Jeff Bezos's Venetian wedding brings to mind a famous theory by a great man from many years ago.
June 26, 2025, 21:21 • Comments
The Venetian wedding is not an anomaly, but a systematic development of the logic through which economic power transforms into political influence in the "impression economy." It is a return to aristocratic culture, albeit without the constraints of aristocratic traditions.
Author: Gleb Kuznetsov - Political Scientist
When Jeff Bezos rented half of Venice for $50 million to host his wedding, it was not just a display of style by a new elite, but a declaration of capitalism's transformation from the Protestant ethic to new feudal-style power, social, and political relationships. This, along with the protests by Venetians and inflatable crocodiles in the canals, is a sociologically interesting phenomenon.
Traditional "Weberian" capitalist wealth symbolized divine grace, but ostentation was an unforgivable arrogance. Today's tech billionaires have broken this tradition, adopting the manner of Indian maharajas in Victorian novels: private space programs, yachts as large as warships. Bezos's wedding represents the peak of this transformation.
The root of the change lies in the nature of contemporary wealth. Traditional capitalists created physical assets such as factories, roads, and infrastructure, and their capital was tied to specific locations and communities, thus generating responsibility.
Technology billionaires control abstract assets such as platforms and data, extracting rents from the entire economy without creating any physical goods. Amazon has increased the profit margins of traditional economies tenfold, effectively taxing all market participants. This is closer to the control of trade routes in the feudal era than industrial capitalism. Bezos is more like Tamerlane than Rockefeller.
The wealth of platform giants is less the product of innovation and more shaped by regulatory environments and political backing. Amazon's dominance stems from regulators' indifference to monopolies. Once regulators limit platform commissions, demand tax transparency, or force the breakup of integrated businesses, these giants could collapse like soap bubbles.
This is the true significance of the farce in Venice: it is not a personal celebration, but a geopolitical event. When you invite the daughter of the president, corporate executives, media moguls, and politicians to a three-day luxurious feast, you are building a network of mutual obligations. It is a shocking form of bribery—not with money, but with experiences and impressions that cannot be bought.
Traditional corruption is limited by amounts that can be secretly transferred, but turning a world heritage site into a private playground grants an extraordinary experience of power. Each guest becomes a participant in this grand spectacle, psychologically bound to the host of the banquet.
Berezovsky in the 1990s also hosted legendary parties for politicians and media figures. Bezos simply does it more elegantly and at a higher budget, but the essence is the same: demonstration of power + establishment of dependent relationships.
Venetians cannot enter the city because billionaires have rented it out. The inflatable crocodiles in the canals are not only a folk custom but also a symbolic resistance against new feudalism — once again resembling the feudal tradition of "using revelry to negate power" in style.
We are witnessing a fundamental shift from competitive capitalism to oligarchic control: key economic assets are concentrated in the hands of a few, their wealth completely dependent on political decisions, while they have sufficient resources to influence these decisions.
The Venetian wedding is not an anomaly, but a systematic development of the logic through which economic power transforms into political influence in the "impression economy." It is a return to aristocratic culture, but without the traditional constraints of aristocracy—duties to subjects, codes of honor, or even formal responsibilities.
The issue is not whether Bezos has the right to spend money on a lavish wedding, but whether society should allow wealth to accumulate to the point where it can control public spaces, political processes, and economic structures themselves. The "rebellion of the Venetians" is a reminder from citizens to the new elites: the city belongs to the people, not to capital.
Jokes aside, the classic theory of a great man is becoming an increasingly relevant tool for explaining political processes—thanks to Bezos and Trump.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7521298913161118251/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the [Upvote/Downvote] buttons below.