Liberation Theology, combined with JOC, critiques power structures, such as Technology.
Liberation Theology, combined with JOC, critiques power structures, such as Technology.
When Joseph Cardijn founded the Young Christian Workers (JOC movement) in the 1920s, the concepts and understanding of Liberation Theology were not part of the vocabulary or the prevailing situation at that time. The JOC movement shares notable similarities with Liberation despite preceding it by several decades. In many ways, Cardijn's methodology and theological approach laid the necessary groundwork for what would later develop as Liberation Theology.
Both movements share the core belief that faith should be grounded in real social issues rather than intangible theological concepts. Cardijn's well-known "See-Judge-Act" approach reflects Liberation Theology's focus on praxis—starting with lived experiences of oppression, examining them through faith, and then taking specific actions for change. This method emphasizes the experiences of workers and people with low incomes as valid sources of theological understanding.
The concept of consciousness-raising is central to both movements. Cardijn worked to help young workers recognize their dignity and analyze the structural causes of their exploitation, much like Liberation Theologians later emphasized the importance of "Critical consciousness" - developing a well-formed understanding of social conditions. Both reject the idea that poverty and exploitation are natural or divinely ordained.
Now consider our world today, our workplaces, the jobs people do to earn a living, and the increasing role that artificial intelligence is playing. The relationship between Liberation Theology and artificial intelligence focuses on applying theological principles of justice, equity, and the preferential option for the marginalized to the ethical development and deployment of AI.
Liberation Theology, combined with JOC, critiques power structures and emphasizes the interests of the oppressed. At the same time, AI poses both risks of reinforcing inequality and opportunities for promoting Liberation.
Liberation Theology plus JOC offers a moral basis for AI ethics, emphasizing:
Preferential option for people with low incomes: AI systems should prioritize marginalized communities in design and outcomes, ensuring they benefit from Technology rather than being exploited by it. This shift from advocacy for people with low incomes to empowering them through inclusive data and participatory development is a beacon of hope in the AI landscape.
Systemic critique: AI's potential to perpetuate bias (e.g., in hiring or policing algorithms) aligns with Liberation Theology's and JOC's focus on dismantling oppressive systems. Biased data or algorithms risk amplifying societal inequalities, necessitating thorough audits to ensure fairness and accuracy.
AI as a Tool for Liberation
When guided by liberationist plus JOC principles, AI can promote social justice.
Amplifying marginalized voices: Training AI on diverse datasets can highlight perspectives that have been historically excluded from technological discussions, turning AI from a tool for the oppressed into one that empowers them, making them feel heard and valued in the technological discourse.
Nonviolent resistance: AI-powered platforms can support grassroots organizing and reveal injustice (e.g., documenting human rights abuses), fulfilling the Sermon on the Mount's call for active righteousness. The potential of AI to support nonviolent resistance can inspire and motivate us in our pursuit of justice.
Liberation Theology plus JOC highlights dangers where AI contradicts its ethos:
Surveillance and oppression: Predictive policing or social credit systems might target vulnerable groups, conflicting with liberationist principles. Black Theology specifically critiques AI's weaponization against communities of color.
Spiritual and communal decline: Relying too heavily on AI for spiritual guidance (such as algorithm-curated religious content) risks turning faith into a commodity and weakening community bonds vital to liberation movements.
Now, something to think about and discover what action we can take in our spheres of control or influence.
Liberation Theology with JOC portrays AI not as a neutral technology but as a site of moral struggle. Its principles call for AI that should actively fight inequality, amplify the voices of marginalized individuals, and promote human dignity, turning technological progress into a tool for Liberation.
Questions to ask within your circles:
How does Liberation Theology and JOC perceive AI as a means for social justice and reducing poverty?
In what ways can Christian thought influence ethical AI development for marginalized communities?
How do different ethnic, racial, and cultural theological perspectives critique AI's role in surveillance and systemic oppression?
What insights does Liberation Theology with JOC provide regarding the use of AI to advance human dignity and Liberation?
How might our faith shape our understanding of AI's potential to benefit the common good?