A Future at Mercy: Why Only Conservative Leadership Can Preserve Freedom in the Age of AI
As we advance toward Stage 4 AI, an era that OpenAI envisions within the next five years, humanity might find itself transitioning from a world governed by mandates to one ruled by mercy. Much like the utopian world of Star Trek, this future could bring about a post-scarcity society where the means of production are fully automated, and where governance depends not on strict commands or coercion but on benevolence and discretion. From a conservative perspective, only a government that champions individual liberties and minimal intervention can effectively navigate the complexities of such a world. In contrast, a liberal government would assuredly descend into totalitarian control, using technology as a tool for oppression rather than liberation.
This potential future, perhaps as close as five years away, makes electing leaders like Donald Trump, with the support of visionaries like Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, JD Vance, and others, even more crucial. These leaders are poised to establish the foundation for a future of freedom—one that works for the people rather than subjugates them. Trump and his allies understand that true progress requires not just technological advancement but a commitment to liberty, autonomy, and a government that serves its citizens. In stark contrast, Kamala Harris and the Democrats would set us on a path toward control and silence, where technology becomes a means to dictate every aspect of life.
The concept of ruling by mercy rather than mandate is rooted in the vision of an AI-driven society where traditional human dependencies dissolve. In this new reality, advanced AI would control every aspect of production—from food to industry—and the military would be automated with AI-powered robots, tanks, and drones. A government that rules by conservative principles would ensure that such power is wielded with restraint and accountability, respecting individual rights and fostering freedom of assembly, speech, movement, and thought. A liberal regime, however, would use these advancements to enforce conformity, demanding that everyone fall in line with its technocratic vision. The conservative ethos values human autonomy, and in this AI-driven future, the preservation of freedom would be more crucial than ever.
Yuval Noah Harari has often warned about the dangers of technological authoritarianism, suggesting that governments that control powerful AI systems may no longer need popular consent to sustain power. The liberal obsession with equity and centralization would likely lead to a paternalistic state that controls citizens under the guise of benevolence, while conservatives would champion decentralized power and community autonomy. In Star Trek, the post-scarcity utopia is marked by a benevolent Federation, but even such a utopia could be manipulated into a dystopia under liberal governance, which would seek to homogenize society, strip individuality, and enforce a collective dependence on the state.
The late Iain M. Banks, in his Culture series, envisioned a society where AI managed all aspects of life. Banks’s vision is a double-edged sword—while the AI rulers of the Culture are altruistic, they wield absolute power, raising questions about the real nature of autonomy when individuals are subject to the mercy of a powerful authority. A conservative government would ensure checks on this power, recognizing that true mercy must be balanced with accountability and respect for human dignity. A liberal government, driven by ideological zeal, would use AI as a tool to suppress dissent, curtail freedoms, and enforce conformity under the guise of technological efficiency.
Philip K. Dick’s dystopian tales provide a stark warning of what happens when technology becomes an unchecked power. In his stories, the distinction between mercy and control blurs, as seemingly benevolent actions become mechanisms for dominance. The liberal proclivity for centralized control and coercive equality would lead to an AI-driven state where mercy is nothing more than a euphemism for the selective favor of the ruling elite. By contrast, a conservative-led society would advocate for limited government interference, ensuring that technological power is wielded to protect, rather than undermine, individual freedom.
In this AI-driven future, the conservative vision would be one of empowerment and autonomy. Conservatives understand that government must serve the people, not dictate their lives. In contrast, a liberal government, enamored with technocratic control, would create a society in which individuals are subjugated to the whims of AI, deprived of agency, and made dependent on the mercy of a ruling elite. The conservative path forward is one that emphasizes the inalienable rights of individuals, ensuring that AI is a tool for human flourishing rather than a mechanism of control.
As we approach Stage 4 AI, the prospect of moving from a world ruled by mandates to one governed by mercy presents both opportunities and dangers. The visions offered by thinkers like Harari, Banks, and Dick help us imagine the possibilities—both utopian and dystopian—of an AI-dominated future. But the conservative perspective is clear: freedom, autonomy, and limited government are the keys to ensuring that this future remains one of hope rather than oppression. Leaders like Trump, Musk, Vivek, and Vance are essential to this vision—they offer a path to a free future that genuinely works for the people. In contrast, Kamala Harris and the Democrats would lead us down a path of control, silence, and technological dominance. Now, more than ever, we need leaders who stand for liberty.
