America and China's AI Strategies Both Reflect Societal Values

­Over at the Lowy Institute, William Topping lambasts the West’s AI strategy, particularly when juxtaposed with China. While the West is venturing forth cautiously, with an eye towards preserving privacy and civil liberties, China has no such concerns.

In 2022, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy released its “Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights” – a comprehensive treatise on balancing technological progress with human rights. With sections like “Algorithmic Discrimination Protections” and “Data Privacy,” it focuses heavily on the human factor and how we shouldn’t lose sight of it.

AI can serve as a technological force multiplier – exponentially so – but as the document notes, “This important progress must not come at the price of civil rights or democratic values.”

Similarly, the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act assigns AI applications to three specific risk categories, with those in the “unacceptable risk” grouping, like the “government-run social scoring of the type used in China,” outright banned.

For Topping, this represents a PR faux pas – by framing AI as a threat to civil liberties (which it absolutely is), we’re opening the door to regulatory hurdles which could impede progress. But I’m not convinced it’s so black-and-white.

By contrast, Topping calls attention to China’s “New Generation Artificial Intelligence Development Plan” and its goal to:

“accelerate the deep integration of AI with the economy, society and national defence … comprehensively enhance society’s productive forces, comprehensive national power, and national competitiveness…”

Naturally, China makes no mention of civil liberties, which has never been a priority of theirs, and in fact, their LLM models could aidthe CCP’s security apparatus. We know that programs like DeepSeek funnel user data back to the PRC and push the CCP’s unique take on the “truth”.

Topping positions China’s AI position as more “mission-driven,” with language that “speaks of mobilising resources, not pre-empting rights infringements.” And he sees any reluctance on the West’s part as a roadblock, which is overly simplistic.

First off, America’s “Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights” balances caution with optimism, stating that “Fueled by the power of American innovation, these [automated] tools hold the potential to redefine every part of our society and make life better for everyone.”

But it never loses sight of AI’s capacity for harm.

And believing that non-binding documents will have any effect on innovation is just silly, particularly with the U.S. outspending China approximately 20 to 1 on AI, and AI Data Centers becoming an omnipresent – and somewhat controversial – feature of the American landscape.

China and the West have each issued their own AI clarion calls, and unsurprisingly, both documents reflect their respective society’s values and principles. That should be celebrated.