{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4","title":"State Platform Capitalism","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9781009619714","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4","id":"d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4","uuid":"d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4","title":"State Platform Capitalism","normalized_title":"stateplatformcapitalism","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9781009619714","isbns":["9781009619714","9781009446594","9781009446587"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":98,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/State%20Platform%20Capitalism","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/d06b946b-6924-4f30-afbd-92f915edbae4/search"},"page":{"printed_page":10,"pdf_page":15,"physical_index":15,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"57a476d242e7dcc2070b95b5495e259c9913736b2a6fb961d3d984033a73121a"},"chapter":"Cambridge Elements","content":"This section first identifies how a rejuvenation ofstate capitalist practices was significantly driven by the dynamics of a global economic slowdown in 2008, before becoming imbricated with geopolitical competition. The urgency of rescuing banking sectors and industrial producers both forced states to break with (self-imposed) laissez-faire of the globalization years, but also revealed what had always been true: that capitalist economies are underpinned by state power. But state capitalist dynamics became increasingly (geo)politicized due to the uneven and combined dynamics at play in the global political economy (Alami and Dixon, 2021). As some states pursue these practices somewhat successfully, others are driven to imitate and adapt to keep up. In this way, policy instruments which emerged as crisis-management tools are becoming deployed for geopolitical ends, with the effect of legitimating their use and strengthening the aspirations of other states to exert control over their own economies.\n\nNext, we turn to the rise of digital capitalism and the platform business model. Although digitalization has a long history, the rise of giant digital platforms to pre-eminence in the global economy is equally tied up with the crisis of 2008 (Srnicek, 2017). We map the evolution of platform business strategies within this broader political economy context. Finally, we demonstrate that rather than being fundamentally opposing trends, state capitalism and platform capitalism are complementary, and increasingly dovetail with one another. As governments embrace state capitalism in their attempts to bolster national security, it is only logical that they seek to exploit the tremendous governance capabilities and extraterritorial reach of platform firms. Platforms, meanwhile, seek to bolster their international scale and scope by obtaining state protection and patronage. The fusion of the distinct but convergent logics of state and platform capitalism is, we claim, fuelling a novel mode ofcompetition between the United States and Chinese states and their platform firms, which we elaborate in the remainder of the text. As with all such ‘fixes’, however, dynamic contradictions and tensions are built-in to this mode of competition – and how these manifest is the major focus of the second part of the Element.\n\n2.2 State Capitalism\n\nState capitalism has a long history. The concept first was introduced with reference to concentrated industrial trusts which were increasingly tied up with the state, alongside emergent forms of national ownership, in late nineteenth-century Europe (Sperber, 2019). Since then, it has passed through many permutations, being used (variously) to signify diverse organizational systems: from the Soviet Union’s centralized planning apparatus and the Keynesian policy frameworks of the advanced economies during the post-war period, to the ‘illiberal’, state-directed and resource-based economies of contemporary Russia, Iran, and Venezuela (Kurlantzick, 2016).\n\n10\n\nReinventing Capitalism","previous_page":9,"next_page":11}