Dr. Jill Lepore Explores the Concept of the ‘Artificial State’ in Gaming

Today, I’m diving into a conversation with Harvard professor and writer Dr. Jill Lepore about her latest book, *The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State*, set to release on August 25. Jill has a knack for uncovering historical patterns within institutions, making her insights a perfect fit for our discussion on systems.

At the core of her book is the idea that systems are built through measurement—collecting data, quantifying it, and acting on it. Jill argues that this kind of systemic measurement can be dehumanizing, reducing complex human experiences to something artificial. These artificial constructs permeate various aspects of life, from technology and apps to politics and governance, illustrating how Big Tech and its leaders have fundamentally altered our understanding of the state.

You’ll hear Jill express her desire to write a “grumpy book,” but it reads as a straightforward examination of the last century and a half of technological and social changes that have led us to a point where automated systems may be taking over. Her concept of the artificial state traces back to the origins of quantification, from ancient censuses to modern polling techniques, with a significant shift occurring in the 1980s as Silicon Valley culture emerged and personal computing became mainstream. This era also marked the rise of targeted advertising and microtargeting in political campaigns.

While Jill expresses some skepticism about the internet, I see it as a platform that has enabled careers like mine and democratized access to information. The late 20th and early 21st centuries saw a significant increase in online access, and not all of it was as disillusioning as some might suggest. However, Jill’s perspective on how power structures adapt to new technologies is always enlightening.

We also explored the future, including where Jill sees glimmers of hope, such as college students voicing their discontent with AI at graduation ceremonies.

Now, let’s get into the conversation with Dr. Jill Lepore about the artificial state.

Dr. Jill Lepore, you’re a Harvard professor and the author of *The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State*. Welcome!

Thanks for having me!

I’m thrilled to chat with you. I’ve been a fan of your work for years, and I must say, this book feels like it’s right in the sweet spot for our audience.

[Laughs] I appreciate that!

The producers and I found this book to be a thrilling ride. It delves into how computers and measurement can flatten human experiences, allowing systems to exploit that flattening. So, let’s start with the basics. What exactly is the “artificial state”?

The artificial state is a concept that follows the liberal nation-state, where our freedoms and rights as citizens are central. While we often discuss democratic decay, we don’t talk enough about the state itself. The artificial state is characterized by the increasing takeover of functions traditionally held by the nation-state by private multinational corporations. A prime example is the public square, where citizens gather information about voting and exercising their rights. Today, much of our public discourse is privatized and driven by corporate interests, prioritizing monetization over genuine democratic engagement.

Moreover, many platforms we use for public discourse are now dominated by bots, which can skew the conversation. This shift poses a risk to our liberal constitutional democracy, potentially replacing it with what I term the artificial state.

You highlight that America sees itself as a messy democracy, yet your thesis suggests we’ve automated and quantified much of that messiness away. Are we on a trajectory that could end the nation-state?

Yes, the history of this shift is long, but the acceleration in the age of AI is significant. For instance, the introduction of scientific polling in the 1930s gradually replaced direct engagement with voters. Campaigns no longer needed to connect with individuals face-to-face; they could simply analyze data to gauge public opinion. While this may seem efficient, it strips away the personal interactions that foster civic engagement.

As we approach the 2026 elections, we see people turning to AI for guidance on how to vote, with campaign messages increasingly crafted by algorithms. This raises concerns about the authenticity of our political discourse.

The book outlines this evolution step by step, showing how we arrived at our current state. You reference science fiction authors from the ‘50s and ‘60s who envisioned both utopian and dystopian futures shaped by technology. Why do you think many modern tech leaders have embraced a dystopian model?

The idea of a machine selecting a president has been a concern since the 1930s, reflecting fears of totalitarianism and dehumanization. For example, Isaac Asimov’s story “Franchise” imagines a future where a machine determines the most representative voter, highlighting the dangers of reducing democracy to data points. Some tech leaders, like Sam Altman, have suggested that AI could efficiently choose our leaders, overlooking the value of human agency and meaningful work.

These leaders often lack a humanistic perspective, focusing instead on efficiency and disruption without considering the wisdom of the past. This disregard for historical context leads to a narrow understanding of progress.

You discuss how figures like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk often revert to a form of moral reasoning rooted in Catholicism, yet they seem to misinterpret its principles. How does this connect to their approach to technology and society?

Their approach often involves a kind of first-principles thinking that ignores valuable lessons from history. This selective amnesia about the past can lead to a failure to appreciate the complexities of human experience. The tech culture tends to prioritize innovation over understanding, which can result in a shallow interpretation of literature and humanistic inquiry.

You also touch on the tension between the promise of the internet and the reality of its impact on democracy. How do you see this dynamic playing out today?

The internet was initially heralded as a tool for democratization, but that promise has not been fully realized. While it has allowed for greater access to information and opportunities, it has also led to the consolidation of power among a few tech giants. The narrative of the internet as a liberating force has often been more about marketing than reality.

You mentioned targeted advertising and identity politics. How do you see these concepts intersecting with the idea of the artificial state?

Identity politics has certainly been shaped by computer-driven sorting and targeting, but it existed before the digital age. The algorithms that categorize us can amplify divisions, but they also reflect existing social dynamics. The relationship between identity politics and technology is complex, as both influence and shape one another.

As we navigate this landscape, what do you think the future holds for democracy in the face of these challenges?

The current moment is indeed precarious. While there are signs of pushback, such as college students voicing their concerns about AI, the broader political landscape remains fraught. The challenge lies in fostering genuine democratic engagement and ensuring that citizens have a voice in shaping the future.

In closing, it seems that while the tech industry may claim that democracy will regulate its power, the reality is more complicated. There’s a need for a deeper understanding of what democracy truly entails and how we can reclaim agency in this evolving landscape.

Absolutely. It’s crucial for individuals to engage in meaningful discussions about the future of technology and its impact on society. The potential for change exists, but it requires collective action and a commitment to democratic principles.

Thank you, Dr. Lepore, for this enlightening conversation. It’s been a pleasure.

Thank you for having me!