René Ramírez

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗨𝗦 𝗘𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗮 𝗧𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗛𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗲𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗰𝘆 History shows us that systemic crises of capitalism have often been associated with periods of hegemonic transition. Not necessarily between countries, but between ideas, institutional paradigms and regimes of accumulation. This happened in the 1930s, with the collapse of the British liberal order, and again in the 1970s, when the crisis of the Keynesian compromise gave way to the neoliberal counter-revolution. Today, we are experiencing another period of transition, one that Álvaro García Linera describes as "hegemonic stupor". The material foundations of this crisis run deep: prolonged productivity slowdown, rising inequality, rentierism, financialisation and persistent gaps between the core and the periphery, particularly in Africa and Latin America. All this against the backdrop of a stagnated ICT paradigm that has yet to find a new phase of sustained expansion, even with the emergence of AI, whose development remains concentrated in the hands of a few powerful "intellectual monopolies." These contradictions intensify social conflicts and undermine the legitimacy of dominant ideas and institutions. Yet systemic crises do not mechanically produce a new order. They are periods of profound historical indeterminacy. Until recently, the far right had been particularly successful in channelling social discontent. Yet recent political events around the world, including, of course, the US elections, suggest that other alternatives are also gaining ground. The scale of Trump's electoral defeat and the Democrats' recovery of both chambers of Congress are significant in themselves. But even more important is the strengthening of a broader progressive coalition that is also contesting the political and institutional future of the United States from within the Democratic Party. This coalition is heterogeneous, with democratic socialism as one of its important organising forces, but it extends well beyond its formal membership. The election of candidates directly associated with the Democratic Socialists of America, alongside other progressive candidates supported by figures such as Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Zohran Mamdani, reveals a growing convergence around universal healthcare, taxing the wealthiest, workers' rights and challenging corporate power. Abdul El-Sayed's victory in Michigan is particularly illustrative of this broader political articulation. These developments do not guarantee a progressive transformation of US politics. However, the fact that nearly one in three young people in the US express support for democratic socialism suggests that a shift in the ideological landscape may be taking shape, with potential implications for global geopolitics. Together with events in Brazil, Serbia and Berlin, and social mobilisations against the cost-of-living and housing crises across Europe, these results form part of a much broader struggle over the next institutional order. Several outcomes remain possible: a new Chinese hegemony, a reconfiguration of US leadership under more or less authoritarian forms, or the emergence of a new international progressive coalition capable of building alternative forms of social coexistence. Crucially, the techno-economic and institutional dimensions of this transition are deeply intertwined. Institutional change is constrained by biophysical limits and the current knowledge base. Yet technological progress is not neutral either. Its direction depends on power relations, institutions and the interests shaping innovation. The political and geopolitical struggles unfolding today will therefore also shape the future of AI, quantum computing and energy technologies. The question is not simply who will control them, but what kind of society they will serve. It is precisely within this interaction that opportunities may emerge for a fundamentally new social settlement.