Billionaires, the AI Race, and the Return of Aristocratic Power
In recent years, the public’s imagination has been captured by stories of billionaire ambitions—whether it be colonizing Mars, funding Artificial Intelligence (AI) research, or openly declaring new political agendas. Beneath these headlines lies a deeper dynamic of power and control that has long historical precedents. From Nietzsche’s commentary on the social strata of ancient Rome to the feudal struggles at the end of the Dark Ages, history teaches us that when new forms of power emerge, old power structures adapt—often by revealing themselves more directly.
This article explores several intertwined threads:
The vulnerability of billionaires who rely on armed guards
The allure of extraterrestrial colonization as a controllable environment
AI as a solution to the “armed guard problem”
The furious “winner-takes-all” AI race
Historical echoes: from Roman nobility vs. bourgeoisie, to the late medieval power struggles, and now the power play by modern billionaires to control AI
1. The Armed Guard Problem
“If you protect yourself with armed guards, what prevents these armed guards from taking power and getting rid of the billionaire?”
This question highlights a fundamental dilemma in the use of personal security forces. Power, especially when it depends on human enforcers, is always precarious. During historical epochs—ranging from medieval knights revolting against their lords to more modern juntas overthrowing leaders—armed security personnel have proven they can become the greatest threat to the very people who employ them.
For a billionaire in a socially unstable world, relying on armed mercenaries or private armies becomes a gamble. If the social structure were to collapse, these armed guards might indeed find it more advantageous to seize assets and eliminate the figure they were once paid to protect. As soon as the incentives tilt in favor of rebellion, loyalty dissolves. This tension underscores why many elites historically sought more subtle and stable means to ensure obedience, such as institutional loyalty or divine legitimacy—none of which are guaranteed in today’s volatile global climate.
2. Mars and the Appeal of Controllable Environments
Visionaries like Elon Musk have long championed the dream of space travel, specifically colonizing Mars or other off-world habitats. While this might seem like a purely scientific pursuit, there is an underlying power dimension: in space or on Mars, the environment is so harsh that inhabitants require infrastructure (air, water, food) strictly controlled by whoever provides it.
In other words, in a Martian colony, those in control of life-support systems hold unparalleled authority. If there is unrest, the risk of sabotage or rebellion is balanced by the fact that survival depends on the colony’s closed ecosystem. Space thus offers a controlled environment—a physical manifestation of the modern desire for an unassailable power structure. This is not a new idea; throughout history, ruling classes have tried to isolate themselves in strongholds, from medieval fortresses to heavily guarded enclaves. However, Mars takes the concept of the fortress to a cosmic level.
3. AI as a “Safe” Security Force
Where armed guards introduce the risk of human rebellion, robots and AI-based security might, in theory, be more controllable. A sophisticated AI force programmed to protect an individual or a small ruling class may lack the autonomous drive for revolution—provided it is designed in such a way and remains under strict oversight.
Yet, this assumption quickly leads to discussions about AI alignment. How do you ensure an AI will remain loyal and never “rise up”? And if the code that directs AI behavior can be modified, stolen, or re-engineered, the risk shifts from one of physical rebellion to one of cyber sabotage. The notion that robots “might not rise up” is contingent on solving the alignment problem: controlling the objectives, boundaries, and self-improvement pathways of advanced artificial intelligence.
In short, for many billionaire visionaries, AI seems like a perfect alternative to trusting in human loyalty. This perspective partly drives enormous investments into AI research—both to build better protective systems and to ensure one’s own competitive advantage in any future AI-driven economy or security environment.
4. The Winner-Takes-All AI Race
AI development has unique characteristics that make it feel like a “winner-takes-all” race:
Self-Improvement Loop: Advanced AI systems, especially ones capable of improving their own code, can lead to exponential gains in capabilities. Being the first to achieve a significant threshold (e.g., artificial general intelligence) might confer disproportionate benefits, allowing the “owner” of that AI to surge ahead of all competition.
