Arun Maira: Don’t let techo-optimism over AI crowd out concerns of equity

AI will not increase equity in society, however, The Economist points out. 

The London-based publication has compiled the forecasts of many experts on the impact of AI on the future of work (The Economist, 13 February 2025). It reveals that inequity in wages is likely to increase further. Lower-skilled jobs will be broken up and eliminated. The best educated will be able to earn even more. 

Techno-enthusiasts want the world to “push on" because “creative destruction" is the way to progress. Ultimately, everyone will be better off somehow. They ignore the destruction of jobs, lives and communities during this transition to a new technology, which could take more than a generation. 

Also Read: Arun Maira: The impact of AI on Indian jobs is a distraction we can do without

Developing countries with large numbers of less educated and poor citizens, like India, where wealth and income inequalities are already very large, must remain wary of the societal and political disruptions that AI will create.

The problem is not what a new technology can do, it is the purpose for which it is used, and for whose benefit. Who will own new technologies and who will control their use are crucial for good governance. 

It is ominous that Elon Musk, the world’s richest man who has accumulated billions of dollars from technology ventures, has taken charge of deregulating the US economy to make it easier for capitalists to make more money. India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi has reportedly discussed the Indian government’s mission of ‘Minimum government, maximum governance’ with Musk.

Also Read: Mint Quick Edit | Economic Survey 2025: Deregulate to grow

The global economy is going through an ideological crisis. 

Corporate capitalism (under the Washington Consensus) overpowered social democracies in Europe—and also India—after the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989. The US took effective control of the World Trade Organization and global financial systems. Capital was given freedom to roam the world for profits. Democratic countries were forced to reduce tariffs and abandon policies aimed at building their domestic industries. 

Citizens benefited as consumers because they could buy the best from around the world. However, insufficient domestic jobs and incomes, together with inadequate social security, frustrated their aspirations for a good life. Political reactions from the Right and Left against neo-liberalism are now shaking up political systems in many countries, including the US.

Also Read: Arun Maira: The Washington Consensus has collapsed and it won’t be mourned

The one who pays the piper calls the tune: Societal challenges in the 21st century require us to reform the institutions of corporate capitalism and electoral democracy. The limited-liability business corporation, which is the growth engine of capitalist economies, is a human invention. 

Corporations are given the same legal rights as human citizens—the right to own property, to free speech, to sue others (corporations, individuals and governments too), and to protect their own rights. Like the pigs in Animal Farm, George Orwell’s literary exposure of the application of power in governance, wealthy persons and corporations have become ‘more equal’ than common citizens in democracies.

The limited-liability business corporation is a legally created, selfish citizen of society. It is designed to attract investments in risky ventures by limiting the liability of investors. The fiduciary duty of the board and CEO of a company is to protect the equity of its investors. The only other equity the board is responsible for is equity among investors in proportion to their investments. It is not legally responsible for broader societal or environmental equity.

Also Read: Both Musk and his MAGA critics are wrong about free speech on microblog platform X

The US Supreme Court lifted the limits on the use of money for political expenditure on the grounds of free speech in its landmark 2010 decision in the Citizens United vs Federal Election Commission case. Now Musk, an unelected person, has taken charge of the US Department of Government Efficiency with a mission to reduce the federal government’s size. 

In an electoral democracy, political parties need money to perform their legitimate function of canvassing support. Parties and candidates that have the most money raise the bar for others. Moreover, a government in power must keep citizens engaged all the time and modern communication channels are expensive. Citizens also need money to lobby a government. 

Thus, the wealthy control most aspects of the communication between governments and the governed: by providing funds to parties for elections and by financing think-tanks and lobbies.

Also Read: Inequality alert: India’s economy appears to be getting even more K-shaped

Efficiency, equity and ethics: The government of a country, whether it is democratically elected or not, is responsible to citizens for ensuring societal and environmental equity. It must treat all citizens equally. 

However, corporations, being ‘more equal’ than others, have persuaded administrations to relieve them of regulations that interfere with their freedom to make profits. 

The ease of doing business, a capitalist idea, is driving government policies, trumping the ease of living of common citizens—a ‘socialist’ approach. US corporate leaders who once championed Environmental, Social and Governance causes and an agenda of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion are abandoning these to embrace the policies of Trump and Musk.

Tools of technology have no in-built ethics. While they can improve the efficiency of enterprises and improve the productivity of economies through widespread adoption, they follow the ethics of corporations that are, by design, selfish. It is the job of a government to ensure equity among citizens. 

Also Read: Jaspreet Bindra: The ethics of AI will matter more than the technology

But when governments engage technologists and management consultants or consult businesses to reform governance, that role suffers.

Global governance has broken down. We need better regulation in many spheres for economies to grow more equitably and sustainably. We require better governance of natural resources, financial and trade systems. We must also ensure human rights and equity for workers, and the regulation of social media and AI. 

What the world needs is not deregulation but better regulation; not more efficiency, but more equity; not minimum government, but superior governance. 

All this demands that we reform the process of reforms. The public must drive this effort for its own good and special interests must not be allowed to dominate it.

The author is a former member of the erstwhile Planning Commission and the author of ‘Transforming Systems: Why The World Needs A New Ethical Toolkit’