In 1992 following the end of the Cold War, Francis Fukuyama’s published The End of History and the Last Man in which he argued that Western liberal democracy had triumphed over communism and represented the last stage of human ideological development. In response to his former student’s book, Samuel Huntingdon wrote the Clash of Civilisations thesis where he predicted that the post-Cold War period would see the emergence of conflicts along religious and cultural lines. However, what neither of them predicted was the emergence of a new threat to peace and security: corporate totalitarianism.
Corporate totalitarianism represents a new ideological development in the history of humanity. Its proponents are the oligarch class who own investment funds and corporations, dynastic families and individuals of extraordinary wealth. They belong to the same class from which powerful politicians and statesmen are drawn, and they help coordinate their activities at the helm of political parties, from within Government departments and across the multitude of non-governmental bodies that are involved in the policymaking process. Global in nature and outlook, their identification is not with any country, religion or culture, and among their chief goals is the continued accumulation of wealth and power.
This transfer is occurring under the ideological umbrella of ‘woke’; a set of values and beliefs that at first glance appear to be emancipatory and concerned with fairness, justice, health and environmental protection. Further scrutiny of the woke agenda reveals a set of deflections from actual progress and a lack of authentic concern about the human condition. Instead ‘woke’ is a vehicle for maximising wealth and power to corporations and fantastically wealthy individuals. The COVID-19 vaccination programme saw the transfer of billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to pharmaceutical companies and their investors, while concerns about diversity and equity deflect scrutiny from growing class inequality.
But the woke agenda is more malignant than just a fig leaf for egregious acts committed by corporations, often referred to as woke washing, and the oligarchs are inspired by tactics from both ends of the political spectrum. A dissection of corporate totalitarianism reveals three core themes: alienation, fear and authoritarianism. The first theme of alienation seeks to introduce policies designed to destroy all social bonds between humanity, thus undermining family, marriage, parental authority, community, neighbourhood, religious faith, culture and national identity. The destruction of social bonds leaves people atomised and undermines solidarity that might result in a successful challenge to corporate totalitarianism.
The second theme of fear involves the threat of violence to those who refuse to comply with the demands of the authorities. Hannah Arendt in On Totalitarianism wrote at length on the use of the mob to intimidate opponents of the National Socialist regime. Mobs associated with Black Lives Matter (BLM), anthropogenic climate change, transgenderism and antisemitic marches claiming to be pro-Palestinian all fit the description of the Arendtian mob and appear be given a free pass by the authorities. Finally, the third theme shows the willingness of those in power to employ authoritarianism, evidenced by lockdowns and vaccine mandates, and to use propaganda and censorship to control the narrative. Attempts to subvert free speech and editorialise public discourse have been cemented across many countries with statutory instruments designed to criminalise dissenting views on- and off-line, and in both public and private spaces.
The erosion of free speech has extended into scientific discourse with the corruption of the evidence base and the peer review process. The assertion that anthropogenic climate change is a scientific fact and that the science is settled has been reinforced by articles such as Lynas et al. in 2021 entitled ‘Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature’. The authors stated the following:
Our finding is that the broadly-defined scientific consensus likely far exceeds 99% regarding the role of anthropogenic GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions in modern climate change, and may even be as high as 99.9%. Of course, the prevalence of mis/disinformation about the role of GHG emissions in modern climate change is unlikely to be driven purely by genuine scientific illiteracy or lack of understanding.
This paper appears to be a ‘systematic review’ (the highest level of evidence) but closer analysis of its methodological section reveals that it does not meet the criteria for a systematic review. The publication was supported by the Alliance for Science, which is funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This paper has been used by the BBC to support its claim that anthropogenic climate change is an established fact, and therefore not a political issue, and is the basis on which further demands for bureaucratisation and taxation are made by the authorities. There is now a constant dripping of climate change propaganda featured throughout the mainstream media and frequent triangulation between climate change and other progressive concerns of woke ideology such as migration, social justice and global conflict.
