SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:#222;padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_1_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_7_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}.sticky-sidebar{margin:auto;}@media (min-width: 980px){.main:has(.sticky-sidebar){overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.row:has(.sticky-sidebar){display:flex;overflow:visible;}}@media (min-width: 980px){.sticky-sidebar{position:-webkit-sticky;position:sticky;top:100px;transition:top .3s ease-in-out, position .3s ease-in-out;}}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
What we need is not a renewed arms race fueled by fear, competition, and secrecy, but its opposite: a global initiative to democratize and demilitarize technological development.
“History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.” Marx’s aphorism feels newly prescient. Last week, the U.S. Department of Energy issued a jingoistic call on social media for a “new Manhattan Project,” this time to win the so-called race for artificial intelligence supremacy.
But the Manhattan Project is no blueprint. It is a warning—a cautionary tale of what happens when science is conscripted into the service of state power, when open inquiry gives way to nationalist rivalry, and when the cult of progress is severed from ethical responsibility. It shows how secrecy breeds fear, corrodes public trust, and undermines democratic institutions.
The Manhattan Project may have been, as President Harry Truman claimed, “the greatest scientific gamble in history.” But it also represented a gamble with the continuity of life on Earth. It brought the world to the brink of annihilation—an abyss into which we still peer. A second such project may well push us over the edge.
If we are serious about the threats posed by artificial intelligence, we must abandon the illusion that safety lies in outpacing our rivals.
The parallels between the origins of the atomic age and the rise of artificial intelligence are striking. In both, the very individuals at the forefront of technological innovation were also among the first to sound the alarm.
During World War II, atomic scientists raised concerns about the militarization of nuclear energy. Yet, their dissent was suppressed under the strictures of wartime secrecy, and their continued participation was justified by the perceived imperative to build the bomb before Nazi Germany. In reality, that threat had largely subsided by the time the Manhattan Project gathered momentum, as Germany had already abandoned its efforts to develop a nuclear weapon.
The first technical study assessing the feasibility of the bomb concluded that it could indeed be built but warned that “owing to the spreading of radioactive substances with the wind, the bomb could probably not be used without killing large numbers of civilians, and this may make it unsuitable as a weapon…”
When in 1942 scientists theorized that the first atomic chain reaction might ignite the atmosphere, Arthur Holly Compton recalled thinking that if such a risk proved real, then “these bombs must never be made… better to accept the slavery of the Nazis than to run a chance of drawing the final curtain on mankind.”
Leo Szilard drafted a petition urging President Truman to refrain from using it against Japan. He warned that such bombings would be both morally indefensible and strategically shortsighted: “A nation which sets the precedent of using these newly liberated forces of nature for purposes of destruction,” he wrote, “may have to bear the responsibility of opening the door to an era of devastation on an unimaginable scale.”
Today, we cannot hide behind the pretext of world war. We cannot claim ignorance. Nor can we invoke the specter of an existential adversary. The warnings surrounding artificial intelligence are clear, public, and unequivocal.
In 2014, Stephen Hawking warned that “the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.” In more recent years, Geoffrey Hinton, referred to as the “godfather of AI,” resigned from Google while citing mounting concerns about the “existential risk” posed by unchecked AI development. Soon after, a coalition of researchers and industry leaders issued a joint statement asserting that “mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.” Around this time, an open letter, signed by over a thousand experts and tens of thousands of others, called for a temporary pause on AI development to reflect on its trajectory and long-term consequences.
Yet the race to develop ever more powerful artificial intelligence continues unabated, propelled less by foresight than by fear that halting progress would mean falling behind rivals, particularly China. But in the face of such profound risks, one must ask: win what, exactly?
Reflecting on the similar failure to confront the perils of technological advancement in his own time, Albert Einstein warned, “The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything except our mode of thinking, and thus we drift toward unparalleled catastrophe.” His words remain no less urgent today.
The lesson should be obvious: We cannot afford to repeat the mistakes of the atomic age. To invoke the Manhattan Project as a model for AI development is not only historically ignorant but also politically reckless.
What we need is not a renewed arms race fueled by fear, competition, and secrecy, but its opposite: a global initiative to democratize and demilitarize technological development, one that prioritizes human needs, centers dignity and justice, and advances the collective well-being of all.
