From human hegemony and the history of domination, to artificial intelligence and the moment the world gets a new “sheriff.”
I deeply love animals. All animals.
Not out of romantic sentiment, nor from a need to position myself as morally superior to anyone else. I love them because, in my view —without any intention of imposing it— they constitute a vital, irreplaceable part of this planet.
A planet that, if we are honest, does not belong to us.
It was given to us —or rather, lent to us— for a brief passage. Not to exhaust it, but to care for it.
And yet, throughout its history on Earth, the human species has acted as the absolute ruler and judge of all other forms of life. It displaced, dominated, eradicated. Not only out of necessity for survival, but often as a demonstration of superiority.
Even today, after so many discoveries, so much knowledge and progress, humans continue to behave as unquestioned sovereigns.
As if this right were self-evident.
But where did this “legitimacy” come from?
What was the criterion?
What comparative advantage granted humans the moral alibi to stand above all other species?
For decades —perhaps centuries— the answer was one: intelligence.
Cognition.
The ability to think, create, and design.
Wasn’t this what we were taught in schools?
Wasn’t this presented as the fundamental distinction between humans and all other living beings?
The same logic of superiority that humans exercised over other species was also exercised over themselves.
Humans over humans.
The powerful over the weak.
The “superior” over the “inferior”.
History is not only a story of domination over nature.
It is also a story of domination of humans over humans.
And yet, this very foundation is now the first to be seriously challenged. Not in some distant future — but in a remarkably short time frame.
What happens when this primacy changes hands?
Even if it does not pass to a living being.
What happens when the peak of the cognitive hierarchy no longer belongs to humans?
And the most unsettling question of all:
What happens if the new leader —whatever form it may take— chooses to behave as humans once did?
Many are quick to assure us that this will never happen.
That there is no cause for concern.
But where does this certainty come from?
How can one confidently predict the future when operating within a system whose evolution is no longer fully controllable?
Perhaps, in the end, the real question is not who the next ruler will be.
But whether humanity is ready —for the first time— to no longer be one.
From Bletchley Park to Artificial Intelligence
History reminds us that intelligence has always been a source of power. At Bletchley Park, during World War II, the ability to decode and interpret information shaped the course of history. Whoever controlled intelligence held the advantage.
Today, artificial intelligence raises the same question on a global scale, but with a crucial difference: it is no longer about who can break a code, but about who has access, agency, and authority over a new form of intelligence.
The transition from intelligence as a weapon to intelligence as infrastructure is not a technical matter; it is profoundly political.
Humanity’s Attempt to Impose Order
Faced with this transition, political leadership does not stand idle. It reacts in the only way history suggests: by attempting to define, frame, and regulate what is emerging faster than it can be fully understood.
Some summits begin from fear —what if AI escapes control? Others speak the language of ethics and social good. Some coordinate among the already powerful. Others treat AI as a strategic asset. And some, more recently, raise a different concern altogether: not the danger of intelligence itself, but the danger of its unequal distribution.
All these efforts share a common thread —the need to believe that intelligence can still be predicted, governed, and ultimately controlled.
But perhaps the real question is not whether regulation is sufficient.
Perhaps it is whether it rests on the unexamined assumption that hegemony is permanent.
If intelligence has always served as the alibi for power, then artificial intelligence is not merely a technological challenge. It is a mirror. And what it reflects is not the future of machines, but the limits of human dominance.
