2025年11月24日，白宫传出震动全球科技界的消息——美国总统特朗普正式签署行政命令，启动名为"创世纪"行动 （Genesis Mission）的国家级AI发展计划。 这份被白宫幕僚称为"堪比曼哈顿计划的世纪蓝图"，以"举全国之力突破AI技术壁垒、巩固全球主导权"为核心目标，标 志着美国将人工智能从产业赛道全面升级为国家战略核心，一场覆盖政府、企业、科研机构的"AI总动员"就此拉开序 幕。 谁在真正操控特朗普2.0？ 2024年大选后，一个细节耐人寻味：特朗普的副总统人选，不是传统政客，而是一个曾骂他"该被谴责"的前风投从业者 ——J.D.万斯。更奇怪的是，这位39岁的参议员，政治履历几乎为零，却能在短短几年内从畅销书作者跃升为白宫二号 人物。 特朗普本人也在悄悄转向。 根据波因特研究所的报告，特朗普在2016年收到的政治捐款中有69%来自200美元以下的小额捐款。正是因为还没有与 大资本形成联姻，彼时的特朗普主义实际上并没有成熟的政治纲领和政策体系。经过八年的政坛沉淀，特朗普2024年 竞选活动最显著的变化就是小额捐款比例从69%降到了32.9%，来自硅谷科技资本的加持不容小觑。特朗普第二任期的 执政逻辑 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the launch of the "Genesis Mission," a national AI development plan initiated by President Trump, which aims to elevate AI technology to a core national strategy, marking a significant shift in the U.S. approach to technology and governance [1]. Group 1: Key Players and Influences - The driving force behind Trump's administration includes a group of Silicon Valley tech elites such as Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and David Sacks, who advocate for a "tech accelerationism" philosophy that seeks to reshape government through engineering thinking [2][5]. - Trump's political evolution is highlighted by a shift in funding sources, with small donations decreasing from 69% in 2016 to 32.9% in 2024, indicating a growing reliance on Silicon Valley capital [4]. Group 2: Technological Ideologies - The rise of "tech accelerationism" in Silicon Valley is changing the macro-political landscape in the U.S., advocating for rapid technological advancement as a means to drive social and political change [12][13]. - This ideology promotes the idea that technological progress, particularly in AI, is essential for solving long-standing societal issues, suggesting that regulatory and ethical concerns should be set aside to facilitate innovation [16][18]. Group 3: Future Vision and Military Implications - Alexander Karp envisions a future where the U.S. is a "Republic" supported by hard technology, emphasizing the need for a government that operates with the efficiency of top tech companies [19][21]. - The article raises concerns about the reluctance of talented engineers to engage in military applications of AI, despite the necessity for the U.S. defense sector to adapt to new technological realities [22][24].

Core Insights - The article discusses the emergence of a new power structure in the U.S. known as the technology-political complex, which intertwines Silicon Valley tech giants, federal government agencies, and Wall Street capital, aiming to maintain U.S. global dominance through technological monopolies and institutional collusion [1][3]. Group 1: Formation of the Technology-Political Complex - The formation of the technology-political complex is a result of the interaction between technological acceleration, the rise of right-wing tech capital politics, and shifts in national strategic needs [3]. - The complex is characterized by a binding of technological acceleration and political power, particularly during Trump's presidency, which embraced Silicon Valley's tech right [5]. - The complex represents an evolution of the military-industrial complex into the digital age, marking a paradigm shift in geopolitical dynamics towards a new form of global digital imperialism [1][3]. Group 2: Mechanisms of the Technology-Political Complex - Political donations and policy influence create a feedback loop where tech companies push for regulatory relaxation, benefiting from government support through tax incentives and subsidies [8]. - The fusion of military and civilian technologies creates a symbiotic relationship that enhances both commercial innovation and military applications, exemplified by companies like SpaceX and Palantir [9]. - Digital narratives and algorithms are weaponized to shape public perception and political discourse, reinforcing the legitimacy of technological dominance [10]. - The weaponization of technology standards and rules serves as a strategic tool in geopolitical competition, aiming to establish a U.S.-centric technological governance framework [11][12]. Group 3: Impacts and Challenges - The technology-political complex is reshaping domestic political alliances and policy directions, with tech giants increasingly influencing U.S. political agendas [14]. - It accelerates global technological competition, potentially leading to a bifurcated global tech landscape dominated by U.S. interests, reminiscent of a new arms race in technology [15]. - The complex fosters unilateralism and technological nationalism, with a focus on self-sufficiency in high-tech development, impacting U.S. foreign policy and relations, particularly with China [16][17].

Group 1 - The article discusses the evolving relationship between technology and government, highlighting the emergence of a "Tech-Industrial Complex" that prioritizes national interests over short-term profits [3][24] - The "Tech-Industrial Complex" aims to enhance national strength through technological innovation and industrial upgrades, contrasting with the traditional "Military-Industrial Complex" that relies on military intervention [4][5] - The article emphasizes the role of key figures like Elon Musk in shaping this new paradigm, advocating for a collaborative approach between the private sector and government to boost strategic industries [9][10][24] Group 2 - The article outlines the implications of "Technological Accelerationism," which seeks to improve U.S. competitiveness through private-public partnerships and innovation [9][26] - It highlights the potential for a global normative competition arising from differing approaches to technology regulation between the U.S. and China, with the U.S. favoring market openness and China emphasizing state control [26][27] - The article warns that the rise of "Technological Accelerationism" could lead to a new phase in U.S.-China relations, where both countries compete not only in technology but also in governance models that support technological advancement [28][29] Group 3 - The article discusses the potential impact of Musk's conservative international expansion on China, suggesting that it could weaken Western pressure on China while also posing risks from right-wing movements that may harbor anti-China sentiments [29][30] - It emphasizes the need for China to navigate this landscape carefully, leveraging opportunities while being cautious of potential threats from rising conservative forces in the West [30][31] - The article concludes that China should enhance communication with right-wing populist parties globally to stabilize bilateral relations and find new modes of interaction amid Western divisions [30][31]