Inside Power, Inc.

Taking stock of Big Business vs. Big Government.

BY DAVID ROTHKOPF | MARCH/APRIL 2012

The sales revenues of the world's largest company, Wal-Mart Stores Inc., are higher than the GDPs of all but 25 countries. At 2.1 million, its employees outnumber the populations of almost 100 nations. The world's largest investment manager, a low-profile New York company named BlackRock, manages $3.5 trillion in assets -- greater than the national reserves of any country on the planet. In 2010, a private philanthropic organization, the $33.5 billion-endowed Gates Foundation, distributed more money for causes worldwide than the World Health Organization had in its annual budget.

The statistics are eye-popping, but this is no parlor game. Over the last century, the world's biggest private-sector organizations have come to dwarf all but the largest governments in resources, global reach, and influence. At the same time, even wealthy countries are now struggling with overwhelmed bureaucracies, budget crises, and plummeting confidence in government. And governments everywhere are compromised by the limitations of their own borders in an era when the issues that affect their people are increasingly transnational.

Striking the right balance between private and public power is the fundamental challenge of our age. Find the sweet spot -- prudent regulation, empowering citizens to compete, fostering economic dynamism, and fairness for all -- and your society will thrive in the 21st century. Get the equation wrong, and the results will be measured in social instability, diminishing prosperity, and declining ability to shape your destiny. Choices that seem entirely domestic in nature will have massive geopolitical consequences.

In the United States, it is the defining political issue of the moment. Is government too big, a burden to society, and a threat to individual liberties? Or is it too ineffective a protector of average people, co-opted by big business and moneyed interests? Is it contributing to the general welfare, or is it institutionalizing inequality, serving the few -- the 1 percent -- rather than the many?

In Europe, such controversies also roil furiously but are joined by an intense argument over how much power individual countries should pass on to a collective European Union, and about whose interests are best served by such collaborative governance -- a departure from the traditional idea and role of the nation-state. Ask a German and a Greek this question, and you'll get vastly different answers. 

In China, the public-private tug of war is visible at every level of a society reinventing itself at such a breathtaking pace that stability and growth often seem as irreconcilable as they are essential to each other. It is a challenge faced elsewhere in the emerging world, from the pitched battles between Russia's oligarchs and its political leaders to the ongoing social tumult in the Arab world, where the uprisings of the last year have been as much against cronyism and governments that have served the economic interests of elites as they have been for individual freedoms and opportunities.

We must get this balance right. A decade and a half ago, the United States was celebrating the triumph of American capitalism and the defeat of state power by the forces of the marketplace. It was a victory dance on the graves of communism and socialism. But it is clear today that the party was premature.

Companies Aren't Just People -- They're Actually Whole Countries.
Employees vs. populations.

We have since gone from a battle between capitalism and communism to something even more complex: a battle between differing forms of capitalism, in which the distinction between each is in the relative roles and responsibilities of public and private actors. As the freewheeling market model promoted by Washington is reeling from self-inflicted wounds, other approaches are gaining ground. Rising models are vying with one another for influence -- from Beijing's "capitalism with Chinese characteristics" to the "democratic development capitalism" of India and Brazil, from Northern European economies with strong fiscal discipline but also a strong public-private compact to the small state "entrepreneurial capitalism" of places like Israel, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates.

Herman Wouters/Hollandse Hoogte/Redux

 SUBJECTS: POLITICS, NORTH AMERICA
 

David Rothkopf, CEO and editor at large of Foreign Policy, is author of Power, Inc.: The Epic Rivalry Between Big Business and Government -- and the Reckoning That Lies Ahead, from which this article was adapted.

CHARLESFRITH

1:18 AM ET

February 27, 2012

Erm GovCorp

Are in bed together.

 

JOHN MILTON XIV

4:05 AM ET

March 1, 2012

Post Capitalism, ready or not; for better or worse.

