the far-right rises again around the world, and there's a clear evidence why. that's tonight, on news night. ♪ ♪ ♪ good evening, i'm abby philip in new york. mid south america's new far-right famous freedom loving leader. and today, the world is lining a lot more about this guy. [applause] [crowd chanting] don't cry for milei, argentina, and yes, that is a chainsaw. he is the nation's new president elect, and he's an outsider nicknamed el loco, the mad man, with a wolverine haircut and the renaissance biography. [speaking in a non-english language] >> he is a political at cast, profane with a grudge against the hope, who taught, and i'm not joking here, ten trick sex. he'll enter the office with a clear mission. the impoverished model of the ubiquitous state, which only benefits the few, while the majority of argentines suffer, is coming to an end. today, the idea that the state is like a bounty to be divided among politicians and their friends, is over. today, the idea that the perpetrators are the victims and the victims are the perpetrators is over. today, we return to the path that made this country great. today, we, once again, embrace the ideas of freedom. i bear these ideas. >> now, if that make argentina great again line catches you and makes you wonder if you're seeing another donald trump figure in the world stage, milei is not quite that simple. you've gotta put his and trump's political agendas on a venn diagram. and there's very little, actually, that they share. he put his name to dozens of academic papers. he's fluent an economics. he's someone who can detail in precise terms is personal evolution from a mainstream pusher of liberal economic thought to a self-described and our co-capitalist. but listen to milei, and he shares donald trump's anger. [speaking in a non-english language] >> so there is some nuance here and his libertarian worldview. he takes soft approaches to, for example, trans rights. he supports marriage. he says, go ahead and sell your organs if you want, but the state should have nothing to do with that. but underpinning his rise is that anger. in buenos aires, milei we's fans reveled in his whims, shouting, out with all of them. they're counting on milei to drain their own swamp, and engineer a way out of decades-long inflation. >> translator: we know that there are people who are going to resist. we know that there are people who want to keep the system of privileges for some that impoverish is the majority of argentines. to all of them, i want to say the following. within the law, everything. above the law, nothing. >> now, that is the anger. that is the point. and it's a phenomenon that's fueled far-right figures everywhere. you look promising to deliver prosperity, and to flip the bird to the professional politicians. you see it in brazil. >> translator: we face a battle between good and evil. the evil lasted for years and our country, and -- now they want to go back to the crime scene. >> and in hungary. >> if you separate western civilization from its judo christian attitudes, the worst things that history happen. let's be honest. the most evil things and modern history were carried out by people who hated christiane a day. don't be afraid to call your enemies by their name. >> and, of course, in italy. [speaking in a non-english language] >> and then, this right here in the united states. >> nobody knows the system better than me. [applause] which is why i alone can fix it. [applause] >> joining me now is cnn political commentator -- rolling stone columnist, jay michaelson. this phenomenon, this right-wing populism, but really, the emphasis on the populism here, it's something that has become, rather than an import to the united states, in some ways, an export to the rest of the world as well. >> yeah, and milei i would carve out just a little, as you did. he's more nuanced. i see him as a ron paul kind of guy. but, certainly, the populism is exploding in places you might not expect. last year, i wrote about arise and right-wing nationalism in sweden, of all places. hungary, brazil, and i think what happened with trump was the world was watching, and fought, if america, right? this bastion of democracy and freedom, isn't going to tamp down on the sky, well, who is? and maybe this is something we could emulate. because we'll get away with it! will be allowed to. i think if republicans had come in and said, we're not nominating the skier, this isn't gonna be our version of conservatism, i think the world would've taken note. and there might be one last orban, bolsonaro, you name it, today. >> it also strikes me that so much of this is about their rhetoric. about the dialing up of the rhetoric, the enemies of the people, that kind of thing. you see it from trump, you see the similarities with milei, you see it in hungary, you see it all over the world. and that might be irrespective of the policy. >> yeah, i think it's right. the emotional tone is the defining feature of populism. and it's not necessarily new. we've seen this kind of reactionary populism for the last hundred and 50 years in the west. before the not seized for the great villains that we assumed them to be, they were a political party with an agenda, and they also had a nationalist agenda. and i think we're seeing so much -- you know, i tried to take a little bit of a step back and sort of see what's the human nature that's behind this global rise in populism, and what's happening around the world. technological advances, changes and social moore's, increases in migration, and loss of a kind of privilege that some people have had in their own countries. and these kinds of disk locations, liberals need to take the more seriously, i think, than they do. and here, i mean small liberals, because the sort of populist answer is we're gonna return to some special perfect time in the past. that doesn't really work, but there's not a compelling -- it's hard to articulate the alternative to that. >> i mean, here's why i think this matters if you're sitting in the united states and wondering, okay, and argentina has been a mess politically and economically for a while. but some of the factors that are at play there, the high inflation, you know, this sort of political upset, the young people wanting a say, these are all things that you can easily see coming into play in 2024. >> absolutely. and they've already been in play. and i think to the tone and rhetoric, if you are in sufficiently angry about these issues, then you're not trustworthy to this group of people. the anger is really, really important. and when trump goes on and