The world is shifting from a post-WWII "bundled" phase of globalization to an "unbundled" phase of populism. This decoupling, driven by anger at elite exploitation, is a predictable historical cycle, much like the recurring bundling and unbundling of media services.
Related Insights
The dynamic between tech and government is not a simple decline but a cycle of alignment (post-WWII), hostility (2000s-2010s), and a recent return to collaboration. This "back to the future" trend is driven by geopolitical needs and cultural shifts, suggesting the current alignment is a return to a historical norm.
The current environment mirrors the late 19th century's first wave of globalization. Then, as now, rapid technological change concentrated wealth, fueling populism and nationalism that ultimately led to global conflict in 1914. We risk 'sleepwalking' into a similar catastrophe.
The centralizing technologies of the 20th century (mass media, mass production) are being superseded by decentralizing ones (internet, crypto). This is causing history to "run in reverse," with modern events mirroring 19th-century patterns like the rise of robber baron-like figures and the fracturing of empires.
The Western belief that free trade would cause authoritarian states like China to liberalize has proven false. Instead, this policy created a powerful manufacturing competitor whose interests diverge from the West's. The current era of deglobalization is an unwinding of this flawed foundational premise of the post-war order.
The appeal of a populist leader lies in their rejection of traditional political norms. When the electorate feels betrayed by the established "political class," they gravitate toward figures whose rhetoric is a deliberate and stark contrast, signaling they are an outsider.
The era of economic-led globalization is over. In the new world order, geopolitical interests are the primary driver of international relations. Economic instruments like tariffs and export restrictions are now used as levers to assert national interests, a fundamental shift from the US-centric view where the economy traditionally took the lead.
Extreme inequality and inflation, driven by debt and money printing, create widespread frustration. This frustration "summons" populist figures like Trump, who are seen as chaos agents to disrupt a rigged system, rather than being the root cause of the political anger themselves.
The traditional relationship where economic performance dictated political outcomes has flipped. Now, political priorities like tariff policies, reshoring, and populist movements are the primary drivers of economic trends, creating a more unpredictable environment for investors.
The period from 1870-1914 mirrors today's super cycle of innovation, wealth concentration, inequality, populism, nationalism, and geopolitical rivalry. This makes it a more relevant historical parallel for understanding current risks than the recent era of hyper-globalization.
The psychological engine of populism is the zero-sum fallacy. It frames every issue—trade deficits, immigration, university admissions—as a win-lose scenario. This narrative, where one group's success must come at another's expense, fosters the protectionist and resentful attitudes that populist leaders exploit.
