Corporate Technocratism and Political Authoritarianism to Work Hand-in-hand Against Liberal Democratism

Definitions/ Intent of the?Phrases

Corporate?Technocratism: The manifest?imperium?of new-age Internet-run technological multinational conglomerates. The nature and sources of this?power and the ways in which?the power is wielded by the corporations are still in the early stages of evolution. In the last century, when the?Internet was a niche and specialist adoption, the extant corporations or the MNCs of those times could only hold a limited sway over?the minds of people, which has changed drastically with the advent of mind-bending IT. And we are still, in the early stages of that IT revolution considering the fact that the domain has been disrupted perpetually and is poised to do so over a continuum.

Political Authoritarianism: The rise of the authority of the right as a reactive backlash to globalisation and liberalisation, globally, to the detriment of liberal democratic values.?

Having laid out the meaning of the key terms, let me proceed on to state that while the latter topic is relatively rich in research material on a standalone capacity, the convergence of both phenomena and how it will work against the values of Liberal Democratism may not have been that thoroughly studied.?

The Grand Convergence and Dissonance with Liberal Democratism

Corporate Technocratism has only one objective: the maximisation of profits; and Political Authoritarianism has the sole purpose of the maximisation of political power. Liberal democratic values are about the decentralisation of power and have the objective of individualistic growth and the development of creature comforts and the enablement of carefree sustenance. Maximisation of profits and power have many aspects in common leading to an overlapping of interests and thereby a convergence of Agendas resulting in mutual cooperation.?

This poses a significant challenge to liberal democratic values and principles. Corporate technocratism, driven by profit maximisation and technological dominance, seeks to consolidate power and influence in the hands of a few tech giants. These corporations control vast amounts of data and have the capability to shape public opinion and behaviour through targeted algorithms and digital platforms. On the other hand, political authoritarianism, fuelled by the desire for centralized control and suppression of dissent, aims to consolidate political power and silence opposition voices. When these two forces align, they create a formidable alliance that undermines the decentralisation of power and individual freedoms advocated by liberal democracies.?

As corporate technocratism and political authoritarianism gain strength, they exert increasing influence on domestic and international affairs, shaping IT policies, privacy laws, space policies, trade policies, diplomatic relations, and geopolitical strategies. Liberal ideologies find themselves at a disadvantage as they struggle to navigate this shifting landscape, facing pressure to compromise their values in the face of economic and political coercion. In this context, the future of global governance is characterised by a struggle between competing ideologies, with profound implications for the future of democracy, human rights, and global stability, order and geopolitics.?

Vital Issues?

Issues: Corporate Technocratism

Economic Concentration: As corporations consolidate power, they often reduce competition, creating near-monopolistic entities that can dominate sectors of the economy. This can reduce economic mobility and freedom for individuals.

Data Control: Companies have amassed unprecedented amounts of data on citizens, enabling powerful influence over personal behavior, preferences, and even voting habits.

Policy Influence: Corporate lobbying is not new, but the scale of influence, particularly from the tech sector, has grown. This influence over legislation can lead to policies favoring corporate interests at the expense of public interest.

Issues: Political Authoritarianism?

Weakening of Checks and Balances: Authoritarian leaders tend to consolidate power, weaken judicial independence, and limit the media's role as a watchdog, undermining democratic accountability.?

Erosion of Civil Liberties: Freedom of expression, assembly, and other democratic freedoms are often restricted, creating an environment of fear and repression that stifles democratic engagement.?

Manipulation of Elections: Some authoritarian regimes maintain a facade of democratic processes, but the elections are often compromised, creating what political scientists call "illiberal democracies."

Issues: Liberal Democratism

Surveillance and Privacy Loss: Surveillance technologies, often developed by private firms, are used both by corporations and governments to monitor citizens, eroding personal freedoms.

Public Distrust in Democratic Institutions: When citizens feel that their governments serve corporate interests or that leaders are authoritarian, trust in democracy weakens, making them more susceptible to anti-democratic alternatives.

Political Polarisation: The use of data-driven algorithms and targeted content can polarise public opinion, as social media often promotes content that confirms biases or stokes fear. This undermines constructive dialogue, a cornerstone of democracy.

Solution: The challenge lies in galvanizing public will and enacting reforms before the powers that be become too entrenched.