Serfs to Silicon: Do We Still Need Latino Labor in the Age of AI?

 

The Industrial Revolution killed off the serf. Machines replaced muscle, and landlords swapped peasants for factory drones. That was progress. Or so they said.

Now we’ve entered a new phase. Machines don’t just cut steel — they cut people out. In Boston, you can see it already: shuttles that drive themselves, mowers that don’t need breaks, warehouses run by ghost arms and code. AI doesn’t ask for healthcare. It doesn’t strike. It doesn’t get deported.

So here’s the uncomfortable truth: Who still needs Latino workers?

No one wants to say it out loud, but you can feel it in the air. The tech bros won’t admit it. The liberals won’t touch it. But automation isn’t just about efficiency — it’s about erasing labor. And that labor has a face: brown, migrant, often undocumented, always underpaid.

It’s the same story with new tools. Replace the old workforce. Sell it as progress. Pretend the fallout is someone else’s problem.

Trump — say what you will — had a nose for this anxiety. He pointed fingers at Mexicans, at immigrants, as if they were the ones taking jobs. But the real job-stealer wasn’t a person. It was a program. While he was building walls, Silicon Valley was building algorithms.

And now? Employers are quietly deciding they’d rather have robots than workers. No paperwork. No politics. No accents. Even in industries Latinos built — landscaping, cleaning, transport — the machines are creeping in.

But be careful. Kill off labor too fast and you kill off demand. Who’s left to clean, care, cook, build — or even buy anything? You can’t run a country on code alone. And despite the hype, AI still can’t hold a crying baby, navigate a construction site in winter, or earn a community’s trust.

Migrant labor wasn’t just cheap — it was essential. Still is.

The real question isn’t “who needs Latinos?”
It’s this: What happens to a society that thinks it doesn’t?