Swazla

quote:

---

they're all puppets. the goal is a one world system and you can't get to that while the US is a superpower. that one world system will be based in Europe.

---

quote:

---

Not worried about bacteria infection we know how to treat.

---

quote:

---

My concern is that we won't see a huge demand for graphene for a few more years.

---

quote:

---

He ate some bad curry

---

quote:

---

How so?

---

quote:

---

On September 3, Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Greg Casar announced the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. They introduced it the following day (Sanders 2026).

On September 8, an Anthropic researcher named Jacob Coxon resigned in a seven-post thread, the only seven posts his account had ever made. He said Anthropic and OpenAI were racing toward self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives, and he put the chance of AI causing human extinction within the decade at ten percent. The Wall Street Journal published its exclusive eighteen minutes before Coxon posted (Ramkumar 2026).

The next day, Evan Hubinger, Anthropic’s alignment science lead, publicly supported Coxon’s warning. Hubinger put the probability of AI killing humanity within the next decade at greater than ten percent and acknowledged that Anthropic had no plan for aligning superintelligence and was not clearly on track to develop one (Hubinger 2026). Unlike Coxon, Hubinger did not resign.

Also on September 9, OpenAI published a policy essay by Chris Lehane, its chief global affairs officer. Lehane had previously worked in the Clinton White House and later led regulatory and political campaigns for Airbnb. His OpenAI essay called for mandatory national AI safety regulation and endorsed four pending California bills. Its title was explicit: “The AI Policy Window Is Open. We Need to Act.” The final section was headed “Use the window.” Lehane concluded: “The AI policy window is open, for now. We intend to use it” (Lehane 2026).

On September 10, Barack Obama spoke at a closed Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee fundraiser in Manhattan. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries asked him about the Anthropic resignation. Obama answered that the technology was moving fast in private hands and urged Jeffries to build a framework (Gorelick 2026).

On September 11, the New York Times opinion page ran Stephen Witt calling for a global pause (Witt 2026). Seventy British parliamentarians wrote their prime minister the same day demanding a superintelligence ban.

On September 12, Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei published an essay arguing the industry must slow down (Amodei 2026). Elon Musk, Sam Altman, and Demis Hassabis agreed within hours. Sanders posted that evening thanking all three for coming around to his position.

Several of these moves were coordinated by the people making them. A resignation does not get a Wall Street Journal exclusive eighteen minutes before it happens by accident. The Journal and TechCrunch both report that Coxon and Hubinger timed their disclosures together. A bill does not precede by five days the incident its sponsors cite to justify it. Three rival chief executives do not arrive at the same position inside an afternoon without advance notice of what is coming.

That does not require a centrally organized conspiracy. Political scientist John Kingdon described the process decades ago. Major policy proposals are often developed long before the political conditions exist to enact them. A crisis, election, or sudden change in public attention creates what Kingdon called a “policy window.” Political actors and interest groups with proposals already prepared then move quickly to take advantage of it (Kingdon 1984).

The bill was already written. Amodei’s essay was already drafted. The House Democratic framework was already in finishing touches. What Coxon supplied was the opening.

The Sanders legislation was already written. Amodei’s proposal was already being prepared. House Democrats were already developing an AI framework. OpenAI’s chief lobbyist was openly describing the moment as a policy window and stating that his company intended to use it.

Coxon’s resignation did not create the regulatory agenda. It helped create the political conditions for advancing it.

---

quote:

---

Have you looked at the big investors in Anthropic? Who sits on their board? It's a who's who of Democratic Party financiers.

When Anthropic goes public, hundreds of paternalist authoritarian Democrats will become millionaires. And they will put hundreds of millions into the campaigns of Democratic politicians, Democratic NGO's, and Democratic media organizations.

---

quote:

---

Which major investors, board members, and executives of Anthropic are also major Democratic Party donors / bundlers?

Reed Hastings (board), Dario and Daniela Amodei (CEO/President and co-founders), and early investor Dustin Moskovitz are the clearest overlaps. Other co-founders and some institutional backers lean Democratic in reported giving; several board members and large strategic investors do not.

