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.
The most important piece isn’t mentioned: the bureaucracy
None of these things can be achieved without a willing and enthusiastic bureaucracy.
Hitler could have ranted all he wanted about exterminating jews, but it wasn’t until he got his hands on the German state bureaucracy that all his ideas and schemes could be put into practice.
Political ideologues don’t get things done. Disciplined and well directed bureaucracies do.
And what we find is that bureaucrats are more than willing to expand their power and reach and infiltrate every nook and cranny of our lives.
As Arendt herself pointed out it was the cold, methodical, thoughtless obedience.of the state bureaucrat thinking he was doing the right thing that really chilled her bones.
As has been pointed out people commit the most evil acts under the illusion that they are doing some service or even sone good.
Ah yes, the functionaries. The useful idiots. Lovers of rules, they seek the comfort of being told what to do, by people they believe have their best interests at heart. The ones whose parents never punished them fairly, the ones whose parents always patronised them.
Their weakness, however, is that they fail to recognise the presence of people who do not think like them. Thus, they believe everyone is following the rules. It never occurs to them that there are those who manage to avoid their kindergarten, and have found ways to live freely… despite the rules.
So, where the fool tries to look different, the wise man looks the same, but is different.
The most important piece isn’t mentioned: the bureaucracy
None of these things can be achieved without a willing and enthusiastic bureaucracy.
Actually, nothing significantly above the level of subsistence farming can be achieved without usually professional administration experts, neither by the state nor by private enterprises.
And your point is, what,exactly?
Isn’t that obvious? Bureaucracy is not necessarily working for a sovereign government and outside of the Marxist paradise the neoliberals are trying to sell to us, it’s an inevitable feature of human enterprises above the mom-and-pop level.
t’s a valid point.
I suppose what I’m really referring to is public bureaucracies which impose administrative rules on us, rules we can rarely escape. And with the backing of brute force if necessary.
Business bureaucracies are directed at supplying us with goods and services that we (typically) can freely chose to purchase or not.
So Pfizer’s bureaucracy can produce and distribute all the covid jabs it wants but it’s only the state bureaucracy that can force or coerce us into taking one. Without the backing of the state bureaucracy, Pfizer would have sold a tiny fraction of the covid jabs it did, if any.
The state bureaucracy also isn’t one we can opt out of funding. And it seems to have a life of its own. The bigger it gets the more funding it seems to suck in to continue growing like a cancer within a body that is incapable of stopping its growth.
The corporate totalitarianism the article talks of depends entirely on a publicly funded state bureaucracy. Corporations couldn’t do it without the state bureaucracy.
The state bureaucracy […] seems to have a life of its own. The bigger it gets the more funding it seems to suck in to continue growing like a cancer within a body that is incapable of stopping its growth.
That’s a (mis-)feature of our current (western) political systems because the people who can impose new taxation are virtually identical to those who can create public jobs. As they can award themselves whatever money they want, the public bureaucracy can never become too inefficient to be still fit for purpose.
Compare this, for instance, with the general political arrangement of the German empire before ‘parliamentarism’ (aka SPD-rule): Government was run by the monarch who also had to pay for its expenses. But taxes could only be imposed when parliament agreed (I’m simplifying this a little) and even if it was willing to do so, it will usually have wanted something in return. Hence, there was strong incentive to get by without asking parliament for new money and no way cancerous growth of ‘bureaucracy’ could have happened.
The bureaucracy has always been in place hasn’t it – Whitehall?
Perhaps 90% of populations are oblivious to this stuff. They come home from work and switch on their 6 O’clock News to be brainwashed about climate, renewable energy, racism, equality, diversity, gender etc etc and they will swallow it all down. They are way too busy with work and family life to investigate everything for themselves and their TV News has this air of authority about it as if Investigative Journalism has taken place and they have looked into all of this stuff on our behalf and are presenting FACTS. ————-Nope, sorry they are presenting dogma.
It wouldn’t occur to a great many people that our leadership and media are anything but benign.
