Recall Sheldon Wolin’s concept of managed democracy, presented in his landmark 2008 book Democracy, Inc. There, he describes a political system where democratic institutions exist in appearance but are in reality controlled and manipulated by corporate-state interests to maintain elite power and privilege. Wolin argues that this system suppresses genuine democratic engagement, reducing citizens to passive spectators—and transforms those who seek democratic means and ends as enemies. Inverted totalitarianism, the situation of managed democracy, contrasts with classical totalitarian regimes by lacking a charismatic leader and pseudo-nationalist rhetoric; it is instead a state of unfreedom secured by entrenched administrative and bureaucratic control. Inverted totalitarianism functions through the expansion of corporate state power, the suppression of democratic accountability, and the use of media and spectacle to pacify the public while maintaining the illusion of democracy.
US Vice-President, JD Vance, speaking at the Munich Security Conference on Friday, February 14, launched into brutal critique of the authoritarian character of the European superstate, calling out the leaders of its member states for suppressing free speech, failing to halt illegal migration, and thwarting the democratic desire of its respective citizens. Predictably, progressive Democrats were horrified. The Trump-Vance administration’s vision of popular democratic republican governance and its commitment to liberal values are antithetical to the Democrat’s vision of a global capitalist order governed by transnational corporations via elite-controlled administrative machinery and technocratic control. The thesis-antithesis dynamic in which the West finds itself is republicanism on the one hand, and empire on the other.
The idea of a German-dominated Europe, now a reality on the Eurasian landmass, is not new. During the Nazi era, the concept of a Greater Germanic Reich envisioned a centralized European superstate under German leadership, with big banks and corporations at its back, integrating neighboring countries into a political-economic system designed to serve expansionist and militaristic goals. In essence, German fascism sought a structured reordering of Europe under corporatist principles. Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, German corporatism is today is being entrenched by transnational corporate actors. The Democratic Party, and coopted elements of the Republican Party, especially in the neoconservative agenda, a rebranded Cold War progressivism, now on the run, have for decades played a key role in that entrenchment.
A key part of Hitler’s vision was the creation of a pan-European military force, with Germany at the helm, to extend its reach eastward. This ambition materialized in Operation Barbarossa in 1941—the invasion of the Soviet Union—designed to extend corporatist-style capitalism into Eastern Europe. The idea was to transform the Eurasian landmass into a hierarchical order where Germany controlled economic, military, and political affairs. Today we see the German fascist vision materializing in a new form. NATO’s goal of allocating two percent of GDP to military spending, set in 2014, remained unmet by many European members for years. We now see significant progress in meeting that goal; members of the European superstate have increased their military budgets amid warmongering-engendered fears of new conflicts and growing uncertainty over the US’s commitment to global military leadership under Trump. Germany’s substantial investment in its military, known as the Sondervermögen, has propelled the country into the top five global spenders on military assets and readiness, according to data released this week by the International Institute for Strategic Studies.
Readers should remember that the Nazi regime did not rise in a vacuum. The role of Western banks and corporations in supporting German and Italian fascism is well documented. Financial giants—including JPMorgan Chase and other major banking institutions—saw fascism as a strategic counter to the populist movements of the early twentieth century. Whether socialist, libertarian, or nationalist, these democratic forces were a threat to the immense financial and political power of capitalist elites. Rhetoric aside, the oligarchy portrayed democracy as a threat to economic stability, favoring a system in which an authoritarian corporate state would manage markets and suppress dissent. This was thus not merely about ideology but about the consolidation of a corporate-state alliance, replacing democratic accountability with centralized economic and political and technocratic control. The suppression of political opposition, censorship, and surveillance were all tools to entrench this new order.
Following World War II, many of these same corporate and financial interests played a key role in shaping the new European order. The formation of the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957, which later evolved into the European Union (EU), was marketed as a peace project. However, its deeper function mirrored the Greater Germanic Reich vision—creating a centralized, technocratic superstate. Germany, through its economic dominance rather than direct military conquest, emerged as the controlling power within the EU. The European Central Bank (ECB), headquartered in Frankfurt, and the EU’s strict economic regulations have effectively bound weaker member states into a structure where Germany exerts disproportionate influence. German fascism regrouped and realized its dream by apparently different means. But it is the same nightmare.
In light of this history, it is no surprise that modern European leaders—now fully embedded in a corporatist paradigm—are reviving the idea of a pan-European military force, set to emerge from the moribund NATO alliance emplaced in 1949 to counter the now-defunct Soviet Union. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s recent call for such a force, amid an ongoing war with Russia, reflects the logical next step in the integrationist agenda. And where did he make this call? February 15 at the same Munich conference that hosted Vance the day before. The lukewarm reception of Vance by corporate state elites contrasted sharply with a standing ovation Zelensky received. Democrats today are busy on social media spinning Zelensky’s vision of a pan-European military establishment over against the Trump-Vance vision of a peaceful international order.