More than 30 years ago, Daniel Ellsberg, former nuclear war planner turned whistleblower, called for a different kind of Manhattan Project. One not to build new weapons, but to undo the harm of the first and to dismantle the doomsday machines that we already have. That vision remains the only rational and morally defensible Manhattan Project worth pursuing.
We cannot afford to recognize and act upon this only in hindsight, as was the case with the atomic bomb. As Joseph Rotblat, the sole scientist to resign from the Project on ethical grounds, reflected on their collective failure:
The nuclear age is the creation of scientists… in total disregard for the basic tenets of science… openness and universality. It was conceived in secrecy, and usurped—even before birth—by one state to give it political dominance. With such congenital defects, and being nurtured by an army of Dr. Strangeloves, it is no wonder that the creation grew into a monster… We, scientists, have a great deal to answer for.
If the path we are on leads to disaster, the answer is not to accelerate. As physicians Bernard Lown and Evgeni Chazov warned during the height of the Cold War arms race: “When racing toward a precipice, it is progress to stop.”
We must stop not out of opposition to progress, but to pursue a different kind of progress: one rooted in scientific ethics, a respect for humanity, and a commitment to our collective survival.
If we are serious about the threats posed by artificial intelligence, we must abandon the illusion that safety lies in outpacing our rivals. As those most intimately familiar with this technology have warned, there can be no victory in this race, only an acceleration of a shared catastrophe.
We have thus far narrowly survived the nuclear age. But if we fail to heed its lessons and forsake our own human intelligence, we may not survive the age of artificial intelligence.
The Energy Department's order "will result in American households paying even higher electricity bills," warned one consumer advocate.
Consumers are set to foot the bill after the Trump administration intervened late last week to prevent the closure of the fossil fuel-powered Eddystone Generating Station, a Pennsylvania plant owned by Constellation Energy that was set to shut down its remaining units on Saturday.
The order from U.S. President Donald Trump's Energy Department marked the second time the administration has invoked emergency authority to rescue a dying fossil fuel plant. Last month, Energy Secretary Chris Wright stepped in to halt the closure of the J.H. Campbell power plant in West Olive, Michigan.
The authority cited in the orders is "typically reserved for emergencies such as extreme weather events and war," Bloombergobserved.
Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's Energy Program, warned in a statement following the Energy Department's latest order that "extending the life of the unit will force ratepayers to shell out money to cover expensive maintenance and overpay for expensive power that will result in American households paying even higher electricity bills, as Trump's emergency order requires consumers to pay 100% of all costs to get the plant up and running, including a guaranteed profit for Constellation."
"Trump's last-minute emergency order—issued literally on the last day these power plants were set to operate—causes significant, expensive complications," said Slocum. "Old units like Eddystone require both minor and major maintenance—maintenance that was deferred because of its planned retirement on May 31."
In December 2023, Constellation informed PJM Interconnection, the regional grid operator, that it would be retiring Eddystone Units 3 and 4, which ran on either fracked gas or oil. Constellation said at the time that "continued operation" of the units was "expected to be uneconomic."
PJM Interconnection signed off on Constellation's decision to retire the units in a letter dated February 27, 2024. But in the wake of the Energy Department's emergency order on Friday, PJM praised the Trump administration's intervention as "prudent."
Public Citizen slammed PJM's statement as a "craven, politically motivated about-face."
The order rescuing Eddystone Generating Station came days after the Trump Energy Department moved to save the coal-fired J.H. Campbell Generating Plant, stunning Michigan officials.
“It came as a surprise to everybody, and it was baffling why they chose this plant," Dan Scripps, chair of the Michigan Public Service Commission, told The Washington Post. "Nobody asked for this order. The power grid operator did not. The utility that owns the plant did not. The state regulator did not."
Citing state officials, the Post noted that "the move will collectively increase electric bills forratepayers in the Midwest by tens of millions of dollars." The J.H. Campbell plant is "the largest source of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions in West Michigan," according to the Sierra Club.
Trump laid the groundwork to save the fossil fuel plants earlier this month with an executive order instructing the Energy Department "to develop a process for using emergency powers to prevent unprofitable coal plants from shutting down in order to avert power outages."
Bryan Smigielski, organizer of the Sierra Club's Michigan campaign, called the administration's J.H. Campbell plant rescue a "blatant act of federal overreach" that "is being imposed against the wishes of Michigan consumers, businesses, regulators, and elected leaders."