Network Effects: The more data and computing power an entity has, the better its AI becomes, which in turn can attract more investment, more data, and more users, creating a self-reinforcing cycle.
Geopolitical Pressures: Governments, militaries, and corporations each fear that if they lag in AI, they may be at the mercy of those who dominate it.
In such an environment, billionaires scramble to fund AI labs or purchase AI startups, hoping to secure an unassailable position. This race, at its extreme, could be fueled by the belief that controlling advanced AI is tantamount to controlling the destiny of humankind—an idea that fosters both cooperation (in alliances and collaborations) and fierce competition to be the sole winner.
5. Echoes of History: Nietzsche, Roman Times, and the End of the Dark Ages
Friedrich Nietzsche wrote extensively about power dynamics, using the Roman Empire as a backdrop for understanding social hierarchies. According to Nietzsche and other historians, one driving force in Roman times was the tension between the old aristocracy (nobility) and the emerging wealthy classes (bourgeoisie)—sometimes referred to as “new men” or the “nouveau riche.”
A similar pattern emerged in late medieval Europe when powerful merchant classes (the bourgeoisie) demanded more political power at the expense of the nobility. Marriage alliances between noble families and wealthy commoners often served as tools to merge or redistribute power. While nobility offered prestige, merchant wealth promised financial security.
Now, in the 21st century, we witness another parallel. Billionaires, once operating behind the scenes, are increasingly stepping forward. They sponsor political campaigns, shape public policy debates, and even run for office. The difference is that rather than bridging alliances through intermarriage (though elite families do still form alliances), the modern play is to shape global policy, direct technology’s future course, and demand direct control over AI, the new currency of power.
Like the Romans before them, who fused noble titles with the capital of wealthy newcomers, modern elites are using AI to merge their technological advantage with political influence. In some views, the aristocrats of old never went away; they merely adapted, rebranding themselves as industrialists, financiers, and now tech magnates.
The Evolving Power Structure in the AI Era
The themes above coalesce into a contemporary reality:
Security Through Technology
Billionaires see robust AI and robotics as a way to reduce their reliance on potentially rebellious human armies or social unrest.
Controlled Environments
Space colonization is a literal extreme—a closed environment where every resource is doled out by the authority in charge. It becomes a laboratory for an ideal society in the eyes of those who can afford to shape it.
High-Stakes Competition
The race for advanced AI is so fierce because the spoils could be total. If an individual or group solves the major hurdles first—achieving a decisive technological edge—they could, in effect, write the rulebook for the rest of the world.
Historical Cycles
Elites have always vied for power directly when their interests are threatened. The Roman patricians navigated changing power dynamics with the equestrian class (wealthy, non-noble citizens); the medieval nobility formed alliances with the rising bourgeoisie to preserve their influence. Today, billionaires step out from behind their foundations, think tanks, and philanthropic facades to secure legislative and moral backing for control of AI.
Concluding Reflections
In a world where AI might soon underpin everything—from military defense to economic production—traditional forms of power face existential challenges. Some billionaires dream of establishing off-world colonies as a new frontier of dominion. Others pour resources into AI development to ensure they can shape—or possibly escape—the modern “armed guard problem” by creating loyal, non-human protectors.
Yet we cannot forget that power dynamics are fluid. Even as technology evolves, historical patterns of alliance, rebellion, and negotiation reassert themselves. The tension between those who have power and those who want power is perennial. Whether in ancient Rome, feudal Europe, or our modern era of space travel and AI labs, the outcome depends on a delicate balance of innovation, law, ethics, and social contracts.
Human history implies that no power structure is ever absolute or eternal. For all the talk of controlling Mars or forging unbreakable AI allegiance, unforeseen events—technical breakthroughs, rebellions, or moral shifts—can overturn the best-laid plans. Time will tell whether today’s billionaire ambitions will usher in a stable new order or merely re-enact the cyclical drama of power struggles that has defined civilization for millennia.
