For those who missed it, the U.,S. Council of Economic Advisors distributed, in January 2026, their Report: Artificial Intelligence and the Great Divergence; Press Release HERE). The analysis is grounded on a powerful analogy:
For centuries, most of the world’s economies grew at a similarly slow rate. However, a “Great Divergence” occurred with the Industrial Revolution, causing industrializing nations to accelerate their growth relative to the rest of the world. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a potentially transformative technology that is often compared to the Industrial Revolution. However, we are witnessing clear leaders in AI investment, performance, and adoption metrics across different nations. The Trump administration is laying the groundwork for American AI dominance by accelerating innovation, infrastructure development, and deregulation while establishing global dominance through technology exports. If the AI revolution is as transformative as the Industrial Revolution, should we expect this to lead to a second Great Divergence? (Artificial Intelligence and the Great Divergence)
The object, of course, is not merely dominance, but the protection of a space in which the state can further its ability to ensure the protection of the objectives of its political-economic model--managed protection of individual autonomous self fulfillment in and through markets based interactions in all spheres of social relations. To some significant extent its serves as the great power bookend to similar efforts to consider and situate the tech revolution within the cognitive cages of Chinese Marxist-Leninism and its political-social imperatives, which speaks in terms of high quality production fueling a socialist modernization that would push the nation farther along the Socialist Path (eg., here, here, and here).
At the same time, its consequences for the rest of the world can be understood as deeply divergent. That was the object of the UNDP Report (December 2025), The Next Great Divergence: Why AI May Widen Inequality Between Countries (see also here). This produces a counter analogy, one that focuses not on the consequences of transformative divergence among the great powers, but its effects on those beneath:
Artificial Intelligence is advancing rapidly, yet many countries remain without the infrastructure, skills, and governance systems needed to capture its benefits. At the same time, they are already feeling its economic and social disruptions. This uneven mix of slow adoption and high vulnerability may trigger a Next Great Divergence, where inequalities between countries widen in the age of AI. (The Next Great Divergence:)
Divergence. One word, two meanings; one concept, two lenses; one evolutionary trajectory, two normative approaches; one factual reality, two analytical perspectives; one challenge, two policy responses. That divide, then, produces variation in values, signification, and approaches that will fundamentally shape policy and the legal structures within which states will seek to shepherd this challenge/opportunity in ways that advance their interests--or perhaps better put, the positive effects of these changes to their populations as a function of the goals and responsibilities of these states as measured against their ideologies.
![]() |
| Pix credit Lib Congress |
The AI revolution, with its parallels to the Industrial Revolution, presents a profound economic inflection point with the potential to significantly increase the GDP of countries that embrace it. We are witnessing clear leaders in AI investment, performance, and adoption metrics across different nations. The United States, as demonstrated by the comprehensive AI Action Plan and related executive orders from the Trump administration, is pursuing a strategy focused on accelerated innovation, infrastructure development, and establishing global dominance through technology exports and deregulation in order to lay the groundwork for American AI dominance. (Artificial Intelligence and the Great Divergence; p. 26).
The second is re-distributive, capacity sensitive, and risk averse--a cautious approach to technological revolution that value of which is measured against its costs, and the costs of which are measured against a set if value generating premises that tend to balance technological advancement against a specific set of human costs grounded in a specific set of adverse impact valuation measures. That is the essence of the UN approach in its The Next Great Divergence. But it also fuels middle power and Global South approaches There are variations given the position of the advocates and their place in global political, economic, and other hierarchies. Its lens is capacity, but also in the normative project of global normative ordering--one that foregrounds risk aversion through the foundational inculcation of the primacy of prevention, mitigation, and remedial strategies that in turn foreground prevention. The essential risk aversion and human centered approach suggests much of what passes for AI regulation, for instance, and is much in evidence in the approaches of the EU (eg here). But it also centers capacity--or relative capacity of human collectives and that, in turn, is understood through the lens of equality that then shapes the discourse of capacity building (and the shifting if its costs).
Sections 1 and 2 of the Report: Artificial Intelligence and the Great Divergence follow below and the entire report may be accessed HERE. And below is its semiotics as imagery.
![]() |
| Pix credit here |

















