Introduction: Thomas More’s “Utopia” – “Sheep were originally docile animals, but now they have become fiercer than tigers, devouring farmers’ land and consuming people’s livelihoods.”
Now, AI robots are truly like a storm, not only stirring up the capital market but also gradually invading everything around us……
In supermarkets, self-checkout is becoming increasingly popular, replacing cashiers with scan-and-pay systems.
On the streets, automatic delivery vehicles are shuttling through alleys, while delivery workers stand by, their eyes filled with despair.
Even in office buildings and cubicles, the efficiency brought by AI has optimized away countless programmers and designers, professions that once seemed respectable and technical.
Data shows that in the past five years, over 3 million jobs in China’s manufacturing sector have been replaced by automation.
Those workers who have toiled on assembly lines for most of their lives, when faced with the notice of “robots going online,” can only wipe their sweat and ask with a bitter smile, “What can we do now?” This scene is reminiscent of the movie “The Wandering Earth 2”.
What is even more alarming is that the “new land-grabbing movement” in the field of AI has already taken shape! A few tech giants monopolize data and algorithms, just like the British nobility once enclosed land, forming a “Matthew effect” where the strong get stronger.
Ordinary people can only become “digital tenants,” either replaced by technology or working for algorithms without receiving much in return. The impact of this wave of technological change is more intense and direct than we imagine!!!
1. How do the “sheep” of the digital age compete with humans for resources? The workplace security house is collapsing rapidly.
Speaking of “land grabbing,” it easily reminds people of the “sheep-eating humans” movement in England over 500 years ago. At that time, the wool industry was booming, and wool prices skyrocketed. The nobility and gentry saw profit and used violence or deception to enclose the common land that farmers relied on for survival, turning it into pastures for sheep.
Countless farmers lost their land and were forced to leave their homes, either becoming wanderers starving on the streets or flooding into cities as cheap labor, enduring brutal exploitation in factories.
Thomas More condemned this phenomenon in “Utopia”: “Sheep were originally docile animals, but now they have become fiercer than tigers, devouring farmers’ land and consuming people’s livelihoods.”
This movement was essentially a brutal deprivation of farmers by capital, sacrificing the survival rights of the majority of low-level workers for the benefit of a few.
Today, the transformation brought by AI and robots bears a striking resemblance to the “sheep-eating humans” of the past. The nobles of that time were “landlords,” while today’s tech giants are “digital landlords,” both obtaining huge profits by monopolizing core resources (land in the past, now data and algorithms);
Those sacrificed back then were farmers, and now it is ordinary workers who are being replaced, with the pains of technological change borne by the most vulnerable groups; the demand for wool back then spurred the land-grabbing movement, while the pursuit of efficiency today has spurred the AI replacement wave, both driven by the essence of capital seeking profit.
However, the biggest difference is that the “sheep-eating humans” of the past was a naked violent deprivation, while today’s AI replacement wears the halo of “technological progress,” making many people feel that “being replaced is because you are backward and lazy.” But is that really the case?
Absolutely not! Ordinary people’s concerns about AI and robots have never been about fearing learning or change, but rather fearing that their years of hard work could be wiped out overnight by technology;
fearing that the skills they rely on to support their families become worthless in the face of AI; fearing that at an age where they have dependents, they suddenly receive a notice saying “your position is no longer needed.” This concern is a primal anxiety about survival, a simple hope for fairness, and has nothing to do with being backward or lazy.
Consider the character Xu Zheng in “Fast and Furious Life,” a 40-year-old programmer who has been in the industry for 20 years, with degrees and experience. It’s not that he doesn’t work hard, but rather that AI can write code faster and with fewer errors, leading the company to directly lay him off to save costs.
He thought about further education and changing fields, but the high costs and uncertain future made him hesitant to try, ultimately having to make ends meet by delivering food.
Then there are those workers on factory assembly lines, who repeat tedious tasks daily. It’s not that they don’t want to improve, but they don’t know what else they can do besides assembly line work. When robots come in, working 24 hours without rest, without pay, and without errors, factories will naturally choose robots.
But what about the livelihoods of these workers? Their mortgages, car loans, and children’s tuition—will they just disappear because of “technological progress”?
The concerns of these ordinary people reflect a desire for “certainty.” We have been taught since childhood that “effort will be rewarded” and “having multiple skills is beneficial,” but now we suddenly find that some skills, no matter how proficient, are useless, and no matter how hard we try, we may still be replaced.
What we fear is not technological progress itself, but the fact that the benefits of technological progress are all taken by a few companies and elites, while the costs are borne by ordinary people;
What we fear is not the need to learn new skills, but the lack of sufficient time, resources, and channels to learn;
What we fear is not the lack of opportunities in the future, but that we cannot even reach the threshold to seize those opportunities.
