You are using an older browser version. Please use a supported version for the best MSN experience.

Wouldn't you rather vote an AI for President?

The Huffington Post The Huffington Post 7/03/2016 George Zarkadakis
PRESIDENT 2016 © adamkaz via Getty Images PRESIDENT 2016

They have call it "revenge of the plebs": masses of traditionally apathetic citizens, mostly blue-collar workers or the underprivileged, becoming politically ignited and supporting populist politicians. The phenomenon gains traction all across the western world. In the US Donald Trump has caught the media and political elites off guard; seemingly coming from nowhere, with rhetoric that purposely deconstructs every semblance of political correctness, he's on his way to become the next President of the United States. In Great Britain, the referendum on whether to exit the European Union or not unleashes waves of dormant nationalism and xenophobia. There is not a single country in the EU without a growing part of the electorate supporting eurosceptics, populists, and nationalists. "Plebs" have had enough of the ruling elites; they demand a catharsis of political life, and are numbersome enough to get it.
But what does this really mean? And what does it have to do with AI? Western democracy is based on a political idea that, in many ways, originates from Plato, the Athenian philosopher who in 5th century BC penned a very influential book called The Republic. In that book Plato suggested that the best political system is one where the wisest and best should rule. He broadly defined that ruling elite in terms of individuals who possess the necessary knowledge to run the affairs of the State, but also the moral integrity to be fair and selfless. He did not support hereditary office: the ruling "best" could come from all strata of society as long they complied with the high moral and educational standards that were necessary. Plato's politics have had a tremendous influence in Western political thinking. They seem to uphold a reasonable tenet: that the affairs and decisions of government should be reserved for those who are morally and intellectually superior. Interestingly, Plato used the term "philosophers" to describe those ruling elites. The word 'philosopher' means 'the one who is in love with wisdom'; and in today's context it would mean scientists, engineers, economists and technocrats in general, anyone with the expert scientific knowledge that is necessary to run a government effectively and equitably. It makes sense. Why shouldn't we trust the running of our government to those with the appropriate skills and moral integrity to act impartially and unselfishly?
Where Plato's argument fails is in the fallibility of human beings. As history and experience have consistently demonstrated, any human with the power to run other people's affairs will most certainly place the continuation of that power as his or her top priority, well above the greater good. Ruling elites, once installed, will do everything to remain in power. Democracy will therefore always have a natural tendency towards the collusion of elected officials and the rich. Unless it is disturbed by popular uprisings, like the one we witness today.
But what if those Platonic philosophers were not fallible humans, but infallible intelligent machines? What if their morality was neutral, and their intellectual ability several orders of magnitude higher than any human? Shouldn't we let those benevolent, hyper-intelligent machines rule our world? After all, in the decades to come humans will become increasingly dependent on AI systems to run vital functions of their everyday personal, social, and economic life. Why not politics as well?
Many, of course, would rush to answer the previous question with an emphatic 'no'. The idea of machines, benevolent or otherwise, ruling over human affairs seems like a non-starter. Nonetheless, the question ought to give us pause. Given this choice, would you still prefer to be governed by corrupt politicians who collude with powerful industrial lobbies and make a mockery of our so-called democracy? Wouldn't you rather choose reason and wisdom over persuasion and rhetoric? Given the evident alienation of voters from the established political class, this is a proposition that might appeal to a great number of citizens - the "plebs" if you insist to call them that way. Perhaps Plato's Republic was not really alluding to perfect humans, but predicting a future world governed by AIs.

More from Huffington Post

The Huffington Post
The Huffington Post
image beaconimage beaconimage beacon