"We have since gone from a battle between capitalism and communism to something even more complex: a battle between differing forms of capitalism, in which the distinction between each is in the relative roles and responsibilities of public and private actors. "

No! We are waaay past that stage! We are engaged in a battle as to the shape of the successor world-system which replace the Capitalist world-system which is collapsing about us.

“We are in a struggle over the transition to a different world-system.

So let me try to resume my imagery of what it is we have to do to achieve a left political agenda. We have to define the long-time objectives in meaningful but still very general terms. We do not have, and cannot have, a precise idea of appropriate structures for the better world-system we want to construct. And we shouldn’t pretend that we have. That was one of the great historic virtues of Marx. He never claimed he could design what the “communist” world would actually look like in institutional terms.

As for the short run, we have to keep in the forefront of our minds that there is never anything but the lesser evil. And we have to be ready to participate at all moments in pursuing the lesser evil, as it is defined by the oppressed populations of the world. If we do not, we shall have the greater evil, and there always is a greater evil. Work in the short run is primarily defensive. It is to keep things from getting worse. It is to preserve gains already achieved. But, most important of all, we must remember that in the middle run, the next twenty-five years, we are living in a time of transition. In this transition, the issue is no longer whether or not we want to sustain a capitalist system, but what will replace it. And we have to work very hard, and very uncompromisingly, to push in the direction of a more democratic and more egalitarian world-system. We cannot construct such a system in this middle run. What we can do is to make possible the multiple political activities that will end up tilting the balance against a richer, better organized, and far less virtuous group—those who wish to maintain or even reinforce another variant of the hierarchical, polarizing systems we have had heretofore. Their system will not be capitalism; it would probably be worse.
We have to remember finally that the outcome of the struggle during the present chaotic transition is not in any fashion inevitable. It will be fashioned by the totality of the actions of everyone on all sides. We have only a fifty-fifty chance of prevailing. One can define fifty-fifty as unfortunately low. I define it as a great opportunity, which we should not fail to try to seize.”

From Immanuel Wallerstein's "Remembering Andre Gunder Frank While Thinking about the Future"

http://www.iwallerstein.com/wp-content/uploads/docs/AGFCONMR.PDF

from

http://www.iwallerstein.com/articles/

See also Wallerstein's "Utopistics: Historical Choices for the 21st Century" for a more extended discussion.

 

LOZER123

10:37 PM ET

March 1, 2012

Walmart does not count. They

Walmart does not count. They are the insurance that China will one day take over US. I cannot believe they let this co advertise chinese stuff to rob americans of jobs. They cannot give us any insurance that their intention is not destroying US, any insurance that they will not one day start poisoning our food, they cannot give any insurance that they will not start poisoning our kids' toys... oh wait...

 

FUNKEDUP143

1:59 PM ET

March 1, 2012

AS Above

I concur with both posters.

Corporations effectively run rings around disparities between nation states laws and regulations and we are seeing the phoenix rising on the ashes of the the current model.

The issue is solely accountability. Global power in the hands of about 6000 Davos men left unchecked is asking for global catostrophe. The interests of these men are seriously at odds with the other 99.99999% of humanity.

The issue I have is if one needs some form of global accountability we are left with these same people influencing, peddling, picking and policing themselves alla the global banking industry. We need some form of accountability that is held democratically by an organisation like the G20

 

ALEXBC

6:07 PM ET

March 1, 2012

Apple Isn't Bigger Than Poland

Apple's market cap is $507 billion - this is an estimate of the total value of all its assets, according to the market (which of course is prone to fluctuations much more severe than those exhibited by GDP figures). To compare it to Poland, you'd have to gauge the value of all assets in Poland, which would be substantially larger than its GDP. For comparison: US GDP is $15.3 trillion, but its total assets are worth more than a third of a quadrillion USD.

Remember, Poland is producing ~$500 billion in good and services PER YEAR (and growing: Poland is one of Europe's few truly growing economies). Apple is taking in $100+ billion in revenue annually, which in turn becomes about $30 billion profit. Poland is producing Apple's market cap every year and outpacing it substantially in terms of "revenue" (insofar as GDP can be compared to revenue) and even more so in terms of "profit."

