The article examines how the concept of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) has taken centre stage in the international race between the U.S. and China, despite significant uncertainty about whether AGI is technically feasible or when it might appear. It argues that AGI functions less as a scientific milestone and more as a narrative tool—used to mobilise investment, regulatory attention and national-security priorities.
One key point raised is that the dominant AGI narrative may distort where the real action lies in AI: namely, in scaling existing models, data-centre infrastructure, and commercial deployment. The piece suggests that because AGI is framed as the looming endpoint, it diverts attention from near-term issues like bias, governance, deployment risk, labour-market change, and global equity.
In the U.S.–China dimension, the article highlights how AGI rhetoric is entwined with geopolitics: each power portrays the other as racing toward AGI, which justifies export controls, strategic alliances, and technology diplomacy. The result is that the race narrative amplifies competition, yet may lead both sides to over-invest in “frontier” capabilities and under-invest in shared safety, transparency and human-centred outcomes.
Finally, the article cautions that the myth of AGI creates both winners and losers: large tech firms and nations that control compute, talent and data gain disproportionate power, while smaller players and civil-society actors struggle for meaningful participation. It calls for a more grounded orientation toward real-world AI deployment, policy oversight and inclusive innovation paths rather than the AGI finish line.
