In my thesis I will argue that postmodern TNC’s are a force of creating and maintaining a durable stability, while modern TNC’s are ultimately a force of destruction. I use the year 1989 as a symbolic watershed in the role and identity of TNC’s, i.e. between modern and postmodern, because the end of the cold war opened up the path of not aligning the TNC’s identity to one-dimensional interests (protecting capitalism), and new technologies made possible a multidimensional structure of production. In 2007 modern and post-modern TNC’s coexist (as do pre-modern TNC’s: pirates, the Caravan-merchants of the
I will make use of two illustrative, ideal-typical cases: Mobutu’s repressive regime in
However, in this period, states backed and promoted them not only to obtain wealth, but to gain influence in other countries and shield them from ideology. The Belgian-American protection
Force of Stability
The rise of the postmodern comes with the rise of the information age after 1989. This is especially true for the post-modern TNC: not only did better computers, mobile phones, full satellite coverage and the internet make it possible for corporations to fundamentally alter and improve production, logistics, and distribution, a large chunk of post-modern TNC’s make this technology and logistics their business. After 1989, every aspect of the TNC became increasingly fluid and mobile, and the successful companies recognized this in time. There are three things relevant here: first, these possibilities created a very pragmatic identity for the TNC-elites as well as for the workforce: you could be anything, as long as you increased the profit of the company. In the long 19th century, as a capitalist, you had to be lot more: white, rich, male, liberal, and Christian (admittedly the requirements for a worker were more democratic than they are now: you had to be poor, now you have to be educated.). This led to a less exclusive system. This dualism might still hold up for the existing modern TNC’s, for the post-modern TNC the situation is different.[3] The dualism between worker and boss increasingly disappears: even in manufacturing, there are more and more functions that share boss and worker qualities. This leads into the second development: structures become more elaborate and flexible. In a modern company hire and fire means insecurity for the labour force; in a postmodern TNC, flexible contracts means hierarchies don’t have time to crystallize and subordination is temporary and relative. This is connected with the third change: because postmodern TNC’s need other TNC’s to function, industries cluster, so that there is more place for skilled and unskilled labour, and ideas diffuse more easily. Post-modern companies are more horizontal and interdependent because of this.
But why are they, in contrast to the modern TNC, a force of stability? ‘The trouble is,’ to speak with
In contrast, a postmodern TNC is not seen as an alien invasion, because it integrates - and creates - sustainable economies. It might subcontract a local factory, instead of building their own, and let another local company do their logistics, marketing, et cetera. In this way, the civil societies of different countries get involved, capital circulates, and mutual interest sustains itself. This creates common values that transcend one-dimensional interests. Post-modern capitalism brings together people, instead of dividing them. Leaders with a geopolitical problem are learning this as well: bringing in post-modern TNC’s is a better insurance policy, than having a disloyal modern TNC.
For instance, Taiwan - a rock in the sea devoid of natural resources - invited US companies in, for political reasons as well as economic: when US interest were aligned with that of the Republic of China (Taiwan), a Chinese mainland communist annexation could be averted. To get and keep the US protection, they had to industrialize, first by massive manufacturing (which at that point was still modern), and then by moving into high-tech(Walker 2007); as argued above, high-tech is the basis of the post-modern TNC, and the main force in shaping long term shared interest, by ‘gluing’ identities with shared ideas about business, life, and desires. In
Clendenin, M. (2007). Apple iPhone fuels speculation on design wins.
Cooper, R. (2004). The Breaking of Nations. London, Atlantic Books.
Schwartz, H. M. (2000). States versus Markets. The Emergence of a Global Economy. New York, Palgrave.
Walker, R. (2007). Economic Geography of the Industrial World, University of Berkely, California.
Witte, L. d. (2001). The assasination of Lumumba, Verso.
[1] Mobutu did not have to financially squeeze the Congolese people with taxes, which would have forced him to improve the country, but could instead buy loyalty with western money.
[2] In
[3] CEO’s are now Asian, Hispanic, Black and Caucasian; male and female; atheist, Muslim, Buddhist et cetera. Some CEO’s make it their core business (next to making profit) to improve social conditions or the environment; not just damage control, but pro-active policies. These social entrepreneurs are, of course, still a minority.