Just like during the “sheep-eating humans” movement, farmers smashing machines were not opposing progress, but opposing the ruthless deprivation of their livelihoods. Today, our concerns about AI are essentially the same as those of our ancestors—they are a defense of the right to survive and a demand for fairness.
What is even more anxiety-inducing is that the wealth concentration effect brought by AI is becoming increasingly evident. Tech giants are laying off large numbers of employees while investing the saved labor costs heavily into AI research: After laying off 14,000 people, Amazon allocated 70% of its $125 billion capital expenditure to AI; after laying off 6,000 people, Microsoft added $80 billion to its investment in AI infrastructure; a leading AI company has new orders worth $5.9 billion but has clearly stated that “those without AI skills will be optimized.”
For companies, pursuing efficiency and profit is understandable, but for the ordinary people who are laid off, this means a complete reset of years of accumulation and facing an unknown job market again.
Ironically, many of those replaced by AI are actually working for AI—our daily behavioral data is collected by tech giants to train AI, and in the end, AI replaces our jobs, while we receive none of the technological dividends. This disparity of “the more you give, the more you lose” is enough to cause concern.
2. Breaking the Deadlock! Reclaiming Initiative, Calling for Heroes!
However, we cannot deny technological progress out of fear.
Just as the Industrial Revolution ultimately eliminated the coachman but gave rise to train drivers; it eliminated artisans but created factory managers, AI and robots are also creating new opportunities.
There are already new professions such as prompt engineers, AI trainers, and robot operators, with salaries twice that of traditional positions; the Ministry of Human Resources and local governments are also promoting AI literacy training, with Henan even including AIGC training in vocational subsidies, allowing ordinary people to learn skills for free; some companies are training quality inspectors to become data annotators and transferring assembly line workers to robot administrators, achieving “internal blood production.”
More importantly, we all need to have a consensus that no matter how advanced AI is, it cannot replace the core value of “human.” In “The Wandering Earth,” there is a saying: “Without human civilization, it is meaningless.”
AI can handle processes but cannot provide warm care to patients; it can generate text but lacks the emotions and soul of a creator;
it can execute commands but lacks human empathy and creativity.
Positions that require human interaction, high originality, and a sense of humanity, such as psychological counselors, personalized educators, original artists, and elderly caregivers, will always be irreplaceable by AI. Technology can improve efficiency, but the warmth of civilization and human emotions are the most precious things in this world.
Therefore, the core issue is never whether to develop AI, but how to ensure that the development of AI benefits more people;
It is not about whether ordinary people should accept change, but whether society can provide ordinary people with enough support to adapt to change.
We do not need to oppose technological progress, but we need a fairer transition mechanism: can companies provide free training for employees who are replaced instead of just laying them off?
Can the government expand the coverage of vocational training so that people of different ages and backgrounds can afford to learn new skills? Can society show less harsh criticism towards those who “cannot use AI” and more understanding of the difficulties ordinary people face in transitioning?
To achieve the above ideals, frankly speaking, ordinary people are truly powerless and need heroes to lead and call for action! I firmly believe that my country can stand at the top of the world and lead the development of the times!
The “sheep-eating humans” movement from 500 years ago was a brutal deprivation of farmers by capital, leaving behind a history of blood and tears;
and today’s AI revolution should not become a new “deprivation” but should liberate productivity.
The ultimate significance of technological progress is to enable more people to live better lives, not to benefit a few while causing anxiety for the majority.
The concerns of ordinary people are not stumbling blocks to progress but alarms reminding society to pay attention to fairness—only when every hardworking person can find their place in technological change and share in the dividends of progress can AI and robots truly become the driving force for social advancement, rather than a terrifying “flood beast.”
After all, as “The Wandering Earth” tells us, all technological development ultimately serves the continuation and prosperity of human civilization. If technological progress leads the majority into difficulties, what meaning does such “progress” have?
Civilization will prevail, freedom will last, and equality will endure!
Finally, I want to ask everyone: Have you seen jobs around you affected by AI or robots? How do you think ordinary people should respond to this technological change? Should they actively learn new skills or stick to their core advantages? Feel free to share your experiences and thoughts in the comments, so we can support each other and find a way out for ordinary people.
Author’s Bio: Don’t worry, Pegasus, former planning director of a listed company, now a participant in various new business formats of the new era.
In this ruthless and realistic era, strive for wealth and pursue freedom!
It is not easy to maintain originality. If you like my article, you can click the blue text above or scan the QR code below to follow me.