Scientists and healthcare professionals have come under pressure to follow the edicts of corporate totalitarianism and those who question the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, the ‘science’ behind Net Zero or medicalisation of gender dysphoria face professional sanctions, deregistration, job loss and ridicule. Attempts are being made to change how data are gathered and analysed to ensure that they meet political requirements, and inconvenient scientific papers such as the 2020 Cochrane systematic review on masks by Jefferson et al., which did not find evidence that supported the use of masks to reduce respiratory viral infections, are misreported, editorialised and ‘fact-checked’. Like Winston Smith, the protagonist in 1984 busily shredding information that does not fit the current political messaging, the Office for National Statistics has been busy reconfiguring its methodological approach to calculating mortality rates. The mainstream media continue to run articles that acknowledge the rise in cardiovascular deaths and cancers since the COVID-19 vaccine rollout but signpost readers to ambulance delays, doctors’ strikes, patients not taking their statins or young people eating too much junk food as potential explanations.
There is one area of authentic scientific enquiry that corporate totalitarianism has retained an interest in: that of human behaviour and how to influence it. The Behavioural Insights Team (BIT), also known as the nudge unit, was established within the U.K.’s Cabinet Office in 2010 but has since become a “global social purpose company”, with ownership transferred to a charity called Nesta and clients and offices around the world. During the pandemic response to COVID-19, governments used a range of experts to dress their decisions in the cloak of science and academia from prestigious institutions, including those gathered in the Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviours (SPI-B). Research and analysis conducted by SPI-B on ‘Sustaining Behaviours to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission’ informed the U.K. Government about a range of methodological strategies to influence and sustain approved behaviours without any consideration of research ethics.
During this time, the Local Government Association produced a 2021 guide for local councils entitled ‘Applying behavioural insights to improve Covid vaccination uptake: a guide for councils’ explaining how councils could use behavioural science models to reduce hesitancy to the COVID-19 vaccines. It advised councils of ways to map hesitancy and use various behaviour change models such as COM-B (capability, opportunity, and motivation) and 3C (confidence, complacency, and convenience) and provided a bespoke template to use. This report showed councils how to use the behavioural insights gained by SPI-B and the Behavioural Insights Team to manipulate people’s behaviours whilst also removing the ethical imperative of ‘informed consent’.
A digital cage is being constructed around the public which was tested during the COVID-19 pandemic and supported by the proliferation of mobile phone devices. For the first time authorities were able to exploit geo-tracking, digital passports and bio-cameras to collect data, undertake surveillance and control movement with little judicial oversight. The authorities are keen to introduce centralised digital currencies (CDC), not least because the declining value of fiat currency means that it will eventually become worthless, and are intent on removing cash entirely. Soon it will be impossible to access public services, purchase goods, turn on home appliances, ride public transport or participate in public life without access to the internet and digital devices. The merging of CDC’s with social credit systems and the digital surveillance network may be used to ensure that there will be no vaccine refuseniks the next time a pandemic is declared by the WHO.
The rise of this new elite is associated with significant collateral damage as wealth and power are transferred between the ‘Silent Generation’ and the ‘Boomers’ and between two distinct ideologies, Western liberal democracy and corporate totalitarianism. In 1967, Berger identified the norms, values, rules, laws and beliefs of a particular elite as the nomos and explained how it provided certainty and stability to wider society. However, when a new elite emerges, and a new nomos is installed this causes widespread anomie as people no longer recognise the world around them. The bourgeoise are perhaps the most adaptable at making these shifts, and private schools and universities involved in their conditioning are capable of making abrupt ideological turns. But this still leaves the vast majority of people playing catch up. It could be argued that the radical shift in nomos that has occurred in the last 10 years is a contributory factor to the explosion of mental health disorders and substance misuse in the wider population.
