Silicon Valley Wants to Be Your Government — And a Historian Has the Receipts

A Harvard historian is calling out the tech industry's habit of dressing up its products in the language of democracy, constitutions, and governance — and her argument has real implications for how business leaders should think about the AI platforms they are adopting right now.

Jill Lepore, historian and staff writer at The New Yorker, has a new book making the rounds that examines what she calls the "artificial state" — the tendency of Silicon Valley companies to borrow the rhetoric of nation-building when describing their platforms and products. As reported by Anthony Ha and Theresa Loconsolo at TechCrunch AI, Lepore's thesis centers on a striking pattern: from Twitter's old framing of itself as a "town hall in your pocket" to Anthropic's Claude "constitution," tech companies consistently reach for civic and governmental metaphors to describe what are, at the end of the day, commercial products.

Lepore's argument, according to the TechCrunch report, is not a flattering one for the industry.

There is a long tradition of powerful institutions using grand language to legitimize themselves. What makes the Silicon Valley version notable — and, for Lepore, troubling — is the speed and confidence with which it happens. A company can go from founding to issuing its own "constitution" in the span of a few years, with little of the democratic accountability that actual governance requires.

The examples Lepore draws on are instructive. A "town hall in your pocket" implies public participation and civic virtue. A corporate "constitution" implies rights, protections, and a social contract. But these are private companies with shareholders, profit motives, and terms of service that can change overnight. The gap between the language and the reality is where Lepore finds her story — and where businesses should pay close attention.

For Lepore, part of the problem is that Silicon Valley's leaders are, in her framing, bad readers of science fiction. They absorb the aesthetic of utopian and dystopian tech futures without grasping the cautionary subtext. The warnings embedded in the stories they claim to love appear to go unheeded.

What This Means for Business Teams Adopting AI Tools

This is not purely an academic debate. For business leaders evaluating AI platforms right now, Lepore's critique surfaces a practical question: when a vendor describes its AI as having a "constitution" or positions its platform as a new kind of infrastructure for society, what are you actually agreeing to?

The framing matters because it shapes expectations. If a company presents its AI assistant as a neutral public good — a kind of utility — but operates it as a proprietary product with usage limits, data rights clauses, and shifting policies, the mismatch can create real operational and legal exposure for the businesses relying on it.

For small and mid-sized businesses in particular, the stakes are quietly high. Large enterprises have legal teams that read the fine print. SMBs often do not. When an AI vendor talks in the language of shared values and civic mission, it can feel reassuring. But reassuring language is not a substitute for clear terms, transparent data practices, and predictable pricing.

A few questions every business team should be asking their AI vendors right now:

Who owns the data you submit to the platform, and how is it used to train future models?
What happens to your workflows if the company changes its pricing structure or discontinues a feature?
Is there a meaningful appeals process if the AI flags or restricts your legitimate business content?
How are the platform's "values" or "guidelines" actually enforced, and by whom?

These are governance questions — and ironically, they are exactly the kind of questions that the civic language of Silicon Valley implies you should be able to ask, even if the mechanisms to answer them are rarely as robust as the rhetoric suggests.

Healthy Skepticism Is a Business Strategy

Lepore's work is a reminder that critical reading of the tech industry is not cynicism — it is due diligence. The companies building AI tools are not governments. They do not owe you representation. Understanding that distinction clearly is the first step toward using these tools wisely.

For teams looking to evaluate AI tools for business with clearer eyes, the goal is not to avoid AI platforms — it is to adopt them with the same rigor you would apply to any significant operational decision. That means looking past the mission statements and examining the mechanics.

If you are building out your team's AI workflow strategy, platforms like WRRK.ai are designed around practical business utility rather than grand civic narratives — which, given the current moment, is itself a kind of differentiator.

Original reporting by Anthony Ha and Theresa Loconsolo, published at TechCrunch AI on August 7, 2026. Read the full piece at TechCrunch.

Start using AI tools built for your business, not for a press release — visit WRRK.ai.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does Jill Lepore mean by the "artificial state"?

Jill Lepore uses the term "artificial state" to describe the pattern of Silicon Valley companies adopting the language and symbols of government — constitutions, town halls, civic infrastructure — to describe commercial technology products. Her argument is that this framing grants these companies a legitimacy and authority they have not actually earned through democratic accountability.

Should businesses be concerned about AI companies using governance language?

Yes, in a practical sense. When AI vendors use civic or constitutional language to describe their platforms, it can obscure the fact that these are private companies with terms of service, proprietary data rights, and policies that can change without public input. Business teams should look past the language and evaluate AI tools based on concrete questions about data ownership, policy transparency, and operational reliability.

How can small businesses protect themselves when adopting AI platforms?

Small businesses should treat AI vendor selection like any other significant vendor relationship: review data and privacy terms carefully, understand what happens to your data after you submit it, check whether the vendor has a track record of stable pricing and feature continuity, and avoid over-relying on a single platform for critical workflows. The more a vendor's marketing sounds like a mission statement, the more carefully you should read the actual contract.

Silicon Valley Wants to Be Your Government — And a Historian Has the Receipts