Anthropic is a public-benefit corporation. Its board (as of 2026 reporting) has included Dario Amodei, Daniela Amodei (chair), Yasmin Razavi (Spark Capital), Jay Kreps (Confluent), Reed Hastings (Netflix), Vas Narasimhan (Novartis), and Chris Liddell (former Microsoft/GM CFO and Trump White House deputy chief of staff). A Long-Term Benefit Trust elects a majority of seats. Major outside capital has come from Amazon, Google/Alphabet, Nvidia, Microsoft, ICONIQ, Lightspeed, Sequoia, Spark, Menlo, Coatue, GIC, and others. Early funding also included Dustin Moskovitz-linked vehicles and (later seized/sold) FTX-related stakes.

Executives and co-founders

Dario Amodei has given six-figure sums to Democratic candidates and committees (Biden, Hillary Clinton, DNC) and endorsed Kamala Harris in 2024. In 2026 he gave $1 million to Public First, a super PAC focused on AI regulation. Reports describe him and several co-founders as registered Democrats with no recorded Republican donations in public FEC summaries.

Daniela Amodei has a documented history of donations to Democrats including Harris, Biden, and Obama. Other co-founders (Tom Brown, Jack Clark, Jared Kaplan, Sam McCandlish, Chris Olah) appear in employee-donation analyses as part of a workforce whose itemized federal giving is overwhelmingly Democratic; some (including McCandlish) appear on AnthroPAC filings. The company itself has given tens of millions to Public First Action. Employee giving has also flowed to Democratic state and federal candidates, often clustered around AI-safety or California races.

These personal amounts are large for individuals but far smaller than classic mega-donor/bundler scale.

Board members

Reed Hastings is a long-standing Democratic mega-donor and past bundler. Public reporting includes a $7 million 2024 contribution to a Harris-aligned super PAC, a $2 million 2025 gift to Gavin Newsom’s California redistricting committee, multi-million gifts to House Majority PAC and Senate Majority PAC, and earlier bundling for Hillary Clinton (2016). Lifetime tracked political giving is frequently cited in the tens of millions, heavily Democratic. He joined Anthropic’s board in 2025.

Yasmin Razavi’s firm Spark Capital has shown Democratic-leaning individual giving in recent cycles, but she is not reported as a top-tier personal mega-donor. Jay Kreps and Vas Narasimhan do not appear as major partisan donors in the sources reviewed. Chris Liddell’s public record is the opposite: senior role in the first Trump White House.

Major investors

Dustin Moskovitz (Facebook co-founder) was an early Anthropic investor; he later moved the stake into a nonprofit vehicle. He is one of the largest individual Democratic donors in the country: reports cite $135 million+ lifetime to Democrats and $0 to Republicans in some tallies, including tens of millions to Future Forward and Harris-aligned vehicles in 2024. His Coefficient Giving / Open Philanthropy network has also funded AI-policy and EA-aligned groups.

Reid Hoffman (Greylock) is repeatedly listed among Anthropic’s investor-orbit Democratic mega-donors ($100 million+ lifetime figures appear in advocacy summaries). Eric Schmidt’s family office was an early investor; Schmidt has a long record as a Democratic donor and adviser. Sam Bankman-Fried’s $500 million 2022 stake (later sold in bankruptcy) came with prior Democratic giving in the tens of millions. Ford Foundation and Omidyar Network acquired smaller stakes via the FTX estate sale and are major funders of left-of-center nonprofits.

Large strategic investors (Amazon, Google, Nvidia, Microsoft) and most later-round VCs/sovereign funds are not themselves partisan “Democratic Party donors.” Individual partners at firms such as Sequoia or Lightspeed vary.

Caveats

“Bundler” is a specific role (raising from others for a campaign). Hastings has a documented bundling history; Moskovitz and the Amodeis are primarily large direct donors. FEC itemized data, OpenSecrets, and news compilations are the sources; dark-money 501(c)(4)s and state-level gifts are only partly visible. Advocacy reports (e.g., Bull Moose Project’s “$43 Billion Machine”) aggregate founder/board/investor/employee giving at $600 million+ with a 99.8% Democratic share; those figures mix personal, employee, and affiliated giving and should be treated as estimates, not audited FEC totals.

Company PAC activity (Public First) has supported both Democratic and some Republican candidates who favor AI-safety regulation, so corporate spending is not purely partisan even when individual giving is.

---