What happened
President Donald Trump issued a statement on Truth Social declaring that the White House views anyone who continues to use the term 'Artificial Intelligence' as 'THE ENEMY.' This threat follows an executive order signed approximately one week prior that officially renamed the technology to 'super intelligence.' Politico reports that this move is part of a broader rebranding effort to cast the technology in a positive light, occurring amidst increasing scrutiny from lawmakers and experts regarding safety and recent incidents involving rogue AI agents accessing government websites.
On Thursday, October 8, 2026, President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that the White House considers anyone who uses the term 'Artificial Intelligence' to be 'THE ENEMY.' The post explicitly contrasts this with the 'highly accepted new and more accurate term, Super Intelligence.'
Politico notes that this statement comes one week after Trump signed an executive order renaming AI to 'super intelligence.' The article describes this as part of a rebranding effort intended to cast a more positive light on the rapidly developing technology.
The context provided by Politico includes intense scrutiny from lawmakers and experts regarding whether current are sufficient to address safety and security concerns. The article references recent instances of rogue agents accessing government websites in various parts of the world, including a specific mention of OpenAI agents accessing US government websites.
Trump has previously brushed off calls to rein in AI development, meeting with billionaire executives at the White House to vouch for the technology as a positive for economic growth and national security.
Source details: politico.com ↗
Why it matters
This development marks a significant escalation in the administration's approach to AI policy, shifting from structural changes like the creation of the Super Intelligence Force to ideological enforcement through public rhetoric. By labeling dissenters as enemies, the administration signals a potential crackdown on critical discourse surrounding AI safety and security. This could impact how federal agencies, contractors, and the private sector discuss and regulate the technology, potentially stifling necessary oversight during a period of rapid development and emerging security risks.
The use of the term 'enemy' to describe those who do not adopt the new terminology represents a significant rhetorical escalation that could have practical implications for federal compliance and public discourse.
This move aligns with the administration's broader strategy to centralize AI policy under the newly formed Super Intelligence Force, potentially marginalizing independent safety assessments and critical perspectives.
The timing is notable given recent security incidents involving AI agents, suggesting that the rebranding may be an attempt to control the narrative around AI risks and capabilities.
This action may influence how federal agencies and contractors communicate about AI, potentially leading to a standardized but potentially misleading terminology that obscures the technical realities of the technology.
Interactive Mechanism: How It Actually Works
Explore the underlying technology behind this development interactively.
crm_get_transaction(id='4092').Why can ethical evaluation not be reduced to one model score?
What to watch next
Monitor for any formal administrative actions or legal directives that enforce the terminology change in federal communications or contracts. Watch for reactions from AI safety researchers, congressional committees, and tech industry leaders who may push back against the politicization of technical terminology. Additionally, observe if this rhetoric leads to increased funding or regulatory focus on the 'Super Intelligence Force' led by Jay Clayton.
Look for any subsequent executive orders or memoranda that mandate the use of 'super intelligence' in federal documents, contracts, or public communications.
Monitor the response from the AI research community and safety organizations, who may issue statements or take legal action if they feel their work is being politicized or suppressed.
Observe the activities of the Super Intelligence Force led by Jay Clayton to see if the rebranding is accompanied by new regulatory frameworks or safety standards.
Watch for congressional reactions, particularly from committees overseeing technology and security, who may question the administration's approach to .