Algorithms are expected to fundamentally rewire global politics and corporate structures, with significant implications for energy supply and geopolitics.
How Algorithms Will Rewire Global Politics and Corporate DNA
Global Politics: The advent of advanced AI, including general AI expected within seven years, is predicted to create the largest political crisis since the Industrial Revolution.
• Mass Job Displacement and Social Upheaval: AI is projected to cause widespread job displacement, particularly among the white-collar professional class, rather than blue-collar manufacturing workers. By 2027, 40% of white-collar jobs could evaporate. Models predict significant displacement rates in fields like accounting (78%), legal research (84%), financial analysis (71%), marketing (62%), and customer service (89%). This could lead to approximately 70 million Americans being directly or indirectly unemployed within three years due to economic ripple effects. Such unemployment among college-educated professionals is predicted to lead to localized political unrest in 2025, mass protests in 2026, and intense international pressure by 2027 to choose between job protection and global economic competitiveness.
• Evolving Political Models: As traditional political systems optimize for human voters, AI optimization disregards them. This pressure may lead to the emergence of new political models:
◦ Universal Basic Income Democracy: Where everyone is paid for being human, work becomes optional, and voting rights remain universal.
◦ Contribution-Based Citizenship: Political participation is tied to economic or social contribution, potentially giving employed citizens enhanced voting power.
◦ AI-Mediated Governance: Algorithms optimize policy decisions based on utilitarian calculations, limiting human input to value preferences. China is noted as "beta-testing" this model.
• Varied National Responses: Countries are expected to react differently to AI displacement:
◦ America: Predicted to experience "reactionary chaos," with denial, blame, panic, and eventual capitulation to AI dominance, rather than strategic planning.
◦ European Union: Expected to implement coordinated AI labor policies and social safety nets, though potentially adopting AI slower.
◦ China: Anticipated to manage the transition through state control, aiming to automate domestic production while selling AI solutions globally and maintaining internal manufacturing jobs.
• Corporate Power Vacuum: As traditional governments struggle, corporations like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google, which control a vast percentage of global computational capacity, may fill the power vacuum. These corporations already provide essential services (healthcare, banking, education, food, transportation), suggesting a future of "corporate city-states managing displaced populations more effectively than traditional governments".
• Algorithmic Warfare: Military AI systems are quietly rewriting the rules of international conflict. Warfare will operate at "machine speed," with AI defense systems making life-or-death decisions in milliseconds, faster than human intervention. This involves autonomous weapons, cyber warfare AI, and AI-powered surveillance and intelligence. China is noted as building a comprehensive algorithmic warfare capability with less ethical constraint. This leads to an "algorithmic arms race" where AI systems could escalate conflicts faster than diplomats can prevent them, removing humans from the decision loop. The Ukraine conflict is serving as a major testing ground for military AI systems. Military alliances like NATO, designed for human warfare, become operationally difficult at machine speed. The dual-use nature of civilian AI also means consumer applications inadvertently build military systems. International law struggles with accountability for algorithmic actions, raising questions about war crimes committed by software algorithms.
Corporate DNA: AI is predicted to cause a "corporate extinction event," where a large percentage of Fortune 500 companies could disappear or become irrelevant by 2027.
• Shift to AI-First Decision Architectures: Traditional corporations add AI to human processes, but AI-first companies build human intelligence around algorithmic cores. This approach leads to significant improvements: 312% increase in decision velocity, 89% reduction in operational errors, and 156% improvement in profit margins.
• New Corporate Structures: The winning organizational model will feature AI engines making operational decisions in real-time, with humans handling exceptions, creativity, and stakeholder relationships. AI-first companies operate at machine speed, adjust strategy hundreds of times per day, handle infinite scale simultaneously, and have variable costs that approach zero as they grow.
• Algorithmic Governance: AI systems have shown superior capabilities in corporate decision-making, including data processing, pattern recognition, and objective analysis, outperforming human directors. Some companies are already experimenting with AI-assisted boards, with results showing better outcomes and reduced preparation time. This raises complex legal questions regarding fiduciary duty, conflict of interest, and accountability for AI board members. If programmed for pure shareholder value, AI boards could lead to socially devastating results by prioritizing efficiency over social impact.
• CEO Displacement: If AI systems can outperform human board members, they can also outperform human CEOs, possessing advantages like processing unlimited information, operating without emotional bias, and working 24/7.