That’s been a significant stumbling block in any conversation I’ve attempted.
I was always fascinated by how Germany changed so quickly 90 years ago, easily mesmerized by a powerful orator, and my amateur historical research taught me power is frequently (always?) abused and that corruption was (and very likely is) everywhere.
Create a power structure and, even if the initial holders of the positions are ‘good eggs’, the roles will be rapidly inhabited by those least suited for them. It’s the human condition and always has been…
… except nowadays, according to some.
My argument tends to be along the lines of “why then, but not now?” but it’s hard going and few listen.
Or as Lord Acton pointed out “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”
“Western liberal democracy and Christianity have provided little resistance to woke culture or corporate totalitarianism”
Because the Church is captured too!
with an Archbishop like we have, if he was put there to deliberately undermine Christianity, what would he be doing differently?
Corporate totalitarianism derives from para-statal corporatism, simply another malignant offshoot of socialist fascism, not so much different to state ownership itself.
Massive corporations feed off state funding by manipulating the state procurement system. They love DEI and other forms of state imposed regulation as barriers to entry for their more efficient and agile, cheaper competitors.
These competitors, the life blood of Germany’s manufacturing success, for example, do not have the resources to shadow state bureaucracy in the way that cumbersome massive para-statals can manage.
Deregulation and a reduction in the size of the state go together like, oh, I don’t know, maybe a horse and carriage?
Remind me, which party is offering reduced state spending, a more efficient state?
Tumbleweed……..
Reform!
UKIP!
Put Ben Habab at the helm, not that slippery jab pushing Tice.
ReformUK appears to be more like a private company than a political party. Some reports suggest Tice and Farage own the brand name so I don’t think he is going to sack himself as Farage doesn’t seem interested in leading a political party anymore. The party members have no say in anything and they have no branches. Having said that they are on mid teen poll ratings so they may be able to play a part in helping to destroy the fake Conservative Party. That is if Tice doesn’t do the dirty and stand his candidates down as Farage did to save Tory skins.
If you vote Reform, you may as well vote Tory. Once they’ve hoovered up all the disaffected Tory votes, they’ll merge Reform with the Tories and it will be containment job done. (Of course there will be a fig leaf of how “We are moving the Tory Party to the right” LOL!)
Speaking of the dangers of corporate totalitarianism. UKC Playing God. About state democide during the PATHWAYS protocols.
https://www.ukcolumn.org/video/playing-god
This week I was contacted by my GP surgery and told that I was now eligible for a regular medical check-up (due to age). They’ve only seen me twice in 8 years – when I registered and pre-Covid, for ear-wax removal. I’m unjabbed.
It’s become easy to envisage a future where the “free” medical check will be used to monitor declining health as you get older and to schedule in the date at which you will be terminated.
I’d ignore them. Chances are that they just want to do something useless and reasonably easy they can bill the NHS¹ for.
¹ Some time before COVID, my GP was effectively privatized, ie, turned into a service run by Virgin doing contract work for the NHS. On threat deregistering me due to not going to the doctor (an obvious attempt at defrauding the NHS), they did a bloodletting with me and measured my height and weight. They’ve also been somewhat keen of getting me on “Must not stop taking this!” medication but I stopped it nevertheless and the attempt faltered due to COVID. I’ll see what I do should they eventually remember me but I’ll try to avoid anything they can come up with. When I’m not sick, I’m not going to see a doctor.
I politely told them “no thanks …. I’m perfectly healthy. When I think there’s something wrong I’ll get in touch” ….. except I won’t.
I really liked this article – thank you. Many years ago (1996) I was given a book to read entitled ‘When Corporations Rule the World’. Dr David C. Korten who set out the disastrous betrayal of common people and future generations being carried out by corporations, governments and multi-lateral banks. Most of what he foresaw has come to pass.
I got a book on General Smedley Butler and the plot to seize the White House and instal a fascist regime there. When it was exposed in 1934 the New York Times covered up the big names like JP Morgan etc. It has been going on for a long time, just more apparent since 2020.