Trump and Technofeudalism: Unpacking Big Tech's Expanding Power and Influence

Inauguration events often set the tone for a new administration, and Donald Trump’s inauguration was no exception. This pivotal moment revealed key insights into the relationship between the tech industry and the U.S. government, highlighting the growing influence of Big Tech in contemporary politics.

Several aspects of Donald Trump’s inauguration stand out. For example, his imperialist-tinged threats, such as the idea of reclaiming the Panama Canal if the country did not reduce the fees for U.S. ships, or his intention to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America. One could also discuss his plans to launch what he himself called the “largest deportation effort” in U.S. history, targeting between 15 and 20 million people living illegally in the country, starting with those he described as “criminals.”

However, this article will focus on the staging of his inauguration, where Trump placed the billionaire tech moguls ahead of the members of his own cabinet. During the ceremony in the Capitol Rotunda, tech industry leaders such as:

Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta
Tim Cook, CEO of Apple
Sundar Pichai, CEO of Google
Jeff Bezos, founder of Amazon
Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla

gathered to symbolize the ever-growing relationship between the tech industry and the new president of the United States.

The growing influence of large tech companies, often referred to as Big Tech, is reminiscent of the feudal lords of medieval Europe. This new system has been termed technofeudalism.

In classical feudalism, the social structure was strictly hierarchical, with lords who owned the land and serfs or peasants who worked for them in exchange for protection and a portion of the production. In the contemporary version of the 21st century, it is the large corporations that control essential digital territories: data and online platforms, which have become fundamental pillars of the current economy and society. In this new model, users of these technologies resemble the serfs of the past, depending on these platforms to perform daily activities ranging from communication and consumption to work and entertainment.

These companies exert an influence over our behaviors and decisions in ways that are not always as voluntary as they may seem. Just as feudal lords controlled land and labor, big tech companies hold disproportionate power over data and access to digital spaces.

This monopoly of power mirrors the feudal structure of the past, where a small elite controls the fundamental resources upon which the majority of the population depends.

It is important to note that the flow of data has surpassed that of physical goods in its contribution to the global GDP. The rise of technofeudalism compels us to critically reflect on the power of large tech companies in our lives, especially as we enter an era dominated by artificial intelligence.

While this “new” economic system affects everyone, there is a significant difference between the West and what could be referred to as the Rest. In this sense, it can be argued that, among those who believe colonialism is a thing of the past and those who think it is still ongoing, there is a third perspective—or a variation of the second—that claims that colonialism not only persists, but is currently transforming into its most powerful form yet: data colonialism.

Data colonialism does not involve the literal appropriation of land, but rather the absolute control over resources of any kind through digital means. Today, what is being appropriated is the social life of human beings. The flow and texture of individual lives are being captured by corporations—and, at times, also by governments. This appropriation takes the form of data, which generates economic value that primarily benefits the corporations.

Knowledge is power, and the amount of information that external institutions have about us is increasing exponentially.

With the COVID-19 pandemic, the scale and ubiquity of data colonialism grew significantly. As the health crisis expanded, the need to monitor how the disease spread globally intensified, and while people remained in lockdown, many more processes migrated to digital platforms. With the rise of digital transformation, the reach of data colonialism also expanded.

The dispossession of data becomes particularly tangible when observing how these same data are being utilized by artificial intelligence technologies implemented by the governments of the digital age. In fact, it can be easy not to perceive data colonialism as part of our lives. Data and algorithms often operate without any direct consent or permission, in the background of our daily routines.

We often accept this dynamic because companies assure us that their goal is to make our lives easier, more connected, and organized. Additionally, we may find ourselves trapped in these extractive systems because there are no other alternatives or, even, because they prove useful to us. For all these reasons, imagining an alternative to the colonial framework surrounding us can indeed be a real challenge.

This new political form has been termed authoritarian technocracy, but it is a deeply Western perspective. For what is known as the Rest, that is, those who do not belong to the West, colonial dominance has always been accompanied by a division and hierarchy between those considered human and, therefore, fit to enjoy the benefits of democracy, and those who have never had access to it due to not being “prepared” for it. In other words, democracy for us (understood from a racial perspective) and authoritarianism for the rest.

Technofeudalism provides a framework to understand the concentration of economic and technological power in the hands of a few giant corporations. As we move into the 21st century, it is essential to maintain an open and critical dialogue about the role of Big Tech in our society. It is necessary to question and analyze its influence to ensure that the technological future is inclusive and not marked by the colonial will to accumulate resources from indigenous populations, as could be the case with Iran.