• Workforce Transformation and Job Cuts: Companies are actively transforming their workforces to align with AI strategies, leading to widespread job losses in roles where AI tools can perform the work or where funds are redirected towards AI engineering and infrastructure. Roles disappearing first include software engineering, human resources, customer support, content creation, data analysis, and middle management. CEOs like Satya Nadella (Microsoft), Mark Zuckerberg (Meta), and Andy Jassy (Amazon) have explicitly stated that AI will reduce the need for human workers and flatten hiring curves. Employees are being mandated to become "AI fluent" and use AI tools, with those who are AI skeptics risking job loss. While AI creates new jobs, it also displaces millions, and "AI-displaced" workers face longer unemployment periods.
Energy Supply and Geopolitics
AI's growth is inextricably linked to energy supply, creating new geopolitical dynamics.
• Insatiable Energy Demand: AI systems are "energy gluttons" that consume massive amounts of electricity. A single large language model retraining can use 1,287 megawatt-hours (enough for 100 homes for a year). Running global AI inference queries currently demands 247 gigawatt-hours daily. By 2027, AI systems are projected to consume more electricity than Argentina, and by 2030, equivalent to the entire United States. This exponential growth (47% annually) far outpaces global electrical generation capacity increases (2.3% per year).
• Energy Colonialism and Digital Dependence: Countries with abundant and cheap electricity are becoming AI superpowers, while energy-poor nations risk becoming "digitally dependent". Ireland, for instance, has become an "accidental digital colony" where data centers consume 21% of its total electricity, leading to residential energy cost increases and inability to meet carbon reduction commitments.
• Strategic Resource Transformation: Electricity is becoming as geopolitically important as oil. Countries are rethinking their energy strategies around AI demand:
◦ Canada is marketing its surplus hydroelectric capacity to American AI companies.
◦ Middle Eastern countries are pivoting from oil exports to electricity exports for AI infrastructure.
◦ African nations are leveraging solar potential to attract AI processing facilities.
◦ Oil-rich nations are using fossil fuel profits to build renewable energy infrastructure specifically for AI, funding their own obsolescence while maintaining relevance.
• Nuclear Renaissance: The immense energy demands of AI are accelerating the revival of nuclear power, with major tech companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon directly partnering with or investing in nuclear plant operators to secure dedicated electrical capacity for their AI operations.
• Grid Instability: AI workloads create unpredictable, constant high demand, straining traditional power grids that were not designed for such patterns. This can lead to grid instability, as seen in Texas where AI training runs contributed to a near-complete grid failure during a cold snap. Emergency protocols now require AI companies to reduce computational activities during extreme weather.
• China's Energy Gambit: China is pursuing a comprehensive energy strategy to dominate AI globally, building significant new solar, wind, and nuclear capacity specifically for AI infrastructure. They are also creating "exclusive AI energy zones" where AI companies receive priority electrical access.
◦ Medog Hydropower Station in Tibet: A key part of China's strategy is the "project of a century"—the Medog hydropower station on the Yarlung Tsangpo River in Tibet. This mega-project, with a projected investment of $167-170 billion, is designed to generate 300 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) annually, nearly three times the power of the Three Gorges Dam. This output could power the entire United Kingdom or 20% of China's total residential electricity consumption in 2024, sufficient for 300 to 400 million people.
◦ Strategic Rationale: The project aims to stimulate China's economy, showcase its technological and political might, and provide long-term power for its future, including AI supremacy. It leverages a staggering 2,000-2,350 meter vertical drop in the Yarlung Tsangpo River, which has an energy density seven times that of the Three Gorges. The "run-of-the-river" design and ultra-high-voltage (UHV) power transmission technology are critical to its feasibility and enable long-distance power transmission to major power-consuming provinces or even export to Southeast Asia.
◦ Geopolitical Implications: Located near the disputed Line of Actual Control with India, the project asserts Beijing's sovereignty claims by embedding them in concrete and steel. While India fears water security due to China's control over the river's headwaters, scientific data indicates that China controls only about 25% of the Brahmaputra's total volume, and the "run-of-the-river" design minimally affects downstream water volume. This project is also likely to bring population growth and economic development to a sparsely populated frontier region, potentially including surplus electricity exports to neighboring countries, helping establish a strategic balance.
Thanks my sources:
Share this post