Google employees in the UK protest military uses of AI, vote for labor union

Bad news! Antisemitism? Leftist anti militarism?

Does Google Deepmind need new employees?

"Google employees protest military uses of AI, vote for union

 

Employees at Google DeepMind’s London office voted to unionize, seeking recognition from the Communication Workers Union and Unite the Union specifically to block the lab from providing technology to US and Israeli militaries.

The push accelerated after Alphabet removed its public pledge against weapons development and surveillance from its ethics guidelines in February 2025, a move that prompted one anonymous DeepMind employee to tell WIRED the company is moving toward “further militarization of the AI models we’re building here.”

The unionization effort comes as Google signed a Pentagon deal allowing the US military to use its AI for “any lawful government purpose”—language the employees consider dangerously vague—and follows similar concerns across the industry: DeepMind and OpenAI staff signed a letter supporting Anthropic after the Department of Defense tried to designate it a supply chain risk for refusing autonomous weapons use. If Google refuses to recognize the unions, workers say they’ll escalate to a UK arbitration committee to compel recognition." (Source)

"Employees at Google DeepMind in London have voted to unionize as part of a bid to block the AI lab from providing its technology to the US and Israeli militaries. ...

The push to unionize began in February 2025, when Google’s parent company Alphabet removed a pledge not to use AI for purposes like weapons development and surveillance from its ethics guidelines, according to a DeepMind employee, who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. ..."

Google DeepMind Workers Vote to Unionize Over Military AI Deals "UK staff of Google’s AI research lab hope to block the use of the company’s artificial intelligence models in military settings."

Libertarian Anti-Militarism And Non-Intervention Is Naive

Posted: 10/19/2014

Violence Still Rules!

In a world, where violence and authoritarianism still dominates large geographical areas and 100s of millions of people, it is downright foolish and simply naive to think by staying out you accomplish anything.

On the contrary, violent people will try to rule wherever they can.

Allies Help Each Other

In a world full of threats from violent people, peaceful, freedom loving people have to voluntarily join together to defeat them whenever and wherever necessary (e.g. coalition of the willing).

This is not Realpolitik, but common sense! That the mighty U.S. military is especially qualified to play a prime role is normal.

This is probably the strongest argument against any libertarian arguments pro anti-militarism or isolationism etc.

Military Readiness Of Allies

Not every ally will always be ready to engage in military campaigns when peaceful, freedom loving people are threatened. But allies should insist that everyone do their best to maintain a capable military force.

That e.g. the Western European plus Turkey allies of NATO have irresponsibly neglected to maintain their military readiness for several decades is inexcusable. Diplomacy has to be backed up by military strength. Paper tigers are not to be feared by violent people.

Unconvincing Examples

Yes, you can argue that U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt was an imperialist and should not have intervened in Cuba, Panama etc.

Yes, you can argue that U.S. President Woodrow Wilson had no business to intervene in Europe and World War II would likely not have happened without this professor’s ill conceived engagement.

Yes, you can argue that U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was too eager to get involved in World War II.

Some libertarians are strenuously arguing about the U.S. interventions in Iran or Chile. This so laughable! It is almost as if these libertarians are being paid by someone (e.g. Iran, Russia) to spread such arguments. These interventions happened during the Cold War when the U.S.S.R was aggressively taking over or destabilizing any country possible for their purposes.

However, these bad examples and other like that are ultimately not convincing to defend a strict non-interventionist posture!