Swedish philosopher Nick Bostrom proposed a thought-experiment in 2003 about the dangers posed by Artificial General Intelligence.

Let’s suppose that we design an Artificial Intelligence programme so that it pursues a goal, say, to make as many paperclips as possible. As long as the AI is sufficiently persistent, Bostrom states that “the AI will realise quickly that it would be much better if there were no humans because humans might decide to switch it off. Because if humans do so, there would be fewer paper clips,” which would go directly against its initial orders.

Before you know it, he continues, there would be no humans and a world drowning in paperclips, all because of an AI’s single-minded pursuit of one goal.

It might sound like a ghoulish science-fiction narrative, easily dismissed as the product of an over-fertile imagination. But we are currently living under the yoke of this so-called paperclip-maximiser.

Except, instead of paperclips, it’s profit, and, instead of AI, it’s corporations. We are trapped by corporations that mindlessly pursue profit at all costs.

This has a whole host of unintended and detrimental side-effects:

Ecological destruction: Because corporations are competing against one another in their eternal search for profit (and they have no choice otherwise they go bust), a tiny side-effect includes the fact that the oceans are becoming emptied of all wildlife, forests are being torn down and replaced with farmland, and the entire earth is being commodified for its resources.

And this occurs because a dead fish is worth more than a living one, cultivated farmland is worth more than ‘useless’ forests, the resources trapped under the earth’s surface are only worth anything if they’re put to good use fuelling society.

Tax havens: Corporations continuously seek to reduce their tax burdens, leading small, resource-poor islands (such as Malta) to offer highly competitive tax rates in order to hide the money of the wealthy. This aggressive pricing strategy diverts tax revenues away from larger jurisdictions, where these funds are supposed to be collected, leading to a benighted state of global inequality.

Corruption: We all (rightly) condemn corruption as the abuse of power for private gain. But do we ever stop to wonder where corruption even comes from to begin with? It’s simple; corporations try to find ways of maximising their profit and will do almost anything within the bounds of the law and morality, frequently overstepping those bounds too, in order to find profit. Investigative reporters are killed because they threaten the profits of those at the top.

Child labour: Corporations also seek to reduce running costs. And children aren’t as expensive as adults, especially in socially-deprived areas, so who do you think corporations favour to carry out their dirty work? (At least, when this isn’t hindered by ‘pesky’ child protection and labour laws.)

Special Economic Zones (SEZ): These are special areas in which the business and trade laws are different from the rest of the country, almost invariably in ways that benefit corporations. The economic clout of large multinational corporations (backed up by military force, especially as regards the largest nations in the world) means that countries are willing to re-write laws to attract the attention of these corporations, even at the expense of workers’ rights. SEZs are essentially legalised slave labour camps that pander to the interests of multinational corporations.

Do we ever stop to wonder where corruption even comes from?- Andrew Izzo Clarke

Wars: Simply put, wars are more lucrative for corporations because they can sell their wares to any nation in need of military materiel. In this light, it comes as no surprise that corporations instigate wars for the very simple reason that it enables them to pursue their much-sought-after profit.

All of these societal blights, and many more besides, are brought about because corporations are forced to search for profit.

But why are they forced to do so?

Very simply, it’s because the banks lend them money (required for any of their expenses) and punishes them for not repaying these loans at interest. And what’s another word for interest? Profit.

This dynamic trickles down to the man in the street, to you and me, as we are similarly forced to search for profit just to survive. And because banks are the middlemen that offer the only means of paying for our goods (at least currently), we have no choice but to search for profit.

And, strangely, this is a subject that very few seem to be speaking about.

Given this topic’s importance, why don’t we hear any politicians trying to tackle this subject in any serious manner?

I think it’s well known at this point that the major political parties in Malta, not to mention elsewhere, are funded by those with deep pockets (about whom we know very little, incidentally, thanks to a lack of political will and a lax Electoral Commission).

Is it because corporations are benefiting them, in whatever way, enabling them to enjoy greater creature comforts, that politicians stay mum? Is it a case of ‘not biting the hand that feeds you’?

Don’t politicians want to solve all the problems mentioned above?

Unless we understand the source of all these problems, all talk would be empty rhetoric.

And the source is how we create money and distribute it in society.

Andrew Izzo Clarke is a junior associate at a local law firm.