The emergence of robots has established the rise of a material cult religion. Not only has formalised the antithesis of religion proper, but has also established the atheistic religion.

For a start, our Democracy is seemed to be organised according to a system of proportionate representation. Parliament representatives therefore expect to reflect the diverse and pluralistic structure of their electorates thus the population.

If the above is true, then we expect social issues of public concern to be fairly assigned to elected representatives. And this role is filled by scientists and technical specialists hence Technocracy, but instead it is more transparent and fair if administered by AI. Technocracy is thus mechanised by robots.

According to a TV1 Market PR series, some prominent people are willing to trust these machines not only with their lives but also with the lives of their children. That's some technical leap of faith!

However, let me highlight some of the flaws of Democracy as we know it:

Might as well go the whole hog; if the human representative is replaced not by another representative or expert but by a robot, then the role becomes a function as social issues are 'mechanised'.

Mechanisation is now a machine perception. It is how a machine attempts to perceive a human issue. In so doing, it tries to feel and understand by displaying a series of (mechanical) emotions as if it is human.

The above is the subject of earlier debates where the machine is said to be taking over human. But the opposite is true of human when one attempts to understand and experience robotic relations. Humans learn to be like robots in adapting to this time and place. This is a direct consequence, the relationship between human and robots is somewhat mechanised.

Following from the above, how should we mechanise our social issues of Poverty; of Unemployment, Violence and Crime; of Gender and Age etc..

If AI is true to its nature, then Poverty is not synonymous with the Underclass. Rather, every sector of the social or should I say mechanical structure would have its quota of struggles.

The AI pure logic departs from social aspects of production, is indiscriminate of gender and ethnicity. And without human prejudice, everyone has a chance to achieve upward mobility. No ethnic birth-right or kingship membership.

Instead in our current democracy, we can expect layers of the social structure not to be mechanised but to be manually stagnated to enforce the status quo. And persons of the underclass maintain their Poverty status according to their ethnicity. They continue to wait for God in Poverty all their life.

And there, AI under Technocracy has profoundly failed the test of social stability. Robots may take hold of life while we humans continue to confront struggles especially during a transitional phase.

How can the population sustain production therefore the economy if most robots are owned by corporations? Left in desperation, we don't have funds to generate profits for the corporation.

Instead we dream of a time where work had provided great purpose and satisfaction that demonstrated our skills. It is where the product is crafted with value and pride. But sooner than we expected, the product took on new meaning and assumed life of its own. We are excluded and isolated from the product.

Disillusioned and alienated with unfulfilled passion, the human consumer is brainwashed to feel inadequate without the product. As a consequence, some folks have died from smoking even when knowing that smokes are made of toxic shite! Some have starved themselves to unhealthy conditions in order to feel normal and accepted. People have worked for nothing; they have sacrificed and gave their lives to the corporation in order to feel adequate.

Now if one's name is not recorded in the central databank, then I guess there's no existent. It's not just having ones ID in the system but having a record of transaction as in purchase and investment. So if you have no job and no income, then you're as good as non-existent.

Defining social relations with robots is a natural progression. We know what's behind the metal face. That's because the robot is not conscious of any existent external to its data. It is therefore dependant on a program and a few switches; maybe a remote one at central base. That means the robot is neither free nor autonomous to validate any moral or ethical decisions.

If the majority is 1000 and the minority is 999, then the simple AI logic of the majority is faulty. That's when objective meaning and purpose matter.

Robots are just another phase in the appropriation of profit for the corporation. And mechanisation is likely to encourage robotic followers of a material cult religion. The remaining humans seek companionship of other humans in the community.