Re: <nettime> Simon Tisdall: Trump and Putin are carrying out a pincer movement

[Brian Holmes via nettime-l <nettime-l@lists.nettime.org>]

Michael Benson quoted Tom Tugendhat:

"More critically, SpaceX now controls enough spectrum to offer
commercial-grade mobile services globally — and the company is positioning
itself to replace every other mobile operator with a service that operates
entirely beyond national jurisdiction."

And how about private global money? Because that too is happening under
fascist cover. Just check everything unfolding around World Liberty
Financial. In the same way that Musk has built his launching pads with
federal contract money, the new currency regime will be backed up during
its formative years by US Treasury bonds. Silicon Valley is using
authoritarianism to leapfrog towards its own unaltered libertarian goals.

As national societies go fascist through fear of the future, oligarchs of
all stripes are setting up the conditions for a perfectly stateless
science-fiction economy that battens on the remains of 20th century
popular emancipation. Why bother with seasteading? The world is gonna be
their oyster bed. For twenty or thirty years at least, until the oceans
boil...

It's increasingly difficult to see how all this will end well.

On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 3:20 AM Michael Benson via nettime-l <
nettime-l@lists.nettime.org> wrote:

> Regarding that Guardian piece, I don't deny certain parallels, certainly,
> but IMO Tisdall's analogy is a bit overstrained, because the EU is hardly
> in the same position as Poland was in August 1939. On the other hand, the
> prospect of a fall of dominoes across the continent, not excluding the UK,
> is very worrisome. The right in the UK, France and Germany are all
> alarmingly popular. And that in turn could very well set the stage for some
> very disturbing eventualities. So on the whole Tisdall's warning is
> well-timed.
>
> One other note on Tisdall, though. He writes that Putin will not let go of
> Ukraine. But Putin hardly holds Ukraine. He holds 19%, at the cost of
> hundreds to thousands of casualties daily. Meanwhile currently Ukraine is
> patiently and methodically destroying Russia's refining capacity. So the
> game is very fluid, and we'll see who is forced to let go of
> what, eventually.
>
> But to change the subject, did anybody notice this disturbing opinion piece
> which appeared in the Washington Post yesterday? It raises the question of
> whether we would rather have nominally democratic state control over the
> electromagnetic spectrum -- or cede control to erratic, hard right
> billionaires on ketamine?
>
>
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/09/29/musk-space-x-satellites-phones-communications/
>
> *Elon Musk’s latest power grab points in a*
>
> *clear direction*
>
>
> His SpaceX deal could fundamentally alter the relationship between a
>
> state and its citizens.
>
>
> By Tom Tugendhat
>
>
> A century and a half ago, the maharajas and rajas of India argued with the
> British viceroy over how
>
> large a gun salute they should receive while British engineers were
> connecting their worlds with
>
> telegraph wires and turning their kingdoms into statelets.
>
>
> This month, the British king and the American president, clothed in medals
> and white tie, respectively,
>
> met in Windsor Castle while billionaire Elon Musk quietly executed the most
> consequential
>
> infrastructure deal of the decade: SpaceX’s $17 billion acquisition of
> telecom company EchoStar’s
>
> spectrum rights.
>
>
> This wasn’t just another corporate transaction — it was a power grab that
> could fundamentally alter the
>
> relationship between a state and its citizens. Unless governments recognize
> the implications and evolve
>
> in response, they risk becoming Potemkin powers.
>
>
> The spectrum Musk bought enables something unprecedented: direct
> satellite-to-smartphone
>
> connectivity without *any* terrestrial infrastructure. We’re not there yet,
> but the direction is clear: For
>
> the first time, a private company will be able to provide global
> communications services that bypass
>
> national networks, government oversight and geographic boundaries. Earlier
> versions of satellite phones needed line of sight to the satellite. They
> required bulky terminals or modified devices. EchoStar’s spectrum, by
> contrast, operates in frequencies that can penetrate
>
> buildings and work with standard smartphone antennas. It allows direct
> communication with the
>
> billions of phones already in people’s pockets.
>
>
> More critically, SpaceX now controls enough spectrum to offer
> commercial-grade mobile services
>
> globally — and the company is positioning itself to replace every other
> mobile operator with a service
>
> that operates entirely beyond national jurisdiction.
>
>
> The timing is no accident. Handsets such as Apple’s iPhone 14 introduced
> basic satellite messaging, but
>
> power consumption limited it to emergencies. The iPhone 17’s improved
> battery efficiency will probably
>
> cross the threshold needed for routine satellite connectivity. When your
> phone can seamlessly switch
>
> between cell towers and satellites, it won’t be long before the base
> stations become redundant, making
>
> local licensing irrelevant. For governments, the change will be profound:
> Lose control of
>
> communications infrastructure, and you lose a fundamental tool of
> governance.
>
>
> Since the printing press and the telegraph, governments have controlled
> communications within their
>
> territories — licensing operators, monitoring networks and regulating
> content through the physical
>
> systems that carry information.
>
>
> This control has enabled everything from wartime censorship to modern
> content moderation, from
>
> emergency broadcasts to surveillance programs.
>
>
> SpaceX is breaking this model. When citizens can communicate through
> networks that operate from
>
> international space, traditional regulatory tools become obsolete.
> Britain’s Online Safety Act, for
>
> example, requires platforms to remove harmful content and cooperate with
> regulators. But how do you
>
> enforce compliance when platforms can route traffic through orbital
> networks that bypass British
>
> infrastructure entirely?
>
>
> This isn’t just about communications. Companies such as Stripe and Coinbase
> have already enabled
>
