Poles Formation and Disappearance Patterns in the Global Economy

According to the dictionary of foreign words in the Russian language, the term "pole" originates from the Greek word "polos", meaning the extremity of an imaginary axis around which a wheel rotates[1]. Geometrically, there can only be two poles, as reflected in geography: the North and South poles. However, this does not apply to contemporary geopolitics, where the concept of a multipolar world is gaining popularity. With this terminological clarification, we will cautiously employ the notion of a multipolar world, considering its diverse interpretations by various thinkers.

1. Change of Global Economic Poles during the Transition of World Economic Systems.

In the context of the author's theory on long cycles of global social and economic development[2], a pole can be understood as a country whose ruling elite exerts decisive influence over the development of the global economy. Viewing this process as a shift of world economic systems (WES), it is possible to establish the periodicity of change of the global economic poles.  During the transition period between WESs, there cannot be fewer than two poles (the old and new WESs). Upon completion of this transitional period global dominance shifts to the country that forms the core of the new WES.

This is precisely how Giovanni Arrighi[3] conceptualized the development of the global capitalist economy, dividing it into five systemic, centurial cycles of capital accumulation: the Spanish-Genoese, Dutch, English, American, and presently transitioning to the Asian cycle. Throughout the five-century era of capitalism, the ruling elites of the Spanish-Genoese, Dutch, English, and American powers successively replaced each other as the decisive driving force in the development of the global economy. Apart from the first cycle, in which Genoese capital provided the financial foundation for the rapid expansion of the Spanish Empire, each subsequent cycle was characterized by the dominance of a single country whose production relations and institutions served as an example for others. Over time, the effectiveness of these dominant powers' production relations and institutions diminished, while a new leader emerged on the periphery with qualitatively more efficient production relations and institutions. Global dominance shifted to this new leader as a result of a world war, which the declining power initiated against its main competitors in order to maintain global hegemony, oblivious to the emergence of a new social and economic paradigm with its own geoeconomic pole.

The systemic centurial cycles of capital accumulation, as revealed by Arrighi, represent corresponding epochs in the evolution of the global capitalist system. These epochs differed not only in the leading countries but also in the systems for managing the reproduction and development of the economy. To study these cycles, the author introduced the concept of a World Economy Systems (WES), which is defined as a system of interconnected international and national institutions that facilitate expanded economic reproduction and determine the mechanism of global economic relations[4].  The institutions of the leading country play a crucial role, exerting dominant influence over international institutions regulating the world market, international trade, and economic and financial relations. They also serve as a model for peripheral countries that aspire to catch up with the leader by importing the institutions imposed by it. Therefore, the institutional framework of the social and economic paradigm permeates the reproduction of the entire global economy, encompassing its national, regional, and international components.

The systemic cycle of capital accumulation is a form of the life cycle of the WES.  The Spanish-Genoese, Dutch, English, American, and the currently replacing Asian centurial cycles of capital accumulation described by Arrighi are manifestations of the life cycles of the corresponding trade, trade-manufacturing, colonial, imperial, and integral WES, respectively. They differ so significantly in their systems for managing reproduction and economic development that the transition from one to another has historically occurred through world wars and social revolutions.  During these tumultuous events, the outdated management system was crushed, and the victorious country formed a new one.

World economic structures differ not only in the type of international trade organization but also in the system of production relations and institutions that allow leading countries to achieve global superiority and shape the regime of international trade-economic relations. The classification of world economic structures is determined by the institutional systems of advanced countries that dominate international economic relations and form the core of the global economic system.  At the same time, other, less efficient and even archaic institutional systems of organizing national and regional economies can be reproduced on its periphery. Relations between the core and periphery of the global economic system are characterized by non-equivalent foreign economic exchange favoring the core. The countries of the core extract a surplus profit due to technological, economic, and organizational superiority in the form of intellectual and monopoly rents, entrepreneurial and emission incomes. Therefore, the core countries constitute the center of the global economy, dominating in international economic relations and determining global social and economic development.

The logic of geopolitical competition in the capitalist world-system necessitated the dominance of one country within the life cycle of any given world economic system. This is linked to the role of national legislation and sovereignty in ensuring the expanded reproduction of capital.  National sovereignty provides the ruling elite with opportunities for unlimited capital accumulation by relying on the national credit and banking system, the issuance of national currency, various tools to protect the domestic market, and judicial protection of property rights. Although international treaties may provide norms for the protection of property rights and foreign investors, in practice, the guarantees of their compliance heavily depend on the balance of geopolitical influence between countries. National armed forces often became the decisive argument in resolving geopolitical contradictions.

From the Westphalian system, which paved the way for states to acquire national sovereignty, to the present time no supranational or interstate structures have been created at the international level that are close in their effectiveness to the national systems of economic reproduction and capital accumulation of the most powerful countries. Even if the countries are civilizationally close, the various coalitions and alliances between them are incomparably less strong than the institutions that bind together the economic relations of economic entities within sovereign states. The stronger they are, the more opportunities the respective national elite have to realize their interests in international relations, including enrichment through non-equivalent foreign economic exchange, exploitation of natural resources, and human capital of relatively weak states, the elites of which are unable to ensure national sovereignty.

