Michael Appelt

Throughout history, capitalism has proven remarkably adaptable. It began as a system in which private ownership, competition, and profit reigned supreme, gradually spreading across continents to become the dominant economic structure of our era. Over time, however, capitalism metamorphosed into a more aggressive and intensified form—often dubbed “ultra-capitalism.” This ultra-capitalism thrives particularly well within global networks of liberal democracies, which provide a relatively stable environment for trade and the free flow of capital, labor, and information. Yet beneath this success story lies a fundamental flaw: ultra-capitalism assumes an inexhaustible pool of natural and human resources to fuel endless growth. As we confront the fact that our planet offers finite resources, this assumption unravels, setting in motion a chain of events that can push even liberal democracies toward regulatory constraints and, eventually, more authoritarian rule.


—

Ultra-Capitalism in a Global Network

In a world of liberal democracies, markets are largely open, regulations tend to be comparatively light, and capital—along with the goods and services it produces—moves fluidly across borders. Ultra-capitalism has flourished under these conditions. Corporations, often operating across multiple countries, take advantage of financial deregulation, cheap labor, and readily accessible resources to maximize profit. The political underpinning of liberal democracies—emphasizing civil liberties, open markets, and free speech—initially seemed a perfect match for this brand of capitalism.

However, a crucial tenet of ultra-capitalism is its insatiable need for expansion. As industries grow, so does the demand for resources, whether those be raw materials, energy, or even data and consumer attention. In the early phases, as new markets opened and technology made international trade faster and cheaper, the growth potential seemed unbounded.


—

The Problem of Finite Resources

Reality has a way of asserting itself, and the planet’s limited capacity to supply raw materials cannot be ignored indefinitely. Non-renewable energy sources are being depleted, and even renewable resources—like fresh water and arable land—are showing signs of strain under relentless consumption. As soon as these finite limits become evident, governments step in to regulate. Environmental protections, resource management policies, and social regulations are introduced to curb harmful practices and preserve some semblance of sustainability.

For ultra-capitalist enterprises, these regulations translate into higher operating costs and lower short-term profitability. Faced with the prospect of diminishing returns under the rules of a liberal democracy striving to manage scarcity, some corporations use their disproportionate power to push back. Their objective: to weaken or circumvent regulations that stand in the way of profits. This escalating tension between societal well-being and unbridled corporate power can shake the foundational ideals of democracy itself.


—

The Slide into Autocracy

When a corporation’s influence over government policy becomes substantial enough, democratic checks and balances can erode. Lobbying transforms into policy capture, and political leaders become beholden to powerful interests rather than their constituencies. As resources become scarcer and competition intensifies, the few corporations with extensive capital reserves leverage their dominance. The drive to maintain the growth-based model propels them into increasingly aggressive tactics.

Gradually, the political climate shifts. Citizens may see a need for a “strong hand” to manage crises—be they economic, environmental, or social—opening the door to policies that sidestep democratic processes in favor of rapid, centralized decisions. Where democracy is unable to preserve growth or is perceived as too slow to address urgent problems, autocratic tendencies can take root. Under such a regime, powerful companies find fertile ground for shaping policy unimpeded by public debate or regulatory oversight, ensuring that growth—or at least the pursuit of it—continues on their terms.


—

A Planet With Limits: Ultra-Capitalism Devouring Itself

In our own time, humanity has discovered that Earth has bounds we cannot breach without serious ecological and societal consequences. Ultra-capitalism, in its quest for endless expansion, effectively devours itself: depleting the very resources it relies upon. In doing so, it forces liberal democracies to introduce stricter regulations—ultimately curtailing the very freedom of the market that once made ultra-capitalism possible.

But rather than abandon this growth-centric model, some entrepreneurs look to the stars for salvation. They champion the idea that, beyond our planetary confines, the universe may harbor the boundless resources and opportunities necessary to sustain perpetual economic expansion. Elon Musk, for instance, has become synonymous with the ambition to establish human settlements on Mars and beyond, betting on technology and human ingenuity to unlock new frontiers of wealth, energy, and even interstellar markets. The underlying hope is that alien life forms or other advanced civilizations might one day join and invigorate a grand, galactic economy.

Until that speculative future arrives, however, the march toward an authoritarian system on Earth may seem a necessary trade-off for those determined to open the interplanetary market. An autocracy—unencumbered by time-consuming democratic deliberation—might more quickly mobilize resources, direct public funding, and build the massive infrastructure required for ambitious space ventures. In this sense, autocracy becomes a political means to the same ultra-capitalist end: eternal growth.


—

Conclusion

The historical trajectory of capitalism suggests that its extreme form, ultra-capitalism, came to rely on conditions only liberal democracies could offer: openness, minimal regulations, and global markets. But this structure presupposes infinite resources. As the scarcity of resources makes itself felt, the very openness of a liberal democracy comes under siege. It must regulate, limiting corporate freedom, spurring ultra-competitive firms to seek alternative forms of governance more malleable to their objectives.

This clash of principles—democratic ideals versus the relentless pursuit of growth—could push societies toward autocratic models, especially when companies view autocracy as a faster, more compliant vehicle. In parallel, space exploration emerges as the ultimate gamble to bypass Earth’s limits. Whether this gamble succeeds or fails remains an open question, but the path we tread highlights a stark truth: if growth remains our unquestioned objective, we may find ourselves willing to sacrifice the democratic frameworks that once nurtured prosperity, all in the desperate hope of reaching new frontiers—on this planet or beyond.