Depending how one approaches the current evolution of economic and political power, we are told that we are moving toward a new era which has been variously called feudal or oligarchic capitalism, technocracy, and techno-polarity.
The terms feudal and oligarchic are used to signify that a limited number of individuals and companies have amassed such inordinate economic power that their relationships with the state resemble the feudal structure of economic and political power in medieval times. The terms technocracy and techno-polarity more narrowly locate the center of the emergent powers in the circle of Big Tech companies that dominate the digital economy and are spearheading the research and development of AI.
The main factor that has contributed to the new unfolding order is the undisputed concentration of economic power. Such power can accumulate in the hands of businesses in the form of market power and/or in the hands of individuals in the form of personal wealth or control over corporations. An article in the NYT times published two years ago reported that concentration of market power in the top 1% of firms in all sectors of the US economy had climbed to 97%. The respective percentages were 96% in finance and 95% in manufacturing. These numbers were at least 20 percentage points above their 1940 levels.
Concentration in financial assets is particularly important for the direction of the economy since those who control funding decisions serve as gatekeepers of new investments. Equally important is their ability to influence the composition of corporate boards and through them corporate policies in relation to workers, the climate, and social responsibility. As of this year, 2025, three finance firms, BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street, had amassed $28 trillion under their management. For perspective, the total US market capitalization stands at about $62 trillion and the global market capitalization is around $127 trillion.
The concentration of power is also extreme at the personal level. Currently, 10% of Americans own 90% of stock value with just 1% owning 50%. Furthermore, when it comes to controlling the direction and policies of the most powerful firms in the world, the leaders of the Big Tech firms (Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Tesla, Nvidia, Oracle, and OpenAI) operate with what comes very close to unchecked corporate power. These firms control or support the infrastructure of the digital technology behind social media, internet search engines, the collection of personal data, and the development of AI.
The consequences of this unprecedent concentration of power are all around us in their multifarious manifestations of extraction of economic and political benefits and influence very aptly described by Joseph Stiglitz in People, Power, and Profits. But what is more worrisome is the emerging tendency of technocrats to claim for themselves the primary role in setting the future of societies. Such views are even expressed in manifestos advocating for example that the future of the West depends on building “a technological republic.” Not content in just developing and profiting from innovations, technocrats have become desirous of running global empires (in the words of a recent NYT opinion piece) beyond the reach of nation-states. The Big Tech has effectively used its influence to allow a very open field in the US and is pushing back on regulations imposed in the European Union. According to the author of this article, tech businesses demand the freedom “to seize land, operate their own currencies, reorder the economy, and remake our politics with little consequence.”
It is this emerging power of technocrats that is reflected in Ian Bremmer’s essay “The Techno-polar Paradox: The Frightening Fusion of Tech Power and State Power” (Foreign Affairs, May 13, 2025). The allure of AI technology to states is that it develops powerful tools for the surveillance of citizens and the control of information that can ultimately lead to the curtailment of basic civil liberties. Bremmer argues that the US is already headed for a hybrid techno-polar world in which technocracy will claim an increasing share of operations and privileges that traditionally belong to the domain of state powers and responsibilities.
The enormity of the ambitions of the technocrats is only matched by their hubris as to what they can deliver to humanity. However, experts on the tech as well as the economic side have expressed serious doubts and warnings about these promises. First, despite the fast inroads in digital and other technologies, the past few decades have failed to deliver broad economic benefits for Americans. Labor productivity has been growing more slowly in the post 20th-century decades, the middle class has shrunk, and economic gains and wealth creation are not fairly shared. Technological progress alone cannot deliver societal benefits without shared objectives.
Also, despite the undisputed great contributions of technology and science to medicine, biotechnology and other important fields, the Big Tech business model continues to be focused on the development of algorithms that control our attention, confine us in echo chambers of biased news and opinions, and promote an insatiable consumerism as the core of human prosperity. We already see that leading AI firms are investing heavily in this retail type of business of personal assistants, virtual therapists and friends, and curiosity-satisfying platforms where the big ad revenue lies.
Even after we set aside the worst fears about the potential consequences of AI for humanity, the public faces the prospect that a few firms and individuals will call the shots about our future. In democracies the role of the state, which governs for the people, is to align as best as it can the private interest with the public interest. If, however, the new Robber Barons of the economy and technology capture the levers of power from the state or do so in collaboration with the state the rest of us will become mere spectators or, should we say, passengers on a ship or train whose direction is not in our hands as it should be.
Let's Reason 