> millions to bypass national banking systems through stablecoins and
> cryptocurrency payments. People
>
> can hold dollar-denominated digital assets and execute international
> transfers without touching their
>
> central bank or local financial institutions, changing the nature of
> corporate structures, employment
>
> and taxation.
>
>
> Combine unrestricted communications with borderless payments, and you have
> an infrastructure that
>
> allows for what economists call “accelerated regulatory arbitrage” — the
> ability to shop for the most
>
> favorable legal environment regardless of your physical location. Why
> accept your government’s speech
>
> restrictions when satellites give you an opt-out? Why use your national
> currency when you can transact
>
> in global digital assets?The state’s traditional monopolies on information
> control and monetary policy erode simultaneously.
>
> Britain understands this dynamic better than most. In the 19th century, its
> control of telegraph cables
>
> laid along ocean floors, with stations on strategic islands, all
> terminating in London, translated directly
>
> into global dominance.
>
>
> British networks gave London advance knowledge of market movements,
> political developments and
>
> military activities worldwide. British operators could delay, prioritize or
> even modify messages passing
>
> through their systems. British control of the cables meant control of
> global information flows, which
>
> meant control of markets, politics and, ultimately, empires.
>
>
> Musk’s Starlink satellite network in Ukraine provides a preview of this new
> dynamic. Within days of
>
> Russia’s February 2022 full-scale invasion, SpaceX activated satellite
> internet across Ukraine,
>
> providing communications capabilities that proved crucial for military
> coordination. Ukrainian forces
>
> used Starlink to guide drone strikes, coordinate artillery and maintain
> command structures, even as
>
> ground networks were destroyed.
>
>
> That’s not traditional military aid; it’s private infrastructure responding
> to corporate calculations,
>
> creating military capabilities that no government authorized or fully
> controls. In future conflicts,
>
> military effectiveness might depend less on budgets than on operators’
> goodwill. Sovereignty becomes
>
> dependent on corporate interest.
>
>
> Musk’s timing exploits competitors’ weaknesses. Telecom company Globalstar,
> Apple’s satellite
>
> partner, is just starting its own buildout. AST SpaceMobile, partnered with
> AT&T and Verizon, is
>
> struggling with delays, including a missed deadline for launch of its first
> satellite at the end of August.
>
> AST is using Amazon founder Jeff Bezos’s space company, Blue Origin. (Bezos
> owns The Post.)
>
> Amazon’s Project Kuiper remains years behind, and EchoStar, previously a
> major competitor, has
>
> effectively conceded by selling to SpaceX.
>
>
> This $17 billion purchase isn’t about competing in a market, it’s about
> shaping the market itself. With
>
> exclusive spectrum rights for direct-to-phone connectivity, SpaceX can
> dictate terms to device
>
> manufacturers, telecommunications companies and ultimately governments.
>
>
> Consider the leverage. Need satellite connectivity for emergency services?
> SpaceX sets the terms. Want
>
> to ensure that your military has secure communications? Better maintain
> good relations with Musk.
>
> Hoping to regulate platform content? Not if the platforms route through
> Starlink.
>
>
> In response, states aren’t entirely powerless but, until rivals are
> operational, their options are limited
>
> and costly.They could ban satellite-enabled devices — but this would
> cripple their economies and probably prove
>
> unenforceable as devices become smaller and more integrated.
>
>
> They could build competing infrastructure, such as the European Union’s
> IRIS² satellite constellation.
>
> But that is already years behind schedule and lacks commercial viability
> without massive subsidies.
>
> They could negotiate access agreements accepting subordinate status,
> governing by permission of
>
> private infrastructure owners — and accept the loss of sovereignty that
> implies. Or they could develop
>
> new regulatory frameworks to compete with other jurisdictions and attract
> investment and innovation
>
> — even though satellites are beyond the reach of territorial
> enforcement. Each is a choice between sovereignty and prosperity.
>
>
> This won’t end government, but it will shift the hierarchy of power.
> Nations without satellites will
>
> become what political scientists call “hollow states,” maintaining formal
> authority over territory and
>
> populations while lacking control over the infrastructure those populations
> depend on.
>
>
> The infrastructure owners — SpaceX, Amazon, Meta, Google — will accumulate
> what amounts to
>
> sovereign power without sovereign responsibility, making decisions that
> affect millions of lives.
>
> Algorithm changes that influence elections, network policies that enable or
> restrict speech, and
>
> platform rules that determine economic opportunities are already here.
>
>
> These decisions increasingly matter more than traditional government
> policies. If SpaceX decides to
>
> restrict access to certain regions, that will shape geopolitics more
> directly than diplomatic negotiations.
>
> If payment processors change their policies, that will affect commerce more
> immediately than central
>
> bank decisions.
>
>
> The question isn’t whether this transformation can be stopped, but whether
> governments can evolve to
>
> maintain meaningful control over the forces reshaping collective life.
>
>
> Today’s princes in parliaments and presidencies are still arguing about
> status, while SpaceX makes it
>
> clear that the debate is no longer about controlling data but rather the
> infrastructure itself. Power has
>
> shifted to the heavens — and, unless they grasp the change, governments
> will be left on the ground as
>
> every new launch and line of code makes it harder for them to reach the
> stars.
>
> --
> Michael Benson
> *Kinetikon Pictures *
> michael-benson.net
> kinpix2001@gmail.com
> --
> # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> # more info: https://www.nettime.org
> # contact: nettime-l-owner@lists.nettime.org
>
-- 
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: https://www.nettime.org
# contact: nettime-l-owner@lists.nettime.org