"Don't be fooled: There is no 'energy emergency' here—just a payday for the coal industry that leaves us with higher bills and dirtier air," Smigielski added.
"As Wright speaks to industry insiders, members of impacted communities, faith leaders, youth, and others are assembling for a 'March for Future Generations,'" one campaigner said of the action at CERAWeek.
As environmental justice advocates were arrested outside a major energy conference in Houston on Monday, U.S. President Donald Trump's energy secretary faced criticism for his remarks to the government officials and oil and gas executives attending the event.
"Chris Wright, a former fracking CEO who essentially purchased his Cabinet position through $450,000 in Trump campaign contributions, personifies the deadly alliance between the Trump administration and the fossil fuel industry," said Oil Change International U.S. campaign manager Allie Rosenbluth, citing a figure that includes his wife's donations.
Wright's speech at CERAWeek, hosted by S&P Global, Rosenbluth continued, "made clear that he and the rest of the Trump administration are ready to sacrifice our communities and climate for the profits of the fossil fuel industry—which spent $445 million in total to influence Trump and Congress last election cycle."
"We have a human right to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and spread our roots in our homes. We cannot do that as long as these poisonous companies... continue to encroach on our communities."
CNBCreported that at the event, Wright vowed to support natural gas production and said that "the Trump administration will end the Biden administration's irrational, quasi-religious policies on climate change that imposed endless sacrifices on our citizens."
Despite his past comments about the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency, Wright rejected claims that he is a climate change denier and said that "the Trump administration will treat climate change for what it is—a global physical phenomenon that is a side effect of building the modern world."
"There is simply no physical way wind, solar and batteries could replace the myriad uses of natural gas," Wright claimed. He also singled out wind, saying that "it's incredibly high prices, incredibly huge investment, and a large footprint on the local communities, so it's been very unpopular for people that live near offshore wind turbines."
While in Texas, Wright announced a permit extension for Delfin LNG, an offshore liquefied natural gas export terminal proposal near the Louisiana coast—which Kelsey Crane, senior policy advocate at Earthworks, called "just a continuation of Chris Wright acting in the interest of Big Oil and Gas."
"Without hesitation he is advancing a project that has a different design, funding, contracts, and operational plans since it was first reviewed over six years ago," she said. "It is clear his only job is to make fossil fuel corporations rich by advancing oil and projects, which will leave families and small businesses to struggle with higher energy bills."
According to the Houston Chronicle, "It's the third Gulf Coast LNG project to receive support since Trump took office."
Rosenbluth similarly slammed the decision, saying that "his performative extension of Delfin LNG's export authorization during his speech represents just how deeply intertwined the Trump administration is with the fossil fuel CEOs at CERAWeek."
"As Wright speaks to industry insiders, members of impacted communities, faith leaders, youth, and others are assembling for a 'March for Future Generations,' where they're demanding an end to new fossil fuel projects and government subsidies for the fossil fuel industry," she noted. "The movement for a just transition away from fossil fuels, and towards a clean energy economy that works for all of us, is continuing to fight—regardless of how many fracking CEOs Trump puts in his Cabinet."
The Chroniclereported that "police arrested eight climate protesters Monday after they linked arms to briefly block a street next to CERAWeek by S&P Global... The activists were among hundreds who marched from nearby Root Memorial Square Park to the conference, which is hosted annually at the Hilton Americas-Houston and the George R. Brown Convention Center."
Climate advocates held a banner at CERAWeek by S&P Global in Houston, Texas on March 10, 2025. (Photo: Luigi W. Morris)
During a press conference at the park, Bekah Hinojosa, co-Founder of South Texas Environmental Justice Network in the Rio Grande Valley, said that "our community has been resisting LNG projects for over 10 years. Those projects are the Rio Grande LNG, Texas LNG, and the Rio Bravo pipeline. Last year, our community proved in court that these LNG facilities would be environmental racism. We are a low-income, brown, Native community, and LNG would be a cancer factory."
Jake Hernandez of Texas Campaign for the Environment declared that "we have a human right to breathe clean air, drink clean water, and spread our roots in our homes. We cannot do that as long as these poisonous companies, like Cheniere, continue to encroach on our communities. I've seen a lot of harms and consequences that LNG buildout can cause to our communities. This is just an earnest plea to help us put an end to LNG!"