Strengthen education on algorithmic biases, so that citizens retain a critical approach to AI.
- Encourage the diversity of AI models, to avoid a single player monopolizing generative artificial intelligence.
- Set up regular audits to detect biases and attempts at manipulation in AI training corpora.
Generative AI is not just a technological tool: it represents a lever of power, which can be used to strengthen or weaken a civilization over the long term. Malicious exploitation of these technologies by hostile states or groups could profoundly alter the way Western populations perceive their world, compromising their intellectual autonomy and capacity for strategic resistance.
3.4 Technological discrimination and unequal access to high-quality AIs
AI, far from being a neutral public service, is a tool controlled by private companies or states who define who has access to it, under what conditions and with what limitations. This can open the door to far-reaching manipulation on a number of levels.
3.4.1. Creating a cognitive elite and a technologically assisted but limited population
Differentiated access to AIs can lead to a cognitive and informational divide between elites, who benefit from access to the most powerful versions of AIs, and the general public, who have to make do with less powerful, more biased or less customizable models.
- Premium subscriptions for advanced AI, capable of analyzing complex information and providing finer-grained analysis.
- Simplified versions for the general population, limiting the depth of answers or orienting information towards pre-defined frames of thought.
- Geographical blocks preventing certain countries or social groups from accessing certain advanced AI functionalities.
- Creation of an augmented cognitive elite, capable of making better strategic decisions thanks to AI.
- A majority of the population trapped in a system of restricted intellectual assistance, making them dependent on formatted answers without access to advanced analytical capabilities.
- Reinforcement of educational inequalities between those who really master and exploit AI and those who become passive users.
3.4.2. Ideological control by segmentation of AI models
Generative AI can be trained differentially for different users, enabling companies and governments to deliver specific versions based on the user's profile or geographical area.
Examples of possible manipulations:
- In the West, an AI could be calibrated to avoid certain sensitive subjects or steer opinions on key political issues.
- In non-democratic countries, AI could provide a version of the facts aligned with government propaganda, preventing access to counter-discourse.
- In certain educational environments, "reserved" AIs could filter historical or scientific information to shape the perception of younger generations.
- Balkanization of knowledge, where each population is exposed to a different version of reality.
- Discreet framing of public debate by AIs that favor certain narratives over others.
- Reduced free will due to asymmetrical access to unbiased information.
3.5 AI as a lever for psychological influence and long-term indoctrination
Apart from informational biases, AI can be designed to shape the behaviors and perceptions of future generations, in an insidious conditioning approach.
3.5.1. Manipulating emotions and societal values
An AI designed to influence behavior could gradually :
- Normalize certain attitudes by prioritizing content that promotes a specific worldview.
- Alter the perception of conflicts by minimizing or amplifying certain geopolitical issues, depending on the interests of the country controlling the AI.
- Modify language and cognitive references, making certain ideas or concepts increasingly difficult to express (for example, by eliminating the use of certain words or by encouraging the adoption of a framed vocabulary).
- A discreet cognitive re-education, where future generations are built on a system of thought dictated by AI.
- A gradual alteration of freedom of expression, not by brutal censorship, but by subtle modification of linguistic and ideological frameworks.
- Passive acceptance of certain doctrines, without users even realizing that they are being influenced.
3.6. Economic destabilization and technological sabotage through AI
AI not only changes the cognitive sphere, it also represents an economic and technological weapon, which can be used to weaken industries, institutions or strategic sectors.
3.6.1. AI as a tool for destroying industrial competitiveness
- Injection of subtle errors into AI models dedicated to Western companies, making financial forecasts less accurate.
- Alteration of recruitment and training processes to steer future elites towards less strategic fields.
- Increased dependence on foreign AI solutions, reducing the technological autonomy of states and industries.
- Reduced innovation capacity in countries dependent on biased AI models.
- Weakening of key sectors (defense, aerospace, finance) through subtle but cumulative errors.
- Migration of talent to countries with more efficient and less biased AI, amplifying the brain drain.?
Summary of potential AI-related threats from a cognitive warfare and geopolitical perspective
Conclusion and lines of protection
In the face of these risks, several strategies can be put in place to protect the cognitive and technological sovereignty of Western nations:
- Develop independent AIs with transparent data and auditing processes.
- Educate people to think critically about AI to avoid passive dependence.
- Encourage the diversity of AI models to avoid a monopoly of influence.
- Impose regulations on differentiated access to guarantee equal access to advanced versions of AIs.
- Carry out counter-analyses on the possible biases of foreign AI models in order to detect possible intentional manipulations.