The direct dependency between the power of national states and the opportunities for capital accumulation through non-equivalent foreign economic exchange generates an upward wave of strengthening the power of a country leading in the formation of a new WES.  Its ruling elite consistently increases its capabilities, using the superiority of its state to maximize profits in international economic relations. This is how the capitalist world-system evolves, with its center sequentially moving from Northern Italy to Spain, the Netherlands, Great Britain, and the USA. Meanwhile, the states that lost their leadership were relegated to the periphery and vice versa, new leaders rose from it.

The life cycle of a world economic system (WES) consists of phases of material and financial expansion. In the first phase, due to the super-efficient management system, the country, forming the core of the new WES, makes a breakthrough on a long wave of growth of the new technological mode, modernizing the economy on its basis At this time the countries of the core of the old WES are plunged into a structural crisis and depression, caused by super-concentration of capital in outdated productions of the previous technological mode.  They are trying to maintain hegemony by any means, including inciting a world war between competitors. heir mutual weakening creates additional opportunities for the economic breakthrough of the country, forming the core of the new WES. As a result, it seizes global leadership, which it consistently builds up to a dominant position. Therefore, Holland gained global dominance after the Spanish-British War, Great Britain - after the Napoleonic Wars, the United States - after World Wars I and II. At present, the global hybrid war unleashed by the U.S. objectively contributes to the economic breakthrough of China, which forms the core of the new WES.

Having seized global dominance, in the second phase of the WES life cycle, the country of its core gets an opportunity to impose its conditions of international financial and economic exchange, up to the use of its currency, financial institutions, foreign trade and transport infrastructure on others. In this phase of financial expansion, the dominance of the country's core of the already mature WES turns into global hegemony, which is maintained by super-profits from the exploitation of peripheral resources through non-equivalent trade exchange, manipulation of world prices, capital squeezing and brain drain. The flip side of this hegemony is a growing national debt and a shrinking productivity of an economy in which financial speculation becomes preferable to productive investment. WES is entering the final phase of its life cycle, which coincides with the phase of birth of a new WES on the periphery of the world-system with a more efficient system of reproduction and economic development management.

It follows from this analysis that the capitalist world-system is unipolar in the period of maturity of WES and multipolar in the period of change of WES. During the formation of a new WES, one or more of its core countries emerges, competing both with the outgoing hegemonic country and with each other. As a result of this competition a global leader emerges, consistently increasing its dominance.  Apart from them, there is also Russia, which preserves its global influence in various political forms throughout the whole period under consideration, the historical role of which Arrighi completely ignored.

2. Russia as an independent pole of world influence.

Throughout the entire era of capitalism, starting with the Genoese-Spanish systemic century cycle of capital accumulation according to Arrighi, Russia has acted as an independent pole of global influence. The outgoing imperial WES was bipolar, with the USA and the USSR controlling a third of the world economy each, with the remaining third being a field of their rivalry. In the preceding colonial WES, the Russian Empire successfully opposed the British Empire, controlling a large part of Eurasia, Alaska, and the northern part of the Pacific Ocean. In the trade-manufacturing WES, Russia underwent the modernization of Peter the Great, effectively catching up with the then world leader - the Netherlands - in terms of technological development and surpassing it in terms of production scales. The Moscow Empire of Ivan the Terrible, which had inherited the traditions of the Byzantine Empire and part of the territory of the Horde Empire, was hardly inferior in its power to the Spanish Empire, with which it had no contradictions.

Therefore, since at least the 17th century Russia constituted an independent pole of world influence that existed in parallel with the competing and successive countries of the WES core in the West. Here we do not consider the previous period, covered by the gloom of historical falsifications that obscure the world influence of Russia (Rus') in the Horde and Byzantine periods. Our analysis concerns only the well-documented period from the seventeenth century to the present, in which the rhythm of the change of world economic and technological ways can be traced. The regularities revealed on the basis of this analysis allow us to make a reliable forecast of the change of global economic development poles until the end of this century. The role of Russia remains uncertain, which has remained an independent pole of global development all this time parallel to the shifting poles of the Western world-system with the change of WES.

After the Great Troubles and the accession of the Romanovs Russia was drawn into a complex and contradictory relations with European states, which at different times are at times allies and adversaries. Russia they regarded as a reactionary force that hinders the processes of liberalization of social and productive relations and democratization of state and political systems. Russia is seen by them as a reactionary force obstructing the processes of liberalization of social and economic relations and democratization of state-political systems. The ruling elites of European countries fear Russia and periodically unite against it, striving to crush and dismember it. Starting with the establishment of the colonial WES and British global hegemony, Russia is invariably seen as a pole of global influence opposing the West.

For their part, the leaders of the Russian state treated the shifting poles of the Western world-system as an ally and partner, an adversary and enemy, a teacher and a learner.  Centuries of systemic cycles of capital accumulation affected Russia as the periphery rather than the center, until the USSR stopped participating in this process altogether. And now the West is trying to take everything it has accumulated from Russia. It has to be said that the Russian ruling elite has not developed any definite attitude toward the West. The discussion between Westerners and Slavophiles continues to this day. The former link Russia's special position to its backwardness and advocate its overcoming through integration with the West, while the latter see Russia's special mission in saving humanity from the threats posed by liberalism, capitalism and post-humanism rooted in the West.  This argument has lost its relevance today due to the anti-Russian aggression of the collective West, which, in fact, ends the half-century era of its global dominance and, with it, the capitalist era. The center of the world economy is shifting to Southeast Asia, where the poles of global influence are emerging.

