The common assumption the Left (or the Tranzi) is that Corporations/Capitalists/Merchants rule the world.
The standard assumption among Reactionaries is that it is the “Priestly” or “Sage” caste.
It would be good to see a Reactionary and a Leftist debate this issue, for each side has a very different view of political reality.
I also don’t think capitalists are that powerful. Back in high school they taught me that international corporations are so powerful because they can operate international, meaning they escape the laws of Western nations. But as Moldbug says: independence? What independence? Independence granted by the international community? What does independence even mean if it has to be granted? What is Somaliland?
In reality there is no escaping the international community. Even a powerhouse like Royal Dutch Shell is supervised by the dozens of NGO’s, diplomats, state department agents and whatnot. The priests are in charge, the capitalists follow.
But it’s still good to assess the capitalists’ power level. Which seems to me best expressed in money. As we saw, the total budget US ($4 trillion) is narrowly defeated by the unison of the 25 biggest companies ($5 trillion). So the top 25 companies united are a good monetary opponent for the US — but even then the US military budget ($600 billion) alone tops company #1 Walmart ($480 billion).
… And beyond money there’s the priests-in-charge thing. Money is worth a lot, paper is worth nothing. Even property is worth nothing if you are not allowed to defend it.
Thus we see every company obediently saluting the Rainbow Flag.
Can anyone make an argument that the above is not the case?
Earlier, for some of our posts, we referenced David Priestland’s work; nevertheless, his main claim about who has power today is mistaken and he comes nowhere near to addressing some of the central arguments that reactionaries make.