Neo-Feudalism

Basic Outline of the Social Structures in the 21st Century

The concept of neo-feudalism has gained significant attention in recent years as a framework for understanding the evolving dynamics and trajectories of modern society.

This essay examines the rise of neo-feudalism and explores the implications of this emerging social structure. The analysis focuses on the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few elites, the erosion of social mobility, and the growing influence of the tech industry and the intellectual elite. The essay concludes by considering the potential consequences of neo-feudalism for democracy, social justice, and the future of capitalism.

Introduction:

The term "neo-feudalism" has been used to describe a variety of social and economic systems that share certain characteristics with traditional feudalism, such as the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few elites and the existence of distinct social classes with limited mobility. In the context of neo-feudalism, these elites often include heads of large multinational corporations, financial institutions, contractors, and tech giants, all who wield significant influence over the economy and are deeply intertwined with governance and the national and international level.

Neo-feudalism grows out of capitalism.

Firstly, concentration of capital, particularly finance, has reached such a point where, such that financiers become the de facto dominant class of society, both within the economy and politically. In a sense, neo-feudalism is the seizure of the state by a cabal of financial elites, money changers, and client-contractors, along with the elevation of the bureaucracy and agents of social management. The advent of neo-feudalism coincides with an increasing importance of rents, fees, interest, subscription payments, and the like, and capturing markets thereof, rather than commodity exchange on the open market and private ownership of even small petty property.

The Rise of Neo-Feudalism:

The rise of neo-feudalism is often linked to the increasing integration of technology into our daily lives, particularly the growth of artificial intelligence and automation. These technologies have the potential to revolutionize labor and production, leading to a scenario where a large portion of the population is rendered superfluous (“useless eater”). This will exacerbate the existing disparities in wealth and power, as the control over these technologies remains concentrated in the hands of a few.

Moreover, the post-Cold War era has seen the emergence of a new form of socialism, characterized by regulated market economies supported by a paternalistic one-party government, one also promoting a culture of national pride and personal ambition.

While this model might seem amazing compared to the degenerated state of affairs in the modern West, it is essential to recognize its flaws. The concentration of power in the hands of a single party can lead to a lack of accountability and transparency, hindering the development of a truly free and equitable society.

Yet, compared to a similar or worse inequality and political corruption of the West combined with its prevalent cultural rot, the ‘Marxist’ ‘Socialist’ neo-feudalism in places like the Soviet Union and modern China may be the less worse variety.

If power for its own sake is the rule for the emerging neo-feudalism (and the investment of surplus into the means of control takes precedent over investment into the means of production), and the only difference is culture, competency, and ideological justifications, it’s crucial to focus on these ‘marginal’ cultural and political issues. Thus, one might arrive at a form of neo-feudalism that is the least bad (while preserving the best good).

The Concentration of Power and Wealth:

One of the key characteristics of neo-feudalism is the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few elites. This concentration is often facilitated by the increasing integration of technology into our daily lives, particularly the growth of artificial intelligence and automation. As these technologies revolutionize labor and production, they have the potential to render a large portion of the population superfluous, exacerbating the existing disparities in wealth and power.

These same technologies, as they are integrated further into the lives of all people, enable the potential for a ruling class to exert far greater control compared to what was possible in the past.

The erosion of social mobility is another key aspect of neo-feudalism. As the concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few elites becomes more entrenched, the opportunities for upward mobility for the majority of the population become increasingly limited. This can lead to a situation where social class becomes increasingly determined by birth, rather than by merit or effort, and begins to determine one’s life and daily possibilities to an even greater degree.

Kotkin on Neo-Feudalism

Joel Kotkin, an author and scholar, has written extensively about the rise of neo-feudalism. He argues that the current socio-economic system is characterized by a concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few elites, similar to the feudal systems of medieval Europe. Kotkin identifies two classes struggling to serve the ascendant classes: the yeomanry and the new serfs. The yeomanry represents the middle class (middle managers, small business, media, bureaucracy, etc), while the serfs are those who have little hope of achieving property ownership or upward mobility.

The idea of neo-feudalism has also been linked to the growing influence of the "clerisy," a term coined by Kotkin to describe the intellectual elite found across government, the media, universities, and the professions. This group, which Kotkin argues is detached from the realities of the working and middle classes, has been compared to the clergy of medieval times, who held significant power and influence over the masses.

The Consequences of Neo-Feudalism:

The rise of neo-feudalism has significant implications for democracy, justice, and the future of capitalism. The concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few elites can lead to a situation where the majority of the population has little say in the decisions that affect their lives and little means to affect change through normal, legal means.

Neo-feudal elites necessarily undermine the basic principles of democracy, enact a system where the interests of the few are prioritized over the basic needs of the many. The erosion of social mobility can also have significant consequences for social justice. If opportunities for upward mobility become increasingly limited, it can lead to a situation where social class becomes increasingly determined by birth, rather than by merit or effort. This can perpetuate existing inequalities and undermine the basic principles of fairness and equality. This stagnation and inequality can also lead to a strong degree of dysfunction and social disorder, as people people increasingly restless.

The growing influence of the tech industry and the intellectual elite can also have significant consequences for the future of capitalism. If a small elite controls the means of production and the lives of the majority, it can lead to a situation where the benefits of economic growth are not shared by all members of society. Ironically, the modern elite governs, in its own words, to promote equality. Particularly in the West, neo-feudalism promotes various ‘social justice’ causes like Black Lives Matter and LGBTQP+ while nonetheless constructing a world where everyone is less free and more powerless.

Conclusion:

The rise of neo-feudalism represents a significant challenge to the principles of democracy, social justice, and the future of humanity. The concentration of power and wealth in the hands of a few elites, the erosion of social mobility, and the growing influence of the tech industry and the intellectual elite are key characteristics of this emerging social structure.

As we navigate the challenges of the 21st century, it is essential that we remain vigilant and critical, questioning the assumptions and narratives that underpin our understanding of the world. By accurately understanding modern power dynamics and economies trajectories, we’re better positioned to plan our own strategies for going forward.

If you enjoy the essay, you might also enjoy this recent youtube video on anarcho-tyranny.