3. Poles of a new world economic order.

The ongoing change of the WES takes place in full accordance with the previously identified patterns of this process[5]. It began with the collapse of the USSR, and today it ends with the collapse of Pax Americana. In full accordance with the theory to maintain its global hegemony, the ruling elite of the U.S. unleashed a world war, seeking to crush or chaotize the countries that have become beyond its control: China, Russia, Iran. However, it will not be able to win it due to the qualitatively higher efficiency of the management system created in China. he U.S. has already lost a trade and economic war to China, by the end of the current five-year plan China will achieve technological sovereignty and become the first in the world in terms of scientific and technological potential. By seizing Russia's foreign exchange reserves, Washington has undermined confidence in the dollar and is rapidly losing its hegemony in the monetary sphere. At the same time, China is becoming the world's largest investor. China's investment in the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) countries exceeds by an order of magnitude the financing of the much-publicized "American Indo-Pacific Future Image" initiative. The scale of this project pales in comparison to the OBOR, which plans to spend, according to various estimates, from $4 trillion to $8 trillion. The OBOR investment portfolio also dwarfs the Marshall Plan to finance the post-war reconstruction of Western Europe, which, at today's dollar value, could be valued at $180 billion. ($12 billion 70 years ago)[6].

After the collapse of the USSR, the American ruling elite rushed to declare its final victory and "the end of history”[7]. However, this euphoria ended with the global financial crisis of 2008, which marked the limits of the American century cycle of capital accumulation. The era of U.S. global dominance lasted a little longer than Great Britain's after the end of World War I, which ended with the financial crisis of 1929.  The Great Depression and World War II that followed buried the British Empire, which could not compete with the more efficient systems of government in the USSR and the United States, forming the two poles of imperial WES, which had replaced the colonial one.

In all macroeconomic indicators, China has already surpassed the United States. Almost unaffected by the global recession of the last decade, China supplanted Japan as the world's second-largest economy in August 2010. In 2012, with imports and exports of $3.87 trillion, China surpassed the United States. The PRC overtook the U.S. with a total foreign trade turnover of $3.82 trillion, displacing it from the position it had held for 60 years as the global leader in cross-border trade.  By the end of 2014, China's gross domestic product, measured at purchasing power parity, was $17.6 trillion, surpassing that of the United States ($17.4 trillion), the world's largest economy since 1872 - the largest economy in the world since 1872.[8]

China is becoming the world's engineering and technology center. The share of Chinese engineers and scientists in the global workforce reached 20% in 2007. The proportion of Chinese engineers and scientists in the world reached 20% in 2007, and doubled since 2000 (1,420,000 and 690,000 respectively). Significantly, many of them have returned to the PRC from American Silicon Valley, playing a major role in the rise of innovative entrepreneurship in China. By 2030 China will be in first place in the world in terms of expenditure on scientific and technological development, and its share in the world expenditure will be 25%. (30%) will be scientists, engineers and technicians from China[9]. By 2030, China will take the first place in the world in terms of spending on scientific and technical development, and its share in the volume of global spending will be 25%[10].

Between 2000 and 2016, China's share of global publications in the physical sciences, engineering, and mathematics quadrupled, surpassing that of the United States. In 2019, the PRC surpassed the U.S. in patent activity (58,990 vs. 57,840). Not only on the macro level, but also on the micro level, Chinese companies are outperforming U.S. leaders in innovation activity.  For example, for the third year in a row, China's Huawei Technologies Company, with 4,144 patents, is significantly ahead of Qualcomm (2,127 patents).

China is the world leader in mobile payments, with the U.S. in sixth place. In 2019, the volume of such transactions in China was $80.5 trillion. The projected total volume of mobile payments in the PRC is $111 trillion, while in the U.S. it is $130 billion. This seems to indicate that the bulk of U.S. money issuance is tied up in financial market speculative circuits, not reaching end consumers.

The share of the dollar in international settlements is rapidly falling, while the share of the yuan is steadily growing. At the same time the continued growth of the U.S. sovereign debt pyramid and financial bubbles of trillions of derivatives (doubled since the financial crisis of 2008 and leaves no doubt about the impending collapse of the U.S. financial system on a shrinking income basis.

Figure 1. the largest (TOP-5 and TOP-25) U.S. financial holdings - holders of derivatives: volume of derivatives, assets (trillion dollars) and their ratio (times)

Source: M. Ershov on data from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

 

Figure 2: Dynamics of U.S. national debt over the past 230 years, in % of GDP

Source: BofA Global Investment Strategy.

 

Figure 3: Federal Reserve Balance Sheet since 1914

Source: BofA Global Investment Strategy, Haver, Federal Reserve Board.

 

The more than fourfold growth in the monetary base after 2008 did not translate into an upturn in the U.S. economy, as most of the money supply went into blowing financial bubbles. China, on the other hand, has achieved a much greater monetization of the economy while increasing investment in the development of its real sector, creating a much more efficient reproductive circuit of capital accumulation.