says, well, never mind my mean tweets. like, i'm angry about staff, and he should be to. now, he goes to cartoonish overreach when he does it, any praise on our bassist instincts. but he's out there identifying problems that a lot of people see every day, and that democrats are saying don't exist. right? there is no rise in crime, there's no border crisis, joe biden's doing great, so as the economy, don't believe your lying eyes, and don't believe your feelings. i think leaning into that anchor has been very, very important to trump, and other right-wing nationalists would be, you know, leaders around the world. >> i think that's right. you can see that ideological malleability, particularly in the argentinian case, right? we don't see a lot of hard right figures expanding this kind of an echo capitalism. remember when i was in college, i was friends with someone who describe themselves as an anecdote capitalist, and now there's the president of argentina. and -- not my friend. you know, that was a kind of thing that, like, sophomore is used to talk about. now, this is the mainstream, and i think we don't see in that among other far-right figures, he tend to be more sort of standard arch capitalists. but i think that goes to your point, but this is really an emotive tone. that's been true of nationalism for quite some time. >> populism. >> do you think it's being taken seriously by liberals that this is out there? and it's real? >> well, from my vantage point, you know, being inside the conservative movement, but also really disavowing where trump has taken it, now. i think, no. and i think there was a condescension from the left for a long time that you heard in the way people talked about the square states. there's a whole book called what's the matter with kansas. democrats are looking back on that now with some embarrassment, that it was snobbish, that it was condescending, that it was trying to talk over people with some really real grievances. some of those grievances might also be imagined. imaginary racism, or white replacement, or conspiracy theories. some of them are real. >> that title is maybe unfortunate, but that argument is the same argument that you're actually making. >> the claim of what's matter with kansas is, here are people voting against their economic interest. which is clearly true. and what i think that bud got right in a sort of patronizing tone was that it's not just the economy stupid. right? there are all kinds of dislocation that people in kansas were experiencing. and that's what they voted for. but i think it's right. the idea that that was a mistake. oh no, you should be voting in your economic self interest, not for the things you strongly believe in. >> people should vote for what's important to them. i think that's the mistake democrats are making. >> this is an important point. we talk about this from the frame of economics, because oftentimes, that's what's being said out lad. but it's not being said is the frame of people social self interests. what they think about the group identity. that plays out with trump, it plays out in italy, where they're pushing back against migrants, and all of these other places as well. >> absolutely. that's what's so striking, i think, about the argentinian case. i'm scaring statements to see, okay, where is it gonna say the quiet part out loud about immigrants, for example. but didn't make that argument, actually. it was more a kind of anti-elite argument. something that you would hear from rfk junior here in the united states. , while the elites, the culture elites, the political elites, these people don't have your interests hand. and that, to me, it's actually almost unique. it's fascinating. >> this is super fascinating. we'll continue to watch it. you guys stick around for us. we'll be back in just a little bit. but up next for us tonight, a revolt is underway and one of the biggest companies in artificial intelligence. it's one of the industry's biggest names getting the boot. plus, a court just gutted the voting rights act, making it harder for groups to defend all voters. and, new signs president biden maybe embracing his age, despite concerns ahead of the next election. >> resign, or we will. that is what openai employees are doing its border directors in a new letter. just days after the board abruptly firing of the cofounders and ceo sam altman. now more than 700 employees are threatening to relieve for microsoft, saying they're unable to work for or with people that lack confidence, judgment, and care for open a.i.'s mission. now, the move follows microsoft's announcement this morning that it would hire altman to lead its artificial intelligence unit. hold on, now, in interviews later today ceo made it clear that altman could still return to open a.i. in some capacity. the revolt within open a.i.'s more than a fight between just the employees and its board, but rather about the lasting consequences of artificial intelligence and what it could have on our society. now, joining me discuss all of this is business insider correspondent linette lopez and also with us a juror and chief ben smith. ben, to me this this like the fight over who gets the dragon egg in game of thrones. this is technology that is inoculating, and whoever owns it kind of owned the future. tell us, in layman's terms, why it matters who runs open a.i. and whether it is sam altman or someone else. >> you have the strange situation, which i think anybody watching a i develop and seeing where the people who run these companies, notably sam altman, open a.i., which developed chatgpt which is genuinely pretty amazing, present themselves as of the real interest with making sure that a i didn't go too fast and in hurt anybody. they had a nonprofit board who said that was their job. then, at some point, the board started to take that a little too seriously while the actual company actually raced to make as much money as they could and built as good company as they could and attempted to fire altman for, essentially, going too fast, it seems like. at which point, the people operating the company and altman and their investors said wait, wait, our actual mission is to build a great company and make money. what is all the stuff about slowing down and worrying about the robot apocalypse with sort of pr. so it seems like, the company microsoft, build a billion dollars as clearly one. >> lynette, do think it matters whether there is a state admission to make a i safe for humankind? does that even matter? is that a significant part of this conversation at all, or was it always destined to become a