Big Data, Digital Authoritarianism, and Transhumanism

The Fourth Industrial Revolution, in which we currently live, has transformative changes to individual lives, societies, and governance structures. The classic transhumanist agenda emphasizes leveraging emerging technologies, many of which rely on AI, to enhance human well-being and the human condition. However, transhumanist thinkers Stefan Sorgner and Nick Bostrom while both stressing the significance of these innovations, warn about their potential to undermine freedoms and expand control, potentially leading to authoritarianism, digital authoritarianism, and global surveillance. Thus, technologies such as brain-computer interfaces, biometric implants, internet monitoring, and AI-driven predictive policing raise serious ethical and moral concerns about the threat to freedom and privacy in that they could be used as a tool of coercion, censorship, and control. This may lead to what Nick Bostrom calls the ‘singleton scenario’, a future in which one of the possibilities, according to him, is to witness a global surveillance system. In such a scenario, issues of digital authoritarianism and big data will take center stage. Even if for Bostrom such scenarios may decrease the risks of a nuclear war or other threats, it entails substantial risks. As Sorgner argues, we need political regulations regarding the collection of digital data for democratic purposes. His transhumanist philosophical insights are relevant for critically analyzing these possible developments. Technologies such as facial recognition or biometric tracking raise many ethical questions considering that the risks of the use of these technologies, at a societal level, may threaten privacy, autonomy, and human rights. In fact, these technologies are already being used for mass surveillance and extensive data collection, aimed at potentially controlling individuals and acquiring economic or political power. Big data underpins these practices. The general objective of this paper is to explore the risks and benefits of big data and digital authoritarianism in the paradigm of Bostrom’s theory of global surveillance systems, and Stefan Sorgner’s posthuman ethics. Considering that China’s social credit system already uses some sort of digital authoritarianism by collecting digital data and by using big data analytics to monitor citizens, we may ask how such a system finds its ethical and political justification when it comes to freedom and privacy. In addition, who should control and monitor this data in order for it not to be used for malicious purposes—governments, organizations, or companies? Would transparency jeopardize the efficiency of these systems? The theoretical goal of this study is based on Sorgner’s transhumanist approach to the necessity for a democratic regulation of data collection to offset the hazards posed by the misuse of new technologies, which may jeopardize democracy by ensuring that the incorporation of emerging technologies promotes rather than jeopardizes human dignity and agency. Given that both digital authoritarianism and Bostrom’s scenario of global surveillance systems are grounded in big data and AI-driven decision-making, the risks of sliding into an authoritarian future are imminent. This is why a democratic approach regarding the implementation of government structures that prevent both the abuse of surveillance systems and the monopolization of societies by a power bloc, is needed.