The reasons for China's advanced development lie in the institutional structure of the new WES, which ensures a qualitatively more effective management of economic development. By combining the institutions of centralized planning and market competition, the new world economic order demonstrates a qualitative leap in the efficiency of management of social and economic development compared to its predecessor systems of the world order: the Soviet one with directive planning and total statehood; and the American one dominated by the financial oligarchy and transnational corporations. This is evidenced not only by the record growth rate of the Chinese economy over the past three decades but also by China's rise to the forefront of scientific and technological progress. And also the breakthroughs in the development of other countries that use the institutions of an integrated world order: Japan before the artificial suspension of its rise by the Americans by sharply revaluing the yen; South Korea before the American financial oligarchy provoked the Asian economic crisis in 1998, modern Vietnam, which in many ways adopts China's experience; India, implementing a democratic model of the new world order; Ethiopia, showing a record growth rate with the active participation of Chinese investors.

Regardless of the dominant form of ownership - state, as in China or Vietnam, or private, as in Japan or Korea - the integrated world economic order is characterized by a combination of institutions of state planning and market self-organization, state control over the main parameters of economic reproduction and free enterprise, the ideology of the common good and private initiative. At the same time, the forms of political structure may differ fundamentally - from the world's largest Indian democracy to the world's largest communist party in China.  What remains constant is the priority of national interests over private ones, expressed in strict mechanisms of personal responsibility for conscientious behavior, clear performance of one's duties, compliance with laws, service to national goals. he social and economic development management system is built on the mechanisms of personal responsibility for improving the well-being of society.

Therefore, assuming the most likely outcome of the global hybrid war unleashed by the US ruling elite not in its favor, the new world economic order will be formed in competition between communist and democratic varieties, the results of which will be determined by their comparative effectiveness in exploiting the opportunities and neutralizing the threats of the new technological order. It is likely that the main competition between the communist and democratic varieties of the new world economic system will unfold between China and India, which are leading today in terms of economic development rates and are claiming, together with their satellites, a good half of the world economy. This competition will be peaceful in nature and regulated by the norms of international law. All aspects of this regulation, starting from control over global security and ending with the issuance of world currencies, will be based on international treaties.  Countries refusing to accept obligations and international control over their observance will be isolated in the corresponding areas of international cooperation. The world economy will become more complex, the restoration of the importance of national sovereignty and the diversity of national economic regulation systems will be combined with the fundamental importance of international organizations with supranational powers.

The competition between communist and democratic varieties of an integrated world economy will not be antagonistic. For example, the Chinese initiative "One Belt, One Road" with the ideology of "one destiny of mankind" involves many countries with different political systems. Democratic EU countries are creating free trade zones with communist Vietnam. The competitive landscape will be determined by the comparative effectiveness of national governance systems.

The further unfolding of the global financial crisis will objectively be accompanied by the strengthening of China and weakening of the United States. As Dr. Wang Wen rightly points out, "the global community sees China growing and the U.S. shrinking on the parameters of international investment, mergers and acquisitions, logistics and currency. Globalization is becoming less Americanized and more Chineseized[11]".

In the course of this transformation, countries on the periphery of the U.S.-centric financial system, including the EU and Russia, will be significantly affected. The only question is the scale of these changes. Under favorable circumstances the Great stagnation of the Western economies, which has been going on for more than a decade, will last for several more years until the remaining capital after the collapse of the financial bubbles will be invested in new technological mode of production, and they will be able to "ride" the new long wave of Kondratiev. In an unfavorable course of events, the monetary pumping of the financial system will lead to galloping inflation, which will entail disorganization of economic reproduction, falling living standards and political crisis. The US ruling elite will be left with two options. The first is to accept the loss of global dominance and instead of forming a world government, as in the century before last, to negotiate with nation-states on the conditions of investment. This will give it the opportunity to participate in the formation of a new world economy as a leading player. And the second - to escalate the global hybrid war, which they are already waging. And, although objectively they can not win this war, the damage to humanity can be catastrophic, up to fatal.

The processes of destroying the reproduction system of the American capital accumulation cycle will accelerate as the countries exploited by the US ruling elite come out from under their control.

If we resort again to historical analogies of the previous period of changing world economic systems, its final phase (analogue - World War II) can take up to seven years. So far, these analogies are surprisingly confirmed. The first phase of the transition period, which coincides with the last phase of the life cycle of the current world economy, begins with Perestroika in the USSR in 1985 and ends with its collapse in 1991. In the previous cycle, it began with the First World War in 1914 and ended in 1918 with the collapse of four European monarchies that hindered the global expansion of English capital.

The second phase of the transition period follows, during which the world-dominating country reaches the peak of its power.  After the end of World War I, British hegemony was established for two decades, lasting until the Munich Agreement, which marked the beginning of World War II. In this phase of the transition period, the outgoing world economic system reaches the limits of its evolution, while on its periphery the core of the formation of a new world economic system arises. In the antecedent cycle, this nucleus was manifested in three distinct political paradigms: socialism as seen in the USSR, capitalism embodied by the US, and a national-corporate model in Japan, Italy, and Germany. Presently, it is similarly manifested in three unique political frameworks: socialism with Chinese idiosyncrasies; Indian democratic nationalism, and the transnational dictatorship of globalists, who are seen to have instigated the escalation of the global hybrid war with the introduction of the coronavirus. As with the previous instance, this phase spans two decades, commencing with the disintegration of the USSR and the provisional establishment of Pax Americana in 1991.

