Concentration

Merging frontier development into one state-funded project reduces failure modes and absorbs race pressure by being the only game.

Strategic competition between states dominates AI development; the state with the most capable AI is best positioned to secure safety and impose constraints on others.

Private ownership of frontier AI concentrates decision authority incompatibly with the technology's distributional stakes; public ownership aligns incentives with broad welfare.

Power concentration is the binding constraint and is visible under current competition law; preventing decisive advantage preserves the option space every strategy depends on.

One actor using AI to seize durable decision authority beyond democratic reversibility is the terminal failure; every other decision routes through whether it reduces that risk.

No single failure mode wins if capability is distributed across many independent actors, and concentration risk exceeds diffusion risk.

Stable equilibrium among several roughly equal AI powers is safer than single dominance or uncoordinated chaos, producing restraint through mutual capability awareness.

Concentration of AI surplus, not AI capability, is the binding failure mode; broad ownership dissolves the political instability driving other strategies.