But representatives in a democracy can take a smaller percentage from each to pay their key supporters, because their educated, freer citizens are more productive than peasants. For rulers in a democracy, the more productivity the better. Which is why they build universities, and hospitals, and roads, and grant freedoms, not just out of the goodness of their hearts but because it increases citizen productiveness, which increases treasure for the ruler and their key supporters, even when a lower percentage is taken. Democracies are better places to live than dictatorships, not because representatives are better people, but because their needs happen to be aligned with a large portion of the population. The things that make citizens more productive also make their lives better. Representatives want everyone productive, so everyone gets highways. The worst dictators are those whose incentives are aligned with the fewest citizens, those who have the fewest keys to power. This explains why the worst dictatorships have something in common. Gold, or oil, or diamonds, or similar. If the wealth of a nation is mostly dug out of the ground, it’s a terrible place to live because a gold mine can run with dying slaves, and still produce great treasure.

This is the biggest thing that is concerning to me about AI, and more generally the devaluation of labor. If the people have declining productive negotiating power (our skills becoming less relevant to the production of wealth), by these principles it could lead to a devolution away from democracy. This seems to fit with what has been happening in the USA lately.