Why a National Data Center Moratorium Could Be a Strategic Mistake for the Left, Argues Expert

This week’s conversation features Holly Jean Buck, an associate professor at the University of Buffalo and former official in the U.S. Energy Department’s Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management. Buck entered the contentious debate over data center siting after publishing a provocative essay in Jacobin that argued against a national moratorium on AI data centers.

In her piece, Buck contended that such a moratorium would represent “a massive strategic blunder for the left”, urging activists to consider the broader implications for global justice and unintended consequences. She suggested that environmental and climate advocates may be misguided in pursuing a left-right coalition that lacks long-term shared objectives.

The article drew praise from thinkers aligned with “abundance” economics, such as Matthew Yglesias, while facing sharp criticism from prominent figures in the anti-data center movement, including Ben Inskeep of the Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana.

Given the polarized reception, we spoke with Buck to dissect the discourse surrounding her argument. She graciously agreed to the discussion, and the following conversation has been lightly edited for clarity.

Is a National Data Center Moratorium ‘Slopulism’?

To open the conversation, I posed a broad question: Are data center moratoria a form of ‘slopulism’?

Haha, oh no. I don’t know if I have a working definition of that term.

‘Slopulism’ is colloquially known as low-effort or performative populism focused on emotional gratification and elite resentment rather than substantive policy.

Buck continued:

I think, sometimes? Moratoria have been proposed at many levels in various forms. With the national moratorium outlined in the AI Data Center Moratorium Act—introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez—I found the document rhetorically impressive. However, I don’t believe it’s a strong policy proposal. That said, I wouldn’t label it as ‘slopulism.’ Those advocating for it likely see it as a negotiating tactic to signal to the tech industry that they lack social license.

Personally, I wouldn’t call it slopulism. I just don’t think it will work. It’s not effective, but I’m not big on labels.

We agreed that the issue isn’t black-and-white. While there’s an undeniable performative element to some advocacy—something Buck addresses in her essay—there’s also a historical precedent for campaigns that propose bans as a precursor to regulation.

Why a Moratorium May Fail: Divergent Coalition Goals

Buck argues that one of the key reasons a moratorium push could stall is the misalignment of goals within left-right coalitions opposing data centers. She cautions that halting data center construction may not automatically lead to a clean energy buildout or address job displacement concerns.

Understanding the Opposition’s Motivations

To clarify the dynamics driving opposition to data centers, I asked Buck to explain what’s fueling this resistance and why it’s unfolding in this particular way.

Buck’s response was cut short in the original transcript, but her broader argument emphasizes that environmental activists must weigh the unintended consequences of their strategies. She suggests that a moratorium, while symbolically powerful, may not deliver the systemic changes needed to address climate goals or economic equity.