Lastly, the third and terminal phase of the transition period is characterized by the disintegration of the core of the erstwhile dominant global economic structure and the consequent emergence of a new order, with its nucleus shaping the novel epicenter of global economic development.  Lastly, the third and terminal phase of the transition period is characterized by the disintegration of the core of the erstwhile dominant WES and the consequent emergence of a new order, with its nucleus shaping the novel epicenter of WES.  In the previous cycle, this phase began with the Munich Agreement in 1938 and concluded with the disintegration of the British Empire in 1948. Assuming the inception of the global hybrid war instigated by the US to be the Nazi coup in Kiev, their subsequent occupation of Ukraine, and the implementation of financial sanctions against Russia, the concluding phase of the current transition period commences in 2014, with its culmination projected for 2024. As prognosticated by Pantin, who accurately foretold the global financial crisis of 2008, the apex of American aggression against Russia is anticipated in 2024. It is noteworthy that this year also coincides with a shift in the Russian political cycle in alignment with the presidential elections.

Let us delve deeper into the historical analogy of the previous change in global economic orders, which commenced with the engagement of leading nations in World War I. Post the socialist revolution in Russia, a prototype of a new global economic order was established, characterized by communist ideology and comprehensive state planning. Approximately a decade and a half later, in an effort to surmount the Great Depression, the United States implemented the New Deal, which forged another variant of the new global economic order, marked by the ideology of a universal welfare state and state-monopolistic regulation of the economy.  Simultaneously, in Japan, Italy, and subsequently in Germany, a third variant was being molded - characterized by Nazi ideology and a public-private corporate economy.

All these transitions occurred during the concluding period of the British capital accumulation cycle and the underlying colonial global economic order. As the fulcrum of the world economic system, the ruling elite of Britain endeavored to resist changes that threatened its global dominion. Economic blockades were imposed on the USSR, and imports were limited to grain only, with the intention of inciting mass famine. Trade embargoes were enforced against the United States. In Germany, the anti-communist Nazi coup was encouraged, and in an attempt to counter the influence of the USSR, British intelligence agencies safeguarded and propelled Hitler to power. With similar intentions and in anticipation of substantial dividends, American corporations invested heavily in the modernization of German industry[12].

The British adhered to their traditional geopolitics of "divide and rule", provoking a war between Germany and the USSR. They hoped to replicate their success in instigating World War I, which was precipitated by the London-provoked Japanese attack on Russia. As a result of World War I, all of Britain's major Eurasian competitors self-destructed: the Russian, German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and finally, the Chinese Empires. However, immediately after the onset of World War II, the Third Reich's qualitative superiority over all European nations, including Britain, in terms of economic management efficiency and the mobilization of all available resources for war purposes became evident. The British troops suffered humiliating defeats not only from Germany but also, in conjunction with the Americans, from Japan, which demonstrably surpassed the Anglo-American alliance in terms of organizational and technological capabilities for conducting large-scale military operations in the vast territory of Southeast Asia. Although Britain, owing to its allied relationship with the US and USSR, emerged as one of the victors, post World War II, it lost its entire colonial empire - over 90% of its territory and population.

The Soviet system of managing the national economy proved to be the most effective at the time, accomplishing three economic miracles: the evacuation of industrial enterprises from the European part to the Ural and Siberia, rebuilding new industrial areas within half a year; achieving work productivity and capital return rates in wartime that surpassed those of Fascist-allied Europe by an order of magnitude; and the rapid restoration of cities and production capacities completely destroyed by the occupiers after the war.

Roosevelt's New Deal significantly boosted the mobilization capabilities of the American economy, which allowed the US to defeat Japan in the Pacific Basin. In post-war Western Europe, the US had no competitors: having insulated itself from the USSR with the NATO block, the American ruling elite effectively privatized Western European countries, including the remnants of their gold reserves. In Third World countries, the former colonies of European states became a zone of rivalry between American corporations and Soviet ministries. The further global development took place in the format of a cold war between two world empires - Soviet and American - each possessing similar technocratic and diametrically opposite political models for managing social and economic development. Each had its advantages and disadvantages, but both significantly outperformed the colonial system of family capitalism with its ruthless exploitation of wage workers and slaves in terms of the efficiency of mass production organization and resource mobilization capabilities.

A similar picture is currently emerging. The forming new global economic order also has three possible variations. The first has already formed in China under the leadership of the Communist Party of China.   It is characterized by a combination of state planning institutions and market self-organization, state control over the main parameters of economic reproduction and free entrepreneurship, the ideology of common good and private initiative, and demonstrates astounding efficiency in managing economic development, far exceeding the American system. This has been vividly demonstrated by the much higher growth rates of advanced industrial sectors over the past three decades and was again confirmed by the performance indicators in the fight against the pandemic.

The second variant of the integral world economic order is forming in India, the largest real functioning democracy in the world. The foundations of the Indian version of the integral structure were laid by Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru on the foundation of Indian culture.  The Constitution of India, adopted after independence, defines its economy as socialist. This norm is practically realized in the system of strategic planning, norms of social policy, financial regulation. The benchmarks for monetary emission are set by a special commission, which, based on the planned priorities of social and economic policy, determines the parameters of refinancing development institutions and banks in the directions of lending to small businesses, agriculture, industry, etc.

The nationalization of the banking system, carried out by Indira Gandhi's government, allowed the management of financial flows to be brought in line with indicative plans for economic development. Correctly chosen priorities gave impetus to the development of key areas of forming a new technological order, and shortly before the coronavirus pandemic, India came first in the world in terms of economic growth rates. As in China, the state in India regulates market processes to increase public welfare, stimulating investment in production development and the adoption of new technologies. At the same time, currency and financial restrictions keep capital within the country, and state planning directs entrepreneurial activity to the production of material goods.

