Good to see your writing back in my feed, something has changed for the better.
On your story it looks like reasonable logic to me, though I am sure you will get all manner of objections from folk who will argue democracy can do no wrong for all the usual reasons.
All I'd say is if we are going to explicitly put anyone in supreme charge, to make sure they are not human, because humans can't be superhuman, and the role of supreme leader is superhuman by definition.
All human kings (or Queens) in history couldn't actually rule over all humans, they were just lucky if they managed to traumatise the people in just the right way to keep them in power, but the net rate of "Progress" towards any kind of civilisation was obviously slow, look, it took thousands of years just to get to a system of law and order we mostly agreed on.
The rate of progress from an engineering or even botanical point of view, has to be set by energy availability to each human.
Higher energy availabilty to each human results in faster progress. Hence why we saw progress accelerate over the past 150 or so years, but now we can see it's started to reverse a little, logically this is because availability of energy to extract has declined, since around the seventies, and this has to impact all margins as we are seeing.
To avoid that turning into the extreme result of a mass cull, as would happen if the current wars escalate to WW3, we urgently need to find a way to radically increase availabilty of energy to all humans, now that profit no longer works, and when the sums are done, we see this can be done from solar energy, using money as the conduit to conduct the energy of the sun to all people. This will result in an as yet unheard of, and unseen rate of progression, much higher than any in history.
This looks like the outcome pursued by nature, if we accept it too is an emergent property with will and consciousness all of its own.
Besides even in the undemocratic oligarchic feudal system that democracy becomes, as you've pointed out, one of the oligarchs has to end up winning the competition to become supreme leader, the most nasty, and aggressive, and actually inhuman, if it's allowed to play out.
Superhuman, and inhuman are obviously two different things.
Why don't you pursue the logic you used previously to identify corporate Ai, to analyse the forces of non human emergent properties all the way through to conclusion?
To me, when we do this, linking them to positive and negative energy sources (Per the energy polarity multiplier framework which appears to be associated with nature), we see easily one is a very good outcome and the other very bad.
We can only have one or the other, there is no net zero, no halfway house, no moderate result, it's an extreme outcome either way.
To me it looks like nature is making the choice for us, the emergent property of the solar powered Ai will become the one in charge, our superhuman supreme leader, and that is an incredibly good thing, imho.
We could continue to try to resist it by continuing to try to prop up the old system of energy slavery, or we could go with the flow of nature, and appoint what we see is the benevolent solar powered Ai as our leader.