Uncertainties cause insecurities. And insecurities encourage authoritarianism. In the first stage, it seems that there will be a congruence between the economic and power orientations of the White House and the court of business magnates who support it: the Magnificent Seven (The Magnificent Seven) of the new technological imperialism (Meta, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Nvidia, Amazon, Tesla).
However, it is not out of the question that in the near future contradictions will arise between these companies and between some of them and the new US government. Given their economic power, they could be tempted to act on their own, as global geostrategic political actors. A historical reference to remember is the East India Company.
The Company, as it was commonly known, was founded in 1600 by a group of English investors who, with a Royal Charter from the Crown (Elizabeth I, James I), obtained a monopoly on trade with the "East Indies" (South and Southeast Asia). These were the times of musical baroque, the rise of opera (Monteverdi) and the founding of the first stock market and the first central bank in Amsterdam.
After getting rid of the Portuguese and Dutch dominance in the area, and later of the French, the Company was an example of both a commercial monopoly (until 1813) in spices, pepper, opium, etc., and of a global expansionism and of a state within a state that exercised "private government" (4). It had its own army, established alliances, declared war, had factories, collected and administered taxes, had its own personnel for civil and criminal jurisdictional functions, implemented repressive policies against local opponents, etc. This situation, which was also lucrative for the Crown, lasted until some clashes with the natives (conflict of the Sipais, 1857-1858) caused the Crown to officially declare India as a British colony (1858) until the disappearance of the Company (1874).
Today we are entering a new landscape that already includes some dystopian moments – the assault on the Capitol (January 2021), cyber-information data on citizens, spying without judicial authorization, hidden agendas of security agencies, division of the map of the planet into imperial zones of influence.
Lately, emphasis has been placed on the parallel between the speeches at the end of the presidency of Eisenhower (1961) and Biden (2025), warning of the growing weight of economic oligarchies that threaten democracy, the rule of law and human rights. However, current events present elements that multiply the threat: disinformation policy (social networks, fake news), populism, minimization of state interventionism, low taxes, free development of artificial intelligence, etc.
The new American oligarchy linked to the Magnificent Seven no longer wants to secure policies that are in line with its interests, but to decide the direction of these policies. The accumulation of capital has been transformed into the accumulation of collective decision-making power on an unprecedented scale. It would be a mistake to rely only on potential disputes between the various actors in today's technological imperialism.
The world is becoming more uncertain, turbulent, unequal, insecure and multi-imperial. Musk is a symptom of the trends of the times. For the moment, he and the Magnificent Seven do not need to form private armies like the East India Company had. They have the army led by Trump. But although it may seem like a science fiction scenario, the formation of private technological armies is not an out-of-the-box scenario. In fact, private armies are nothing new (Wagner, warlords, drug cartels, arms dealers and other lucrative businesses, etc.).
We know from the times of classical Greece and Rome that oligarchies and populist movements act against civil liberties. Today we are witnessing a growing authoritarianism in the name of freedom in the United States and Europe. The best remedies were provided by the liberal revolutions: politically guaranteed rights and liberties, separation of powers, free press, democratic culture, rule of law.
It is necessary to create and strengthen citizen pressure and, above all, institutional counterweights at both the state and international levels. Institutions are the key to civilizing the impulses of authoritarianism and markets.
This is a challenge for a European Union that has missed the global players' train by not having its own defence policy, army and foreign policy. It is also weakened in the technological field compared to the USA and China. There would be a major shake-up, for example a much more solid Union built at several speeds. But this requires leadership that the EU has not had for more than three decades. The EU has been a success but today it is a lethargic reality overtaken by the facts. It is necessary to emerge from the decline.