The third variant of the new world economic order exists so far as an image of the future in the eyes of the Americentric financial oligarchy, striving for world domination. The US deep state is initiating calls for a new world order. On the wave of an artificially organized pandemic, attempts were made to create institutions claiming to manage humanity.  The Bill Gates Foundation establishes control over the activities of the WHO in terms of population vaccination. At the same time, vaccination is used to promote a long-developed technology of biological programming to reduce fertility and total control over the behavior of vaccinated people.  This technology combines the achievements of bioengineering and computer science: vaccination is accompanied by chipping, allowing any restrictions on human activities[13].

In other words, the third variant of the new world economic order essentially envisages the formation of a world government under the leadership of the American ruling elite in the interests of the financial oligarchy, controlling the emission of world currency, transnational banks and corporations, and the global financial market. This is a continuation of the trend of liberal globalization, supplemented by authoritarian technologies of population control in countries deprived of national sovereignty. It is described in many dystopias, starting with the famous "1984" by Orwell and ending with modern religious images of the coming of the Antichrist - an "electronic concentration camp", heralding the end of the world.  This scenario of world capital domination was presented in the first chapter of this monograph.

Each of the variants of the new world economic order characterized above implies the use of advanced information technologies, which are the key factor of the new technological order. All of them rely on big data processing methods and artificial intelligence systems necessary for managing not only unmanned production processes, but also people in systems of economic regulation and social behavior. The goals of this regulation are set by the ruling elite, the way of forming which predetermines the essential characteristics of each of the above-mentioned variants of the new world economic order.

In China, power belongs to the leadership of the Communist Party, which organizes economic regulation to increase public welfare and directs social behavior towards achieving political goals of building socialism with Chinese specificity. Market mechanisms are regulated in such a way that the most efficient production-technological structures win in competition, and the profit is proportional to their contribution to the growth of public welfare. In medium and large corporations, including non-state ones, party organizations operate, controlling the compliance of the behavior of the management with the moral values of communist ideology. The system encourages increased labor productivity and production efficiency, modesty and productivity of managers and owners on the one hand, and punishes market dominance abuses and speculative market manipulation, wastefulness and parasitic consumption, on the other hand. A social credit system is being developed to regulate the social behavior of individuals. According to its design, the social opportunities of each citizen will depend on their rating, which is constantly adjusted based on the balance of good and bad deeds.  The higher the rating, the more trust in the person when getting a job, promotion, obtaining credit, delegating authority. This unique modernization of the personal file system familiar to Soviet people, which accompanied a person throughout their working life, has its positive and negative sides, the assessment of which is beyond the scope of this article. Its main problem area is the dependence of the mechanism for forming a productive elite of society on artificial intelligence that manages the social credit system.

The second type of the new world economic order is determined by the democratic political system, which can significantly differ in different countries.  The pinnacle of this type can be observed in Switzerland, where pivotal political verdicts are primarily determined via public referendums. The most consequential embodiment of this approach, from a global economic standpoint, is India, alongside the traditional countries of European social democracy.  However, in numerous nations, this democratic framework is severely compromised by corruption and is susceptible to manipulation from large-scale businesses, which can either harbor patriotic or comprador tendencies.  The incorporation of the widely recognized distributed ledger technology (blockchain) into electoral systems can potentially enhance the efficacy of this democratic model by eradicating vote-rigging and ensuring equitable media access for all candidates. The burgeoning popularity of independent media outlets in the blogosphere has engendered a competitive environment for information sources, thereby facilitating candidate access to potential voters.  Assuming appropriate legal provisions are established for the application of modern information technology within the electoral process, an automatic mechanism for holding government bodies accountable for the societal consequences of their actions can be developed. The efficacy of this democratic paradigm is directly proportional to the level of education and civic engagement of the populace. The main challenge facing this paradigm is the dependency of the ruling elite's formation on clan-corporate structures, which are generally disinterested in promoting transparency and electoral integrity.

Finally, the third type of the proposed global economic structure is contingent on the aspirations of the financial oligarchy, aiming for global hegemony.  This is accomplished via liberal globalization, which entails the erosion of national economic regulatory institutions and the subordination of economic reproduction to the prerogatives of international capital.  Dominance within this structure is held by a few dozen intertwined American-European familial clans who control major financial conglomerates, law enforcement agencies, intelligence services, mass media, political parties, and the executive branch[14]. This core of the U.S. ruling elite engages in hybrid warfare against any nation beyond its sphere of control, employing a wide array of financial, informational, cognitive, and increasingly, biological technologies to destabilize and engender chaos. The ultimate objective of this warfare is the creation of a global institutional system under its jurisdiction, which regulates not only the global economy, but the entirety of humanity via contemporary informational, financial, and bioengineering technologies. he primary issue with such a political system is its absolute lack of accountability and ethical principles, with its hereditary ruling elite adhering to Malthusian, racist, and to some extent, misanthropic ideologies.

The formation of a new world order will transpire in competition among these three variants of the novel global economic arrangement. Notably, the latter variant excludes the first two, although the initial two can coexist peacefully. This scenario parallels the hypothetical outcome if Fascist Germany and Japan had prevailed in their war against the USSR and the USA, which would have negated both the Soviet and American models of the novel global economic structure of that era. This scenario parallels the hypothetical outcome if Fascist Germany and Japan had prevailed in their war against the USSR and the USA, which would have negated both the Soviet and American models of the novel global economic structure of that era.

