There is a joke that there are two kinds of economic system. One is socialism, in which the government owns the means of production. The other is capitalism, in which the means of production owns the government.
There is more than a little truth in this quip. When the former Labor senator Sam Dastyari said that ten companies control Australian politics many, including myself, thought he had probably signed his own political death warrant. So it turned out. Stating such an unacceptable truth in the public arena was, to use the phrase from Yes, Minister, 'courageous'. His demise was probably only a matter of time.
Much of what is currently happening in western geopolitics is a battle to maintain that corporate control: roughly globalism versus nationalism. Corporations are aggressive proponents of globalisation because it gives them access to the 'cheapest hands and sharpest minds'; they are able to pick and choose their labour force from anywhere in the world. This has not just destroyed organised labour in many Western economies, it is fast degrading the Western middle class as well, especially in America (on the plus side, though, it has arguably raised hundreds of millions out of poverty).
Globalisation also gives corporations access to world consumer markets, which gives them scale and allows them many strategic options on getting a return on their capital. Usually this involves techniques of arbitrage designed to circumvent national governments — especially their taxes.
The corporations have pretty much had it all their own way for most of this century but two recent events have startled them. One is the election of a US president who says he is an economic nationalist, Donald Trump. The other was Brexit. These events are demonised as 'populism': a curious term of disapprobation in a democracy.
It is true that Trump is an economic nationalist. He immediately rescinded the deeply flawed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which would have further cemented corporate global control over the Pacific, half the world economy. He has attacked NAFTA and exploited the inconsistency in Germany's security position by pointing out that Russia is characterised as a mortal threat, yet Germany is creating a gas pipeline that increases its dependence on a supposed foe.
Most of all, Trump has started to hollow out the World Trade Organisation, threatening to walk out 'if it doesn't shape up'. The architecture of globalisation, established over decades, is slowly falling apart, replaced by economic nationalism.
"The west does not appear to have a winning hand but it is hard to predict the outcome, at least in the near term."
The battle lines (in one sense literally, as this also has a military dimension) have been drawn between a unipolar, American dominated world and a multipolar world. Eurasia is integrating fast — but as a coalition of nations, not a bloc. China is pursuing its national interests by building its One Belt One Road. Russia has no choice but to be nationalist because of ever-more aggressive Western sanctions, which is forcing it to be more self reliant.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation is rapidly starting to rival the EU. Remarkably, in June both India and Pakistan became members and Turkey may soon follow suit, which may mean the end of its membership of NATO. Meanwhile, the former dominant powers, Europe and Japan, are being left on the fringes; small wonder they have struck a trade deal.
How this plays out will decide the direction of this century. The west does not appear to have a winning hand but it is hard to predict the outcome, at least in the near term. The three major actors, Trump, Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, are all counter punchers: Trump's approach is to create chaos and look for an opening, the Chinese will be using something like the subtle tactics of Sun Tzu, and Putin is a judo fanatic who likes to use the opponent's energy against them.
What is predictable is that little of it will be well covered in the West. As the satirist C. J. Hopkins jokes, media coverage has become a kind of corporate psyops, especially the coverage of Trump:
'The corporatist ruling classes need to make an example of Trump to dissuade any future billionaire ass clowns from running for high office without their permission, but even more so, they need to put down the "populist" opposition to the spread of global capitalism and the gradual phase-out of national sovereignty that began with Brexit and continued with Trump, so they can transform the smouldering remains of the Earth into one big happy neoliberal market run by supranational corporations and the "democratic governments" they have bought and paid for ... which, by that time, folks won't even notice because we'll all be shuffling around like zombies staring down into the screens of our phones.'
That is only the view from the west, though. The perspective of the emerging nations, especially in Eurasia, is very different.
David James is the managing editor of businessadvantagepng.com. He has a PhD in English literature and is author of the musical comedy The Bard Bites Back, which is about Shakespeare's ghost. Despite his name, he is more like a Bruce than a James.
Main image: WASHINGTON, DC - AUGUST 31: U.S. President Donald Trump arrives at the White House on August 31, 2018 in Washington, DC. President Trump is returning from a trip to Charlotte, North Carolina. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)