sort of for profit giant? >> chatgpt does not have the monopoly on creating great a.i.. there will be companies that come up and maybe make better large language models because that is what they, they have a large language model that scrapes the internet for patterns that make sense, what you would say a sentence or logic or thought. there are other companies that can do this and are doing this. it is just that chatgpt raced to it first and became this household name that went viral and brought this technology to the forefront of our popular culture. but this stuff has been going on since 2018. now, there are three things that are happening right now. one is that we don't know why sam altman was actually fired. it could be completely political, they will not tell us what he did or how he was racing too fast or anything like that. the other thing is that openai still doesn't make any money and it needs its investors like microsoft, which is why sedona law has the freedom to say, you can stay with us or you can go to open a.i.. because what we are really realizing right now is that the board is toothless. it doesn't have money, it doesn't have control over the clusters and lastly the mission. is this mission about what is happening in a.i. now, while we are still trying to figure out the use cases for this large language model technology? or is it a mission about technology that we don't actually even have fun? the fearmongering from this board is about general intelligence a.i., which is like the robots in the jetsons. we don't have that yet. >> reporter: well, we could. should we be afraid, ben, that this is the beginning of the part of this technology that gets scary? >> it's good that lynette is so relaxed about the robot apocalypse. i think what we are seeing here is just, in realtime, this idea that when you've created a technology, the notion that particularly these private companies are going to exercise any kind of control of it other than just, essentially, feed the market. there was a lot of skepticism of that and you are seeing that idea collapsed and realtime. >> reporter: if you're microsoft, or the things we don't know is whether sam altman will end up at microsoft. it seems like they are still open still to the idea that he could go back to openai, maybe with a different board. if you are microsoft, do you want microsoft and sam altman and all these brains from this entity in your company or in your company or outside? there's talk a little bit of a boost today. >> who knows, but i think the most important question is how do we know how a.i. thinks what it thinks, how does it comes to the computation side it comes to? what we have seen only put a prompt in the jet gpt is like solving a math problem without showing your work. i think what we need to focus on is not the fearmongering that could come ten, 15 years down the road. we need to focus on understanding this technology now and the fearmongering distracts from that and it seems very convenient, for me. >> do you think, been, that this is what the board is worried about. a lack of guardrails is a real problem? >> it's really hard to know, it's what they say they're worried about. they have been strictly affected in doing anything other than microsoft the whole company for free, without regulatory approval. it's an incredible gift. however who knows if that works out, it seems like right now microsoft is trying to put the genie back in the bottle. they had a functioning situation. >> and they call themselves effective all truist's, which also sandbanks and freed said he was. you know how that turned out. so i think that watch what they do, not what they say. >> reporter: forgive me for being skeptical, but there is all tulum at play here. people want to make money and we'll see where that takes them. linette lopez, ben, thank you so both. it's a stunning ruling that will impact the voting rights of black, hispanic, and of the racial minorities at the risk of a devastating blow. that is next. plus, former president trump releasing the results of a recent health exam. why the timing is noteworthy here and the idea of potentially arresting a rising palestinian writer and contributor for the new yorker. we will ask what went on there. you want to be able to provide your child with the tools or resources they need. with reliable internet at home, through the internet essentials program, the world opened up. fellas, fellas. that's how my son was able to find the hidden genius project. we wanted to give y'all the necessary skills to compete with the future. kevin's now part of this next generation of young people who feel they can thrive. ♪ ♪ well don trump's guy quarter appeal got the most attention to, in another court of the voting rights act is in serious sovereignty. the act, of course, as landmark legislation of the 1960s outlawing racial discrimination in america's voting system. but, tonight, a federal appeals court gutted it. the ruling that private groups cannot bring lawsuits, only the federal government can, in a written dissent chief circuit judge live in ski smith, the george w. bush appointee, noted that just 15 cases in the last 40 years have been brought by the justice department. he writes, writes so foundational to self government and citizenship should not depend solely on the discretion or availability of the government agents or protection. let's discuss this with judith brown diana's, the executive director of the advancement project in the nonprofit focused on racial issues. judas, thank you for joining us. this is something that you called a body blow to the voting rights act of 1965. if you are an average voter in one of these states, what does this mean for you heading into 2024? >> first, we have to remember that each circuit doesn't cover the whole country, but it does cover missouri, arkansas, minnesota. missouri is a case where an advancement project is brought voting rights cases, so what it means for that handful of states, including the dakotas and iowa and nebraska, is that this court has slammed the court house door on civil rights >> -- and organizations. it means that the federal government is the only protector that we have, that our communities cannot access justice on their own. and it is problematic for so many reasons. the first thing is that this is fundamental, this is like one of those things that you said, this is not even a thing. this has never happened, no court has ever raised that. in fact, in this case the defendants did not raise it, the lower courts are used on its own. so this has been well settled that plaintiffs