Hence, three prospective scenarios are proposed for the formation of the new world economic structure.  They all share a common material basis in the form of a novel technological structure, the core of which comprises an amalgamation of digital, informational, bioengineering, cognitive, additive, and nanotechnologies. Leveraging these technologies, fully automated unmanned productions are currently being developed, alongside artificial intelligence systems managing infinite databases, transgenic microorganisms, plants, and animals, as well as the cloning of living creatures and regeneration of human tissues. Upon this technological foundation, the institutions of an integrated global economic structure are being built to consciously regulate social and economic development of sovereign states and potentially humanity as a whole. This is achieved through a combination of state strategic planning and market competition based on public-private partnerships. Depending on the interests that regulate the activities of autonomous economic entities, one of the aforementioned variants of the new global economic structure is formed. The first two – the communist and democratic variants – can coexist peacefully, competing and collaborating based on international law norms.  The third – the oligarchic variant – is antagonistic towards the first two as it assumes the establishment of hereditary global dominance by a few dozen American-European familial clans, incompatible with either democratic or communist values.

The trajectory of humanity's evolution, according to one of the three forecasted scenarios, hinges on the outcome of the hybrid warfare initiated by the American ruling elite against sovereign states.

Among the three scenarios previously characterized for the formation of the new global economic order, the domination of the global capitalist oligarchy appears least probable. Albeit this is the current direction of the unfolding global hybrid warfare, the ruling elite of the USA is destined to fail due to the qualitatively superior mobilization capabilities of the People's Republic of China and the global disinterest in this war.

Regardless of the scenario for the further unfolding of the global economic crisis, the mechanisms for the reproduction of the American capital accumulation cycle are eroding, leading to the weakening of the USA's economic power. There is no doubt that the American ruling elite will utilize any means to maintain their global dominance. They will aspire to steer events towards the formation of a global government, as recently suggested by the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Gordon Brown[15]. The pandemic of fear over the coronavirus, global warming, and environmental catastrophe, inflamed by the media under their control, is preparing public opinion for this scenario. However, the financial interest of the US financial oligarchy to consolidate their hegemony in the global financial system, and to maintain it, thus precluding the independent development of other countries, is hidden beneath this narrative. To maintain these countries in a dependent position, the Anglo-Saxon geopolitical tradition employs tools such as pitting competitor countries against each other, provoking social and political conflicts, orchestrating coups, and encouraging separatists to instigate chaos in non-compliant countries and regions. To minimize the ensuing risks for Russia, the Eurasian Economic Union, Eurasia, and humanity as a whole, the immediate formation of an anti-war coalition capable of inflicting unacceptable damage on the aggressor is imperative.

Potential participants in the anti-war coalition could include all countries not interested in a new global war and the overwhelming majority of the population residing within them. Foremost, these include countries against which the brunt of American blow is directed - Russia and China. These are the countries of the new global economic system, growing successfully on the wave of the new technological order: China, India, and the countries of Indochina, constituting a new center of global economic development. Others include Japan, Korea, and all post-Soviet states that have maintained their sovereignty, the precursors in forming its constituent institutions. And, of course, the beneficiary countries cooperating with the Asian center of economic development, receiving positive impulses from its growth through participation in the One Belt, One Road initiative, and other processes of Eurasian integration.

Contrary to the countries of the "core" of the existing global economic order, which have imposed a universal financial-economic relationship system as the basis of liberal globalization, the forming "core" of the new global economic system is characterized by greater diversity. This peculiarity is reflected in the principles of international relations shared by the countries that constitute it: freedom of development path choice, denial of hegemonism, and sovereignty of historical and cultural traditions. The formation of a new global economic order is undertaken on an equal, mutually beneficial, and consensus-based foundation. These principles form the basis for new regional economic associations - SCO, EAEU, MERCOSUR, ASEAN-China - and international financial institutions: (the BRICS Development Bank and currency reserve pool, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and the Eurasian Development Bank.

The unification of countries into such large international organizations as the SCO and BRICS represents a qualitatively new model of cooperation, paying tribute to diversity in contrast to the universal forms of liberal globalization. The unification of countries into such large international organizations as the SCO and BRICS represents a qualitatively new model of cooperation, paying tribute to diversity in contrast to the universal forms of liberal globalization. The principles of international structure shared by the countries of the forming "core" of the new global economic order differ significantly from those typical of previous global economic systems, which, according to S. Huntington, were formed by Western civilization "not due to the superiority of its ideas, moral values, or religion (to which only the population of a few other civilizations were converted) but rather as a result of superiority in the use of organized violence"[16].

The restructuring of the global monetary and financial system is of key significance for the transition to a new world economic order.  The new architecture of international monetary and financial relations should be formed on a treaty-legal basis. Countries issuing global reserve currencies will have to guarantee their stability by adhering to certain constraints on the size of public debt and deficits of payment and trade balances. In addition, they will have to comply with the requirements set on the basis of international law for transparency of the mechanisms they use to secure the issuance of their currencies, providing unhindered exchange possibilities for all tradable assets on their territory.

4. The configuration of poles in the new world economic order

Based on the above, the configuration of multipolarity of the world economy by the end of the current century is likely to appear as follows.