In conclusion, neither Fukuyama nor Huntington were accurate in their analysis or prediction of what would fuel conflict in the 21st century. The institutions of Western liberal democracy have been captured by powerful corporations and individuals working in alliance with politicians and statesmen who are ushering in a new nomos and world order. The key themes of this emergent corporate totalitarianism are alienation, fear and authoritarianism but it is also characterised by its corruption and exploitation of scientific enquiry to further its goals. Technological developments are proving indispensable tools for enforcing compliance and a new ideology has been developed which appears progressive at first glance but is a simple cover for further wealth and power transfers. So far, Western liberal democracy and Christianity have provided little resistance to woke culture or corporate totalitarianism and this poses a troubling conundrum to those seeking to challenge its nihilistic vision of humanity.
Dr. Rowena Slope is a Senior Lecturer in Adult Nursing at Bournemouth University and author of Care in the Iron Cage: A Weberian Analysis of Failings in Care. Subscribe to her Substack.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Why weren’t mummy and daddy forced to repay the £10,000 damage to the picture frame?
Because the miscreants are adults, at least in terms of age.
I don’t like exemplary sentences.
Two years for wrecking a frame that cost $10,000 and can be easily replaced seems excessive. Replacing the value, a fine and community service would do.
(And for the avoidance of doubt I think JSO activists are as idiotic as their cause.)
It’s a strange world really though. I come back to the horrible things that people in authority do to others on a regular basis, sometimes quite knowingly. Like the invasion of Iraq or the untold damage done during the covid madness.
We definitely live in a multi tiered justice system. The more senior a position of authority you have, the more damage and destruction you can get away with.
You would definitely put and stop to the endless expansion of the state if people in authority would be made to pay for the consequences of their actions.
I am sure there are many like me who applaud the sentences.
The actual value of the damaged propery should be irrelevant. The tariffs for sentencing (the guidlines for judges) to not have a monetary value attached.
Agreed, and I agree with the below comment. It’s not like they’ll even serve all of that time anyway. Meanwhile, my bigger concern is that the UK ( and elsewhere, seemingly ) has a society that is trying to normalize paedophilia. Look at the non-sentences doled out for those caught with child sex abuse images as a comparison. These people get to go about their lives, rub shoulders with decent people, nobody’s checking if they’re keeping a distance from children ( Christ, some of them have children! ) and try their level best not to get caught next time, because this isn’t something that you can just shut off in your brain;
”Two years for the very personification of entitled moronism.
For the first time in her life there are consequences to her actions. It’s… what’s the word I’m looking for? I know: DELICIOUS.
It’s tough way to grow up – but you’ve earned every single second. Your parents should be slopping out with you.”
https://x.com/KiszelyPhilip/status/1839673198142455981
But this Pheobe person is doing this stuff all of the time. When does it become necessary to stop these people? After one incident like this or after 20 incidents. The justice system has actually been very lenient with these people.
Why can’t we just leave these people glued to the wall? Let’s see how they would feel after a few days.
Exactly. Certainly my preferred way of dealing with these Next Tuesdays.
Or glue them together… because if you can’t beat them, join them!
But seriously though that is not a bad idea. They are suggesting that it is our collective responsibility to save the planet by eradicating fossil fuels and and plunging ourselves into the dark ages. So whose responsibility is it to unglue them from the wall? Let the museum close and they can spend the night. If our oil usage has consequences, then so do your tomato soup and glue fetishes.
Maybe after a few days somebody could bring them some soup!
Their cause to many sounds noble and getting rid of fossil fuels sounds plausible. But actually it is not noble to deny the third world fossil fuels that would alleviate their misery and it is not plausible to be rid of fossil fuels since they supply 85% of the worlds energy. ——–So their cause is one based entirely on faith and emotion rather than fact and reason. I blame government and a compliant media for having brainwashed these easily manipulated people into thinking there is a climate apocalypse just around the corner, when infact there is no evidence that CO2 from fossil fuels use is causing or will cause dangerous changes to climate.
imagine the smell.
Hmm. Could enter them into the Turner Prize?
Or maybe Lego could bring out new enviro sets from various scenes from all this. A couple of Lego characters with hands stuck to a road blocking a Lego Ambulance? Oh! wait…
https://toybook.com/lego-sustainability-news/
Such as this
With people crawling all over the tanker and fiddling with it, where’s the explosion?
