Far from relaxing as is often believed, the grip of states on the economy is strengthening. A trend accentuated by the climate crisis. 

Mark Zuckerberg was heard by the US Senate in 2018 as part of the Cambridge Analytica case.

A thesis is spreading with more and more force: the big capitalist enterprises would play an ever-increasing role in the global functioning of our societies, to the point of stripping the states of a significant part of their prerogatives.

The American Gafa (Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple) provide the most serious contribution to the convincingness of this theory. They develop their own operating laws and therefore, in part, their own law, accumulate personal data about each of us and profit from it by selling it, escape taxation by optimizing their locations and internal billing flows on a global scale. Thanks to the increasing efficiency of their activities, they exert a dominant effect on their markets, systematically buy out their potential competitors or, failing that, try to make them disappear. Finally, the eventual arrival of Libra, the private currency invented by Mark Zuckerberg, would constitute, if it were to see the light of day, a direct attack on the sovereignty of States. This threat is certainly present. I do not believe, however, that it can really materialize. The Chinese Gafa (Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent, Xiaomi), without yet having the power of their American rivals, are getting closer and closer. However, far from overshadowing the Chinese state, they have become a key element of its strategy. Let us recall in passing that China represents about 20% of the world's population and 15% of the wealth produced each year in the world. The party-state exercises total, not to say totalitarian, power and all companies, regardless of their public or private status, are at the service of a clearly nationalist policy. The example, even if it is fortunately not followed identically by the Western democracies, will not fail to make our rulers think about the need to have tools of sovereignty: strategic confrontations, trade disputes, diplomatic rivalries, even war, are, for better or for worse, the business of states. "China First," xi jinping said? The sovereignty displayed calls in response for a sovereignty of the same nature. First in the United States, where the will for political power remains strongly present: "America First", replies Donald Trump. But also in Europe, where the notion of sovereignty is beginning to reappear, at least in speeches. In this sense, the libertarian (or hypercapitalist?) conception of society carried by the Gafa seems to me doomed to failure. Already, 48 American states have begun to fight jointly against their dominant positions, Europe has decided to tax them and civil society is becoming sensitive to their various abuses. But money commands. The shareholders and directors of these societies will prefer to submit to the law of nations rather than risk losing their first source of prosperity, the universality of their use. It remains to manufacture the necessary framework internationally, which is not an easy task. As for Libra, no central bank worthy of the name will be able to accept the return of a private currency that would endanger the effectiveness of any monetary policy. A softer movement is at work within the traditional capitalism of Western countries. Companies, hitherto subject to the financial markets and the desires for return of their shareholders, are suddenly detached, at least in words, from the model that governed them. Milton Friedman is no longer fashionable, and the company must now be concerned with the general interest, if not embody it. The Pacte law, in France, obliges them since last May to integrate social and environmental issues into their social purpose and encourages them to define their raison d'être, or even their mission, which gives a scent of transcendence to their activity. Would these fine positions be a sign of a retreat of the States, or even of their impotence? I don't believe it for a second. Rather, they mark the realization by the heads of big business that traditional capitalism, from which they have benefited greatly, is being criticized from many quarters. All these good intentions are in fact the mark of a recognized weakness, and not of a takeover of society. Their lobby, to remain effective, must become more virtuous. Another major element will strengthen the grip of States on economic and social life, the fight against global warming. For two reasons of obvious simplicity in principle. First, in this real race for the survival of humanity it will be necessary to foresee, organize, even plan. Only the State can do this at the level of a society and the reunification of States with that of the planet. Secondly, to change all our modes of production, transport, housing and individual behaviour, we will have to incentivize, deter or even coerce. This implies laws and regulations, as well as new fiscal resources and the organization of transfers between social categories. The State will therefore, quite naturally, regain its raison d'être. In short, liberalism will necessarily retreat (which is not without risks) and capitalism, in order to survive, will have to have the intelligence to return to the ranks. We have seen the first signs, we are waiting for the proof. In any case, the state is back.