Just as in the 1930s and 1940s, the primary target of this militarization is Russia, the go-to boogeyman man of the West. And the strategic objective remains the same: eastward expansion, territorial and economic control over Eastern Europe, and the containment or dismantling of the Russian specter. Thus, the hostility expressed towards JD Vance’s speech criticizing the militaristic and technocratic policies of the European elite was entirely predictable, highlighting the divide between those who seek centralized control over the world’s populations and those advocating for national sovereignty and democratic governance. These two visions of the future order of things could not be clearer. Technocracy is not democracy no matter how often Democrats repeat their Orwellian euphemisms; breaking the back of legacy media by a liberated global social media network has made it difficult if not impossible for Democrats to fool most of the people all the time. Vance told European elites this much to their faces.
For a deeper understanding of this, readers may find helpful yesterday’s essay History as Ideology: The Myth that the Democrats Became the Party of Lincoln. There, I show how the Democratic Party has historically aligned with transnational capitalist interests, favoring corporate-state alliances and globalist policies. I explain how progressivism and transnationalism have consistently worked hand-in-hand to undermine national sovereignty in favor of a managed global order run by the transnational oligarchy. Conversely, the Republican Party, its underlying DNA populist and nationalist, remains the party of democratic republicanism. Indeed, today, under Donald Trump and JD Vance, the party is experiencing a return to and revitalization of its anti-corporate-state roots. That Democrats claim Lincoln is yet another instantiation of Orwellian inversion.
The centralization of power in Europe—whether through economic control, corporate influence, or military integration—has always carried the risk of expansionist conflict. The historical trajectory from the Greater Germanic Reich to the European Union demonstrates a continuity in corporatist ambition, repackaged under different ideological banners. The modern push for a pan-European military force under German leadership is therefore a dangerous step toward escalation, particularly in its confrontation with Russia, a confrontation the United States using previous administrations, involving deep state forces, provoked by capturing the Ukraine government to use as a proxy for its imperial desire. The fact that leaders across Europe applaud this trajectory while suppressing dissenting voices should be a cause for great concern and helping Americans and Europeans alike grasp the ends the power elite seek. If history has taught us anything, it is that technocratic empire inevitably leads to war, suppression of individual liberties, and the destruction of national sovereignty.
For his part, Zelensky is a willing agent of the power elite. Imposing martial law, Zelensky banned opposition parties, alleging ties to Russia, and seized their assets. Zelensky canceled elections, as well. It is no exaggeration to say that Ukraine has become an authoritarian state. Indeed, it is even a throwback to the classical totalitarian regime, replete with a charismatic leader and paramilitary shock troops. This is what elites in Munich stood for and applauded. In Zelensky, they have a leader who manifests imperial desire. In Vance, they saw a vision that, if manifested, negates that desire.
What was excusable as ignorance in the past is inexcusable now. The question is: Will people wake up before it’s too late? Will we have republican governments in an international order or a pan-European empire governed by the transnational corporation? Crucial to the awakening is keeping progressive Democrats away from power so they cannot undo the progress the populist forces have made, while at the same time supporting nationalist movements across the various European states.
This is the significance of Vance’s speech in Munich. And Zelensky’s speech provides the perfect contrast to raise awareness of the forces facing those who believe in democracy, liberty, and world peace. To be sure, changing the terms of the NATO alliance provides the European superstate their opportunity to establish a pan-European military apparatus with which to threaten Russia’s security. Or at least to pursue Cold War 2.0. But, facing a sovereign debt crisis thanks to the reckless spending by the progressive establishment, the United States can no longer afford to underwrite Europe’s security (which should start by securing borders and deporting the millions of aliens invaders that have illegally crossed them) by stuffing money we don’t have into the ravenous maw of the military-industrial complex. NATO long ago became a scheme to feed that beast—the same beast that frightens the people about the threat posed by Russia.
The corporatists and warmongers tell their populations that populist-nationalist politics represents fascism, but this is an Orwellian inversion designed by corporates elites, pushed out by their propagandists, to confuse the masses. They make Putin out to be Hitler because they don’t want the masses to see who the ghost of Hitler actually haunts. As Wolin told us, totalitarianism is today inverted, manipulating the masses through managed democracy. The reality is the opposite of what is projected. Corporate-state propaganda is a camera obscura. German fascism was never populist in character, anyway. Its character was always corporate capitalist and imperial, and what went under the name National Socialism was a capitalist cabal obsessed with suppressing popular democratic forces. German fascism did not seek a republican order, but instead empire—and empire is where civilizations go to die.
The suppression of speech critical of progressive and social democratic policies and the globalist agenda, and the popular political resistance that takes up this criticism, tells us that the corporatist-style arrangements that have marked the European superstate are well into their authoritarian phase. Vance spoke past the elites to tell the people that Trump is on their side. In so many words, Vance told the world that it is witnessing Fascism 2.0, that the menace of totalitarianism is no longer supposition, and that it’s populist-nationalism that can save the world from it.
freedom and reason 