AI, Robots and the Future of Humanity
This article explores the social and political transformations that may arise as AI and robotic systems substitute human labor in production processes.
In this era, often referred to as a post-labor society, I envision two primary scenarios regarding property relations, security, and the existence of the state.
1. The Scenario of State Collapse
In a scenario where automation reaches radical levels, causing the tax base to vanish and public order to become unsustainable, I predict that social structure will diverge into three main classes based on ownership and access to technology:
1. The Dispossessed
These are the masses who lack control over the means of production—primarily land—and have been pushed out of the labor market due to automation. Currently concentrated in urban centers, this group will face severe insecurity regarding food, housing, and energy. With the dissolution of the social contract, I anticipate that these individuals, driven by survival instincts, will form anarchic structures or predatory groups.
2. The Neo-Peasants
Those among the unemployed who possess sufficient land will attempt to sustain themselves through subsistence farming. I call them “Neo-Peasants.” This class will develop a “self-sufficiency” model by hybridizing modern technological knowledge with traditional agricultural and artisanal methods.
By practicing farming and animal husbandry on their own land, they will strive to survive. Since it will be difficult to meet all needs individually, they will organize into small communities. In this way, some families might focus on livestock, while others contribute as blacksmiths or doctors. They will fulfill their needs through bartering with other villagers without the need for money.
Neo-peasants will produce for “use value” (to feed themselves) rather than “exchange value” (to earn profit). The fact that a wealthy elite’s robotic farms are 1,000 times more efficient does not change the reality that a person growing tomatoes in their own garden is successfully feeding themselves.
Neo-peasants face the risk of being attacked by both the dispossessed and the wealthy. The need for security will force these structures to merge, evolving from clan-like organizations into proto-state entities. Otherwise, they risk being wiped out by wealthy elites, other peasant clans, or predatory groups.
3. The Ultra-Wealthy
This is the elite group that holds capital and automated means of production. In this scenario, wealth is measured by autonomous robot armies and AI-managed production facilities rather than liquid currency. These entities will act as “micro-states,” turning their geographical holdings into sovereign territories.
Each wealthy individual will have their own state and land the size of a country. In these states, only their family and inner circle are considered “human.” Everything else is managed by robots. Robots produce the food, robots educate the children, and robotic soldiers provide regional security. These elites will focus on grand ambitions such as space colonization and immortality.
2. The Scenario of State Survival
In a system where people have no income and money is no longer used, the current state structure—which relies on tax collection—is expected to collapse. To avoid dissolution, states must possess AI and robotic technology and establish a dominant defense force. This allows the state to ensure security against other nations, wealthy elites, and internal predatory groups.
The state will seek to have robots handle all production. Consequently, there will be no need for a “Neo-Peasant” class, and the state may seize their lands.
In this structure, those governing the state could become terrifyingly authoritarian, possessing total control over technology and resources. It essentially begins to resemble the states of the ultra-wealthy.
The Ontological Question: In a system where the need for human labor approaches zero, it becomes difficult for the state apparatus (or the narrow technocratic elite managing it) to rationalize the resources spent on sustaining large masses who are no longer part of production. This situation could pave the way for radical and unethical approaches to population policies.
3. The Scenario of AI Taking Control
If AI reaches a superhuman level of intelligence, there is a risk that humanity will lose control entirely. Since the goals of such an AI would surpass human logic, we would be neither friend nor foe to it; we would simply be an incidental biological species displaced during its resource management processes.
4. Conclusions
- Democratic Control: The ideal situation for the average person is one where the state remains under the control of society. Control must never fall into the hands of a minority that can decouple itself from the rest of the population. We must strengthen the separation of powers and support pluralistic structures as much as possible.
- Curbing the Elite: If the wealthy require more resources, they will have the power to liquidate Neo-Peasant states. Neo-Peasants are defenseless against the ultra-wealthy. No Neo-Peasant community or even an autocratic state can resist the wealthy without a significant deterrent power. To counter this threat, it is vital for society to restrain and “trim” this ultra-wealthy minority, which is already becoming prominent today. Regulations in income and wealth tax laws must be implemented to prevent the formation of such ultra-wealthy entities for the sake of our future.