Culture and AI: The New Frontiers of Class Struggle

According to many commentators and social trend analysts of recent years, the advent of AI, beyond its professional and technical uses, is revolutionizing the ways culture and information are consumed. Not always, according to these opinions, in positive terms. Indeed, it seems that AI is increasingly widespread at a “popular” level, becoming the main learning medium. With all its pros and cons. Because, while it's true that anyone can ask various models questions and receive more or less satisfactory answers, this almost never leads to genuine growth, critical thinking, or the development of lateral thinking. On the contrary, more often than not, people settle for a pre-packaged answer. This leads to a leveling down, according to standardized and pre-set models that effectively determine, if not actually guide, our learning curve. Conversely, real cultural growth, made up of reading, critical analysis, and creative stimuli, is being relegated to more affluent classes of the population, who can afford learning models and tools that stimulate exponential brain growth. That is to say, what was entirely common just a few decades ago has now become an elitist phenomenon (on this topic, click the link at the bottom of the text to learn more). Is it true? Is it not true?

A Choice of Immediacy or an Economic Necessity?

Certainly, as with many things, the truth lies in the middle. There are two crucial points in favor of AI: 1. **Practicality**: AI makes everything simpler and more immediate. But it stops at a minimal level, beyond which there must necessarily be a voluntary activity of individual research and analysis. A will that must necessarily be formed within one's family and social background. It's normal that if, to give a simple example, an adolescent receives no cultural stimuli but is left with a mobile device in their hands, that will become their universe. The young person will always seek the easiest and most convenient path. It's like, using a simple metaphor, wanting to pass university exams with top grades by studying 100-page summaries instead of the thousands-page tomes indicated on the syllabus (often many more; anyone with humanities studies knows what I'm talking about). 2. **Costs**: Culture often comes with a very high price. In contrast, creating products with AI often has reduced costs, if not none at all. Producing in the cultural sphere, whether publishing a book, staging a show, studying at certain levels, or making a film, instead requires significant outlays, often prohibitive for the average citizen. Their consumption is also not exactly easy for many income brackets, without even delving into the critical merits of increasing prices for volumes, tickets, and event access.

Historical Recurrences

However, if we pause for a moment to conduct a historical-social analysis, the problem is not contemporary but ancient. In past centuries, culture has always been the prerogative of the wealthier classes, both concerning studies and the possession and enjoyment of cultural assets. Indeed, the gap was even starker. The poor classes, the plebeians, often had to content themselves with oral consumption, both for educational purposes and entertainment. With all the limitations – and problems due to the “personal” way of reporting facts, stories, and theories – that entailed. It's no coincidence that the works of many artists, their ingenuity and creativity, could only take shape and see the light thanks to the wealthy patrons who sponsored them. As was once said, with a phrase linked to the religious sphere (after all, it's no coincidence that culture in past centuries was very often connected precisely to this specific context), “without money, no masses are sung”.

The Solution? An à la carte menu, rather than an *all you can eat*.

But today, how can this gap be addressed? Technological media often lead us to believe in an easy illusion: the possibility of having “everything”, knowing “everything”, and consuming anything. What is lacking today is a real ability to make a selection. A choice. Knowing which direction to go when faced with a crossroads or, more often, a true branching of paths and routes. Only in this way is it possible to optimize one's resources in a “useful” way and choose a path to follow in the direction of personal growth. An expense to face, certainly, but a targeted one. And with a bit of planning, probably a little less burdensome to tackle. After all, it's better to be specialized in something than to give the impression of being a popular mini-encyclopedia, “Not everything, but a little bit of everything”, isn't it?