People are falling in love with artificial intelligence — and not just colloquially. AI has become an all-purpose tool: a tutor, a teacher, a therapist and a lover, all combined in one emotionally available digital package. 

Using AI to augment your scholarly experience is its own academically dishonest problem. But turning to chatbots for emotional support, whether that be through therapy or companionship, is symptomatic of a larger epidemic of loneliness that is plaguing our society and uprooting our politics. 

In 2023, then-United States Surgeon General Vivek Murthy declared loneliness and isolation an epidemic, one that spans all races, socioeconomic classes and gender identities. 

As a note, there is no distinct “male loneliness” epidemic — men and women experience loneliness at similar rates — but rather, a collective lack of connectivity. In the AI companionship space, however, there is a gendered aspect at play. Three-quarters of the user base of the two most popular chatbot companies, XiaoIce and Replika, are men, suggesting a deeper chasm between men’s outlets for companionship and women’s.

Dependence on AI relationships rises from a politically cultivated lack of community. When there is no one you can speak to about your feelings, a robot seems like a valid alternative. 

On some level, this is true. With therapy being expensive and inaccessible and finding a romantic partner often being a game of luck, AI does provide accessible and convenient forms of communication. It responds instantly, has no emotional baggage, and is wholly attentive to your needs. If it weren’t true that a data center consumed fresh water equivalent to 4,200 people’s daily usage, then it may seem almost ideal. 

But AI is not a substitute for social interaction, nor is it even a supplement. It’s a positive feedback loop: It increases isolation and deteriorates mental health, which facilitates more AI usage.

Chatbots do not experience empathy, love or compassion. In fact, they feel nothing at all. This absence of feeling means that any emotional intimacy created is illusory, but it feels real to the user. Since anthropomorphized AI can feign any emotional or physical form, it distorts a normal conception of human relationships, complicating the prospect of real intimacy. 

I am not faulting anyone for using AI for companionship. It is not an individual’s fault if they feel they have no one else to turn to in moments of crisis. At nearly every level, politicians and corporations have stripped people of their communities. 

Digitization and automation have also contributed to the decline of socialization. At the grocery store, for example, cashiers are being replaced with automated check-out. Increasingly digital interactions and changes in urban planning have destroyed “third places” — public gathering places that are neither work nor home — which enrich communities and improve mental health. Contemporary society values convenience at the expense of community.

Los Angeles sees this community destruction firsthand: Car-dependent transportation siloes us on our commutes; rising rents price out locals; and park scarcity is a direct result of unfair and racist zoning practices. All of these concessions serve a larger, insidious political agenda. Fascistic and authoritarian governments thrive on separation and isolation. 

Historian and philosopher Hannah Arendt wrote about the connection between loneliness and totalitarianism in “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” writing, “what prepares men for totalitarian domination in the non-totalitarian world is the fact that loneliness, once a borderline experience usually suffered in certain marginal social conditions like old age, has become an everyday experience.” Arendt argues that loneliness is a precondition for totalitarianism. 

Authoritarians create the conditions of isolation, creating arbitrary “us vs. them” mentalities and weaponizing it for political gain. It is not a mistake that there has been a decline of third spaces, the scapegoating of marginalized groups, a rise in union busting and increasing AI interactions coinciding with rising authoritarianism. 

Isolated people are easier to control. They feel disempowered in society and hopeless about the prospect of change. That same mechanism is why cults target emotionally vulnerable populations, those without a strong sense of community. If you don’t have anyone to lean on, you’ll be more susceptible to charismatic leaders who promise security. 

Community and solidarity are an antidote to authoritarianism. Any interaction that forces us to confront each other’s humanity is integral to rebuilding our communities. This can look like small talk with a cashier, complimenting a stranger or confiding in your friends about your feelings. This, combined with rejecting AI companionship in all its forms, is a step toward rebuilding connectivity.