Search
Generic filters
11 February 2025
,

Does the EU Have What it Takes to Counter American Plutocratic Power?

Our symposium ‘Musk, Power, and the EU’ has evolved in parallel with the inauguration of the new US administration and has been marked by numerous and unprecedented attacks on the European Union. Amid a flurry of announcements challenging the status quo - often with brutal disregard, even against traditional allies - the European Union, along with the way it exercises power, suddenly appears as the antithesis of the new America. Yet does the EU have what it takes to resist such an expansionist and plutocratic projection of power, which now threatens Europe’s security, lifestyle and overall existence?  Continue reading >>
0
10 February 2025
,

Corporate Power Beyond Market Power

Elon Musk’s corporate empire spans an impressive array of markets and industries. This empire includes SpaceX (and its subsidiary Starlink), Tesla, Neuralink, The Boring Company, X, xAI, and the Musk Foundation. These corporations are connected and interlinked, creating a cross-corporate power structure. Competition law, which focuses on market power in narrowly defined relevant markets – say, a market for booster rockets – has very limited reach to guard against the possible detrimental effects of such multifaceted concentrated power in the hands of a few on open democratic societies. Continue reading >>
0
24 January 2025

Countering the Tech Oligarchy

Seeing Elon Musk with Donald Trump at the latter’s inauguration, it would be tempting to single him out as a unique and overbearing threat to a range of EU interests, such as its online environment, election integrity and regulatory capacity. But that would be to miss the point of a larger trend; what Joe Biden has termed the “tech-industrial complex” is not limited to the US. It, and an associated worldwide oligarchy, is converging with ascendant ultra-nationalist political agendas to pose wide-ranging challenges. Continue reading >>
0
24 January 2025

The US Supreme Court and Plutocracy

Populist authoritarianism is a global phenomenon. However, the US is the only so-called consolidated democracy where its ascent has been eased by the systematic dismantling of legal limits on campaign donations. US elections are now not only the world’s most costly, but they are also directly subject to the inordinate influence of wealthy individuals and corporations. The Supreme Court of the United States’ 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling has paved the way for the emergence of so-called “super” PACS (political action committees) that, while formally barred from coordinating with candidates or parties, can accept unlimited corporate contributions. Continue reading >>
24 January 2025

One Step Further Towards Global Plutocracy

On his first day in office, US President Donald Trump signed dozens of Executive Orders on various issues. Among those receiving little public attention was the announcement of the US withdrawal from the OECD project on reforming global corporate taxation. This step, although expected, is a major setback for the only global plan aimed at increasing economic fairness that has any real chance of success. Continue reading >>
0
23 January 2025
,

Democracy or Domination

The urgency of Europe’s creep towards plutocracy calls for a similarly urgent response. Competition law, given its history and potential as a tool of anti-domination, is a natural fit to protect and revitalise democracy in Europe from the threats posed by excessive concentrations of private power. For it to be effective for that purpose, competition scholars must clearly articulate which democratic values, like non-domination, competition law should seek to pursue, and clear-mindedly design mechanisms through which to channel them. Continue reading >>
0
21 January 2025

Zuckerberg’s Strategy

On January 7, 2025, and in the days following, the founder and CEO of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg, made a series of statements that framed Meta's previous and future content policy with an evidently strategic intention. The change of content moderation policy, as described in three comprehensive points in his personal announcement on his own platforms, may even sound reasonable, as discussed below. However, the reasoning and the framing of these changes appear to show that Meta is up to something entirely different from just further optimizing its curation of content on its platforms. Continue reading >>
20 January 2025

Plutocracy 2025

When thinking about this current moment in time when major currents of political and economic power seem to flow into each other in exceptional and perhaps unparalleled ways, it might be useful to tease out in some more detail how exactly plutocracy 2025 differs from the entanglements of economic and business power that have come before. Here is one difference that seems particularly striking. Plutocracy in 2025, unlike its typical predecessors,  is not really engineered in discrete fashion behind the scenes by deep-rooted dynasties of political and economic life. Instead, it is a full-frontal brash attack right on the public stage. Continue reading >>
19 January 2025

Protecting Democracy in the Digital Era

At the dawn of 2025, liberal democracy is faced with a considerable challenge: Big Tech bosses appear to leverage their market power for far-reaching political influence, without any democratic legitimisation to do so. As someone working on issues of market power in the digital economy, one cannot help but wonder: shouldn’t competition law be able to contain (some of) this unseeming wielding of market power? Continue reading >>
0
17 January 2025

Musk, Techbrocracy, and Free Speech

In this blogpost, I situate and address Musk’s position within the broader EU debate on freedom of expression. The purpose of this symposium is to elucidate aspects that make Musk, his influence, and his provocations to the EU legal order, problematic under EU law, and, should we consider his influence as unwanted, harmful or illegal, whether EU law can provide answers to it. This post centres on three points: (i) Musk’s changes to X’s content moderation process, (ii) Musk’s usage of X to amplify select political candidates and (iii) Musk’s ownership of Starlink. It ends with a note on how this fits in a grander theme, which has been dubbed by commentators such as Paul Bernal as the ‘techbrocracy’. Continue reading >>
Go to Top