Skip to content

The state is more powerful than ever the view that big business alone shapes the

Marxist Theory · 2026-05-13

Core Argument

The central thesis is that the fashionable view of globalisation as the triumph of multinational corporations over weakened states is not merely inaccurate but politically dangerous. John Pilger argues that western state power, far from retreating, has been accelerating and concentrating. The claim that governments are "servile lackeys to big business" obscures the real relationship: the state and corporate capital are fused, not opposed. The state does not surrender power to capital; it exercises power on behalf of capital, and in doing so becomes more centralised, more repressive, and less democratic. The illusion of a weakened state is itself a smokescreen thrown up by the designers of modern power.

This argument is a direct intervention against depoliticised anti-globalisation movements that reduce opposition to "ethical trading" and "codes of conduct". By misidentifying the enemy as corporations alone, these movements leave the state — the actual instrument of class rule — untouched and invite co-option by the very institutions they claim to oppose.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis draws on the Marxist theory of the state, particularly the understanding that the capitalist state is not a neutral arbiter above classes but the executive committee of the ruling class. Pilger does not use this language, but his argument rests on precisely this foundation: the state and monopoly capital are "interchangeable", not separate forces. The state's repressive functions intensify as its social functions are abandoned — a dynamic that echoes Engels' observation that the state is a product of class antagonism and, in its most developed form, a force for managing those antagonisms in the interests of the ruling class.

The article also engages with Lenin's theory of imperialism, particularly the fusion of state and monopoly capital, and the use of state power to secure markets, raw materials, and spheres of influence. The reference to Bretton Woods as the moment the American state "fashioned the present global economy" situates the argument within the Marxist tradition of understanding imperialism as a stage of capitalism, not a policy choice. The debt regime, structural adjustment, and the use of international institutions as instruments of US state power are all consistent with Lenin's analysis of finance capital and the export of capital.

Pilger's argument also implicitly challenges the "globalisation as inevitability" thesis common in both liberal and some left analyses. By insisting on the primacy of the state, he aligns with the Marxist view that globalisation is not a natural process but a political project driven by the most powerful capitalist states.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article was written in 2001, but its analysis is more relevant today than ever. The period since has seen an unprecedented expansion of state power in the name of national security, financial stability, and pandemic response. The 2008 financial crisis saw states bail out the very banks whose deregulation they had championed — a vivid demonstration that the state does not shrink from the economy but intervenes massively to preserve the system. The COVID-19 pandemic saw governments across the west impose lockdowns, direct production, and distribute trillions in state funds to corporations, while abandoning social protections for working people.

Geopolitically, the US state has become more overtly interventionist, not less. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the use of sanctions as a primary weapon of foreign policy, and the recent escalation of economic warfare against China all demonstrate the centrality of state power to the maintenance of US hegemony. The "decoupling" agenda and the weaponisation of the dollar system are not the actions of a state in retreat.

The rise of China as a rival imperialist power further complicates the "stateless globalisation" narrative. China's state-capitalist model, with its vast state-owned enterprises and party-controlled financial system, is the clearest refutation of the idea that globalisation means the end of the state. The European Union, far from being a post-national project, has become a vehicle for the consolidation of state power at a continental level, with its own monetary authority, border regime, and military ambitions.

The article's warning about co-option of "moderate" NGOs has been borne out. The World Bank and IMF now routinely partner with civil society organisations, and the language of "sustainable development" and "inclusive growth" has been absorbed into the mainstream. The climate movement, for all its radical rhetoric, has been largely channelled into demands for "green capitalism" and market-based solutions, leaving the state-corporate nexus untouched.

Where the Argument Continues

This article is a polemical intervention, not a systematic theoretical treatment. It does not develop a full analysis of the capitalist state's relationship to the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, the dynamics of overaccumulation, or the role of fictitious capital. These are taken as given rather than explored. The article also does not address the question of working-class strategy: if the state is the instrument of class rule, what does this mean for the struggle for socialism? The answer is implicit — the state must be smashed, not reformed — but it is not argued.

The argument continues in the broader Marxist tradition. Lenin's The State and Revolution is the essential companion text, providing the theoretical framework for understanding the state as a product of class antagonism. Trotsky's writings on the nature of the bourgeois state and the need for a revolutionary alternative are also directly relevant. Within the IDOM corpus, articles on the nature of the state under capitalism, the critique of reformism, and the analysis of imperialism would develop the themes Pilger raises. The Against the Stream podcast episodes on the state, globalisation, and the nature of the EU would provide further concrete analysis.

Connections

  • Lenin, The State and Revolution: The foundational text on the Marxist theory of the state.
  • Lenin, Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism: The analysis of finance capital and the fusion of state and monopoly.
  • Trotsky, The Transitional Program: The strategic implications of the state as an instrument of class rule.
  • Boris Kagarlitsky: The Russian Marxist cited by Pilger, whose work on the state and globalisation develops similar themes.
  • Ellen Meiksins Wood, Empire of Capital: A contemporary Marxist analysis of the relationship between state power and capitalist globalisation.
  • IDOM articles on the state, imperialism, and the critique of reformism: These develop the theoretical and strategic implications of Pilger's argument.

Key Quotes

  1. "Globalisation does not mean the impotence of the state, but the rejection by the state of its social functions in favour of repressive ones, irresponsibility on the part of governments and the ending of democratic freedoms."

  2. "The illusion of a weakened state is enticing: indeed, it is the smokescreen thrown up by the designers of modern, centralised power."

  3. "Big oil, like big weapons manufacturing and big agribusiness, has always been as one with the occupants of the White House and the US government; they are interchangeable. That is the American way."

  4. "Without government patronage, some of the greatest corporations would fail."

  5. "The danger of the 'moderate' view, which refuses to contemplate the sheer rapacity of western state power, is that it can be co-opted."

  6. "The WTO and its creators in Washington were delighted, for its legitimacy was not in question. Yet, this secretive, entirely undemocratic body is the most rapacious predator devised by the imperial powers."