1. A bipolar core of the new (integral) WES with communist (China) and democratic (India) poles, between whose competition half of the GDP growth will be produced.
2. Its near periphery (ASEAN, Pakistan, Iran).
3. The significantly influential core of the capitalist part of the crumbling old (imperial) world economic system (USA and Britain) with their satellites.
4. Entities wavering between the cores of the old and new world economic systems, such as the European Union, Turkey, and the Arab world, whose global influence opportunities will depend on their ability to break free from the dictates of the USA.
5. Fragments of the old world economic system aligning with the core of the integral system, likely to integrate into it once they free themselves from dependency on Washington (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan).
6. The raw material periphery of the integral world economic system (Africa, Central Asia, Latin America).
7. Russia and the EAEU, which, depending on the economic policies currently being pursued, may either enter the core of the new (integral) world economic system or remain on its raw material periphery, where they are currently situated in effect.
8. International organizations facilitating the consolidation of the new (integral) world economic system (BRICS, SCO, EAEU, ASEAN), the influence of which will be growing.
9. International organizations used by the USA to maintain their hegemony (NATO and others), the influence of which will be rapidly diminishing with the end of the global hybrid war.

The integral world economic system differs from the imperial one by restoring the significance of national sovereignty and international law based on it. This presupposes a much greater diversity of the geopolitical landscape, on which national states and their integration associations can create various configurations of international relations, striving to occupy the most advantageous niches in global economic connections. In this context, the importance of non-economic factors of integration, such as spiritual culture, civilizational proximity, spiritual values, and common historical destiny, significantly increases. Consequently, the influence of spiritual-historical poles of influence will intensify, integrating into the configuration of the integral world economic system. Its multipolarity will have a civilizational connotation, affirming the concept of a multipolar world of civilizations[17].

Russia's position in the multipolar world forming as a result of the change in the world economic system remains uncertain. A radical change in economic policy is necessary to escape the current peripheral position between the cores of the old and new world economic systems. This involves implementing a strategy of advanced development based on a new technological order, relying on the institutions and management methods of the integral world economic system[18].

 

Notes

[1] Krysin L.P. Modern dictionary of foreign words / L.P. Krysin; In-t rus. lang. them. V. V. Vinogradov RAS. – Moscow: AST-PRESS, 2014. – 410.

[2] Glazyev S. Management of economic development: a course of lectures. M.: Moscow University Press, 2019. 759 p.

[3] Arrighi G. The long twentieth century: money, power and the origins of our times. London: Verse, 1994.

[4] Glazyev S. World economic structures in global economic development // Economics and Mathematical Methods. 2016. Vol. 52 No. 2; Glazyev S. Applied results of the theory of world economic structures // Economics and Mathematical Methods. 2016. Vol. 52 No. 3; the author of this material has registered the scientific hypothesis "Hypothesis of periodic change of world economic patterns" (certificate No. 41-H for registration by the International Academy of Authors of Scientific Discoveries and Inventions under the scientific and methodological guidance of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences was issued in 2016).

[5] Glazyev S. The Last World War. The US starts and loses. M.: Book World, 2016.

[6] Steinbock D. U.S. – China Trade War and Its Global Impacts. – World Century Publishing Corporation and Shanghai Institutes for International Studies China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies. 2018. Vol. 4. No. 4. P. 515–542.

[7] Fukuyama F. The end of history and the last man. M.: AST, 2010.

[8] Why China is taking over the ‘American century’ (by Dilip Hiro) // The Asia Times. URL: https://asiatimes.com/2020/08/why-china-is-taking-over-the-american-century/. August 19, 2020.

[9] 2030 Zhongguo: manxiang gongtong fuyu (China - 2030: forward to universal prosperity) / Tsinghua University National Research Center / Ed. Hu Angang, Yan Yilong, Wei Xing. Beijing: Publishing house of Renmin University of China, 2011. P. 30

[10] Prospects and strategic priorities for the ascent of the BRICS / ed. V. Sadovnichy, Yu. Yakovets, A. Akaev. M.: Moscow State University - Pitirim Sorokin-Nikolai Kondratiev International Institute - INES - National Committee for BRICS Research - Institute of Latin America RAS, 2014.

[11] Wang Wen. China won’t watch Globalisation Die // The Belt and Road News. June 16. 2020.

[12] Charles Higham. Trading With The Enemy: An Expose of The Nazi-American Money Plot 1933–1949. New York, 1983.

[13] Bill Gates talks about “vaccines to reduce population” // URL: https://www.warandpeace.ru/en/exclusive/view/44942/ 4 марта 2010 г.

[14] Coleman D. Committee of 300. Secrets of the world government. M.: Vityaz, 2005.

[15] The savior of Great Britain proposes a world interim government // RIA Novosti. URL: https://ria.ru/20200328/1569257083.html, March 28, 2020

[16] Huntington S. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1996) is one of the most popular geopolitical works of the 1990s. Originating from an article in the journal Foreign Affairs, it describes in a new way the political reality and the forecast of the global development of the entire earthly civilization. The publication contains the famous article by F. Fukuyama's The End of History.

[17] A.Dugin, “Theory of a multipolar world”, Moscow: Eurasian Movement, 2013. - 532 с.

[18] S. Glaziev. Leap into the future. Russia in the new technological and world economic structures. - M.: Book World, 2018. - 768 p.