“This is What it Means to be Pro-Human” Declares Broad Coalition of Conservative, Progressive, and Civil Society Groups in Statement of Shared Principles on AI

2026-03-04 · Source: Future of Life Institute · Field: Government & Public Sector — Public Policy & Governance, Regulatory & Compliance, Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning · Depth: Fundamental Awareness, short

Summary

On March 4, 2026, a broad coalition of conservative, progressive, and civil society groups, including faith organizations, labor unions, and AI thought leaders, issued a "pro-human" declaration outlining 33 AI principles. Developed through in-person workshops and ratified in New Orleans, these principles aim to counter perceived Silicon Valley overreach and define a human-centric future for AI. The declaration is organized into five themes: Keeping Humans in Charge, Avoiding Concentration of Power, Protecting the Human Experience, Human Agency and Liberty, and Responsibility and Accountability for AI Companies. Key principles include prohibiting AI personhood, mandating "bot-or-not" labeling, and establishing criminal liability for executives in cases of egregious AI harm. Polling indicates strong public support, with 83% agreeing that "Humanity must remain in control of AI."

Key takeaway

For executives and policymakers navigating AI regulation, this declaration signals a unified, cross-spectrum public demand for human-centric AI governance. Your organizations should review these 33 principles, particularly those on accountability and human control, as they represent a growing consensus that will likely influence future legislation and public sentiment. Prioritize developing AI strategies that demonstrably align with these "pro-human" values to mitigate reputational risks and ensure long-term societal acceptance.

Key insights

A diverse coalition established 33 "pro-human" AI principles to ensure human control and accountability over AI systems.

Principles

• Humans must remain in control of AI.
• AI companies require accountability for harm.
• Power concentration in AI must be avoided.

In practice

• Implement "bot-or-not" labeling for AI.
• Establish criminal liability for AI executive harm.

Topics

• Pro-Human AI Principles
• AI Governance
• AI Accountability
• Human-AI Interaction
• AI Policy

Best for: Executive, CTO, VP of Engineering/Data, Policy Maker, AI Ethicist, Tech Journalist

Related on AIssential

• The 1970 Law That Solves AI’s Legitimacy Crisis — AI requires human-defined meaning and accountability, mirroring the governance principles of the 1970 Fair Credit Reporting Act.
• The God We Deserve: Nonzero's Robert Wright on AI as Humanity's Ultimate Test — Humanity faces an ultimate test to collectively govern AI, which will reflect our choices.
• Puppets or partners? Governing cyborg propaganda in the digital public square — Cyborg propaganda, combining human accounts with AI, poses a novel, undertheorized threat to democratic discourse.
• Future of Life Institute Launches Multimillion Dollar Nationwide AI Regulation Campaign — Public campaigns can effectively mobilize bipartisan support for AI regulation outside traditional tech hubs.
• Beyond Verification — What Responsible AI Really Demands of Human Experts — Responsible AI demands human experts for broad "verification" across the AI lifecycle, combining judgment with automated tools for scalable oversight.
• Anthropic is Becoming the Backbone of Rwanda’s Government. But Who is Accountable? — Anthropic signed a three-year non-binding memorandum of understanding with Rwanda in February to embed its AI systems, including Claude and Claude Code, across the health ministry, public sector agenc…

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by Future of Life Institute.