You conduct research within the SCRIPTS Cluster on the “Crisis of the Liberal Script.” What role do AI and digital technologies play in this context?

Kostka: Technologies are not neutral. They can strengthen the liberal system — for example, by promoting transparency or participation — but they can also stabilize authoritarian structures by making surveillance more efficient. At SCRIPTS, we examine how governance structures shape these dynamics. This is not something that happens only in autocracies, but also in democracies.

Why is China particularly interesting in this regard?

Kostka: China is a particularly fascinating contrast case. The country uses digital technologies in a highly systematic way to ensure political control and stability. Examples include large-scale data infrastructures and AI-supported administrative and judicial systems. These technologies increase efficiency while at the same time strengthening the regime’s legitimacy. By exporting such technologies, China also exerts international influence, creating new dependencies and alternative models of governance.

In a recent study on chatbot adoption, you examined how people respond to AI technologies. What did you find?

Kostka: We surveyed more than 8,000 people in Germany, the United States, China, and South Africa. Classic acceptance factors such as perceived usefulness and social influence play an important role. What is particularly striking is that the country of origin of a chatbot strongly shapes its acceptance. People tend to accept products from countries toward which they have positive attitudes. Although privacy is cited as an important factor, it is statistically less relevant for actual use.

This suggests that people increasingly evaluate technologies through a political lens.

Kostka: Exactly. Users bring geopolitical considerations into their decisions — for example, whether a product originates from China and might be subject to state control. This shows how technology is becoming part of geopolitical contestation.

In another study, you examined emotional attachment to chatbots.

Kostka: Yes, around one-third of respondents reported developing some form of emotional attachment to chatbots. Many consider them “friends” or use polite language when interacting. Emotional support and usage intensity strongly correlate with this attachment. This can have positive effects, but it also carries risks — such as dependency or distorted perceptions.

What political consequences can arise from this?

Kostka: Chatbots influence how people absorb information, make decisions, and develop trust. When states or companies control the technological infrastructure, power relations shift. In autocracies, this can increase regime legitimacy. Democracies need to respond — through regulation, transparency, and education.

What is the central political challenge of the AI era?

Kostka: The speed of governance. Democracies must learn to regulate AI fast enough without stifling innovation. This is not just about technology but about social values, power structures, and resilience. Autocracies are often faster in this regard, but democracies can be more resilient in the long run through open debate and transparency.

How does the BCCN Lecture Series fit into your research?

Kostka: The Berlin Contemporary China Network fosters interdisciplinary exchange on contemporary China. For SCRIPTS, this lecture series is important because it challenges Eurocentric perspectives. We discuss how China uses digital technologies and what global consequences this has. These insights help us better understand the political dimension of technological developments.

Thank you for the conversation.

Interview by Boris Nitzsche