but I think it would be very difficult to defend the notion that planes would be inherently safer with less automation.
I don't think that's true. "Automation' is a nice word but behind every piece of machine and every bit of software code is a human being. The issue is often portrayed as "machine vs man" but it's best understood as "human vs human". Aviation engineers, software programmers, etc are as a class no less capable of error than pilots. I think the trend towards automation will continue not because it's safer but because it's cheaper.
People often conceive of risk as a glass from which one drinks until there is nothing left on the bottom but the dregs. That view is wrong. After a certain point risk in complex systems becomes a tug of war. A decrease in risk in one area leads to an increase in risk in another. Often this increase in risk in another area is unforeseen, until it bites you on the ass. The net effect is that "improvements" are more often than not simply rearranging the furniture. We might just be at that point in aviation today.
Obviously the incident rate will never drop to zero entirely
Exactly. Look at the bright side. If the flight deck becomes completely automated that's two less possible deaths avoided right off the bat.