BlackRock's assets under management are infinitely more valuable than China's forex reserves. Forex reserves are unusable internally and a huge liability overall, since they represent imbalanced currency policies.

 

KBC

8:54 PM ET

March 1, 2012

Neo communism

And the new proletariat will be white collar yuppies and not the blue collar working class hero. Only difference would be that corporations will pay politicians to rule.

 

JOHN MILTON XIV

3:35 AM ET

March 2, 2012

The Precariat

In the present moment of historical crisis and instability, the agency for change - for good or for ill - will likely be (already likely is) the "precariat"

See Guy Standing's "The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class"

Unlike the proletarians of old, the precariat includes amongst its ranks vast numbers of credentialed and educated professionals - the 99%

Put another way, the agent that will shape foundations of the post-Capitalist world will closer to that as described by Joseph Schumpeter than as found in Marx.

 

ALIFELIX

4:28 PM ET

March 9, 2012

Ever Changing

Like most things in life, the government needs to stay dynamic and deal with current issues and problems. To remain static is to become obsolete. The best form of capitalisim today might not be the optimal form in 20 years. The quote that really popped out of my i phone 5 "Striking the right balance between private and public power is the fundamental challenge of our age" is very true, but I don't think it is anymore important than it was a generation ago. One hopes that people still look and believe in the government to do right and that the government takes care to do their job correctly.

 

BARBARATODISH

12:17 AM ET

March 18, 2012

Americans: ego, drama buffoons

David Rothkopf Re Inside Power, Inc.:
Perhaps Americans deserve to all be outsourced until what they do best, namely whining, is captured as "entertainment" for the rest of the world by WALMART diversification to/with Disney, etc. An alternative scenario might be:
Most of the world has "retired". The world is made up of gated communities where most of the world are members of "leisure communities". They have "virtual" existences. The life simulators do their travelling, their entertainment, their sports, their eating, their drinking, their sex, EVERYTHING, FOR them. Those who control the virtual life simulators, the microlife managers, are involved in every detail, by scanning past, present and future continuously.
The micro managers only additional function, besides keeping the virtual life simulators running, is to keep the poorest and those banned from the gated communities, ie those who were politically incorrect, ie defiant,) struggling to physically survive. In other words the micro managers job is to continuously bully and provoke these "alien consciousnesses" as they are labelled, so they are depleted of physical energy, so that they have physical survival always as their priority.
A micro life manager learns about a new economy that the banned and the poorest have developed, where the banned and the poorest begin to self communicate, by reflecting on their experiences. These unique story experiences that they tell themselves enable them to enjoy and have limitless gratitude for the simplest and the least pleasures of life. They begin to be able to have stockpiles of food and other resources. They begin to become a free community where everyone values self communication where positive communication of gratitude for trauma and vulnerability becomes "currency". In other words all the hardships that they have awareness of, become, as a result of uniqueness reflection, priceless limitless EXPERIENCE currency.
The micro life managers want the limitlessness of this life as art communication and thus begins the bottom up teaching that results in realistic utopias. Instead of a final utopia however, realistic utopias develop into competitive utopias based on providing ever better and better communities based on gratitude for traumas, except now, instead of traumas inflicted upon people by others, there are only traumas that occur as a result of unintentional accidents and/or natural catastrophes. Greed, and crime is is gone because everyone values uniqueness and everyone now communicates competitive missions based on freedom from comparisons, ie people compete with self life art in itself, ie they compete with how grateful they are and how simply they can live. Each community tries to out do the other in self life as art stories. With each passing generation, everyone tries to compete to provide more gratitude for having more and more, simplicity in their life, more and more justice, more and more fairness and more and more uniqueness in their respective communities.
B. Todish, Founder, flyinginplace.com
http://www.flyinginplace.com

http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/263-arts/10492-celebritidom-is-a-viral-human-qinfectionq