Solidarity, Not Speed, for AI Governance
The call for a more deliberate approach to artificial intelligence (AI) governance has never been more pressing. As technology continues to advance at breakneck speed, the need for a governance model that prioritizes democracy over haste is highlighted by recent global initiatives.
The Launch of AI AGE
On June 12, 2025, a significant milestone was reached with the launch of the Artificial Intelligence Advisory Group on Elections (AI AGE). This initiative, spearheaded by the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), aims to unite electoral authorities and leading AI experts to tackle the challenges AI poses to democracy.
Founding members of AI AGE include electoral management bodies from countries such as Argentina, Indonesia, Kenya, Taiwan, and Ukraine. The initiative embodies a collaborative effort to ensure that AI strengthens democratic processes rather than undermines them.
Strategic Slowness Over Speed
AI AGE advocates for a governance approach that emphasizes dialogue, deliberation, and debate. This contrasts sharply with the prevailing tech ethos of “move fast and break things,” which has often led to accountability issues and power consolidation.
As highlighted during the AI AGE launch, the notion that speed is essential can lead to detrimental outcomes. Instead, the concept of strategic slowness allows for consultation and inclusive decision-making—key aspects of a robust democratic process.
The Global Power Shift
The landscape of global governance is also shifting. Recent events, such as President Donald Trump‘s diplomatic tour of the Gulf in May 2025, showcased how states are increasingly partnering with tech companies. Landmark deals included the establishment of a massive AI data center in the UAE, backed by major firms, and significant investments in AI initiatives in collaboration with U.S. tech companies.
This new model, where tech companies are not merely contractors but partners in governance, poses questions about the implications for democracy and public policy.
Case Study: Brazil’s dWallet
Another compelling example of the intersection between AI and governance is Brazil’s dWallet, launched in April 2025. This digital wallet allows citizens to monetize their personal data, transforming fundamental human rights into commodities. While it aims to empower individuals, it raises critical concerns about privacy and the monetization of personal information.
Brazil’s existing strong data protection laws, which recognize data as a fundamental right, are now being challenged by proposals that shift the focus from protection to monetization.
The Lessons from the Internet’s Early Days
The early internet serves as a model for how democratic principles can guide technological development. The collaboration among companies, governments, and technologists led to the formation of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), which established open web standards that prioritize freedom of expression and multi-stakeholder engagement.
While not without flaws, the W3C exemplifies how inclusive governance can foster a global, open internet—a goal that remains relevant today.
Conclusion: A Call for Democratic AI Governance
As AI continues to integrate into various aspects of public life, the risk of repeating past governance failures looms large. However, by embracing a governance model rooted in solidarity rather than speed, stakeholders can work together to shape a future where technology serves to enhance democracy.
In a world marked by rapid technological change and rising autocracy, the future of AI governance requires a commitment to democratic values, ensuring that the benefits of AI are equitably distributed across society.