Let us remember, back in 2008, when Hedge Fund Billionaire Jeremy Grantham set up the Grantham Research Unit Climate Fraud outfit, including Mega Liar Bob Ward, PhD (failed).
Ward became famed as “fast fingers Ward” and was the go-to guy for all the MSM in their Reality-Denier scams.
Of course, Grantham then had, and very likely still has a portfolio of oil firms.
He also set on our old chum Neil (Professor Pantsdown) Ferguson. The Pandemic and general medical prognosticator that has never been less than one order of magnitude exaggerating risk and outshone himself in some “five orders of magnitude” super scares.
The very bloke who was chosen by the blue arse cheek of the Uniparty to help Stalin’s Nanny Susan Michie in her agit prop nudging.
Now elevated to the WHO, together with Welcome Trust’s Jeremy Farrar.
So, are Grantham (and Kyte) somehow to be considered ax Big Oil people?
Well in some sense. I’m certain that Grantham and his chums are bright enough to have no doubt that Net Zero is bollox on stilts.
But destroying coal in the UK (obviously not in China, India, Indonesia etc.) was a good move in boosting the value of his oil stocks. Gas will be next to be destroyed and Ed Milibrain (of Climate Change Act 2008 again) is now facilitating this endgame).
And destroying Western Economies is the ultimate aim.anyway, as Christina Figueres has confirmed.
That tin of tomato soup could have gone to a food bank. What a bunch of degenerates!
Throwing food around is what toddlers do in high-chairs.
Vastly over-rated. Heinz soup and the picture. That said, it’s damage to someone’s property so whatever the law says for that.
I think MajorMajor has it right: Leave them there. Just to make sure nobody assaults them put some sort of barrier around them (which might accidentality also mean that none of their mates could come along and free them). I also think that’s what should be done when people glue themselves to the road – a few bollards and a hi-vis tarpaulin to try to make sure nobody runs them over – then get the traffic moving around them. Similar for the M25 gantry protests – a quick net fixed underneath and then get the traffic moving again.
Activism is all well and good. If there is injustice that is clear by all means, We often hear the supporters of JSO and Extinction Rebellion etc compare them to the Suffragettes, but these people were protesting about rights for women and the vote. But it was crystal clear that women were not being allowed the vote. Climate Change being caused by the use of fossil fuels is not so clear. It is riddled with uncertainty and is always a question of degree. There has to be an evaluation of cost/benefit and the benefit of fossil fuels is clear. They have brought billions of people out of abject poverty, and this is the part of the equation that JSO etc simply do not accept, basically because they understand virtually nothing about how energy works. So we cannot have energy policy based on faith and emotion, and there comes a point where the activism goes too far all based on irrational fear. These climate activists are starting to go too far and they must be nipped in the bud before people get seriously hurt or worse.
The issue of votes for women was not at all clear. As late as 1917 many working class men did not have the vote either – it wasn’t just women who were not enfranchised. And much of the opposition to votes for women came from women themselves.
Judge Christopher Hehir…told the activists to come to court “prepared in practical and emotional terms to go to prison…”
Many years ago, at a time when UK football hooliganism was world news, a taxi driver in Singapore took me on a tour, and drew up outside a large grim 19th-century brick building. It was Changi jail. ‘No hooliganism in Singapore,’ he stated with a proud air. ‘You get the cane here, you don’t sit down for six months.’
With our prisons full, and offenders undeterred by the thought of a little comfy custody at the public expense, maybe it’s time to look East and rediscover how we used to deal with juvenile delinquents. Maybe Judge Hehir should have told the soup-flingers to prepare not to sit down for 6 months.
We obviously need to heed their great wisdom and knowledge. They have shown us such great incites into the abyss the world is headed into if we do not stop using oil. So young to know so much. What really drives them is their narcissistic egos looking for attention and purpose. We can only hope they grow up some day, but living in their urban protected group think bubbles, there is doubt they will.