As the United States prepares for yet another electoral contest, it’s easy to get caught up in the drama—the speeches, the debates, the controversies. But to truly understand what’s happening, we need to adopt a critical lens that cuts through the noise. Looking at the U.S. elections from a global perspective—specifically from India—reveals a different picture, one that goes beyond the personalities and the pageantry. It’s a picture of power, wealth, and the global order.
At its core, the U.S. election is a spectacle designed to reinforce a system of corporate dominance. The two dominant political parties, the Democrats and Republicans, may appear to be at odds on a few issues, but when it comes to the big questions—the economy, foreign policy, and military intervention—they largely serve the same masters: multinational corporations, defence contractors, and the ultra-wealthy. This is the real game. The winner of the election might get to wear the crown, but they are all part of the same royal court, bound by the same rules.
Let’s be clear: the election is not a contest between two ideologies. It’s a contest to determine who can better serve the interests of the powerful few while keeping the majority distracted with empty promises. And for the rest of the world—especially countries like India—the outcome is far from irrelevant. The policies decided in Washington will shape not only the future of the U.S. but the global balance of power, trade, and military alliances. For India, a country trying to navigate the complexities of its own economic rise, these decisions could have a profound impact on its future trajectory.
The Illusion of Choice
In the U.S., elections are often sold to the public as a choice between different futures, a moment when the people's will can direct the course of history. But the reality is quite different. Both parties are deeply entrenched in the structures of corporate capitalism, and while they may bicker over certain domestic policies, they are aligned when it comes to protecting the interests of the corporate elite. Whether it's Kamala Harris or Donald Trump in the Oval Office, the policy differences are often superficial. When it comes to military spending, defence contracts, trade deals, or tax cuts for the wealthy, they are both firmly on the same side. The differences are in tone, not in substance.
From an Indian perspective, this is critical to understand. The U.S. election offers a choice between two figures who will ultimately shape India’s future through their policies. But the difference between a Democrat and a Republican isn’t necessarily a choice for India; it’s a choice between who will better maintain the international status quo—a status quo that keeps India in a position of dependence, both economically and strategically. Whether it’s in the form of trade agreements, arms deals, or military alliances, India often finds itself caught in the web spun by the U.S. government’s decisions.
India’s growing relationship with the U.S. over the past few decades has been marked by increasing military cooperation, economic integration, and diplomatic alignment. But while this may seem like a sign of progress, one must ask: Progress for whom? It’s certainly progress for the corporations that benefit from these partnerships. But for the ordinary Indian citizen, the benefits are less clear. The U.S. elections, then, are not just a contest between two personalities—they are a contest between two visions of how global power should be structured. And in both cases, that vision serves the interests of the few.
Corporate Power and the Global Order
The U.S. election is a contest between two forces: the public and corporate America. It’s not even a fair fight. From the massive influence of the military-industrial complex to the lobbying power of Big Tech and Wall Street, the public has little say in the larger decisions that shape the nation and, by extension, the world. For those of us watching from afar—particularly in a country like India, which is both a rising global power and a former colony—the U.S. election represents something far deeper than the personalities running for office. It represents the way in which a system of global capitalism dictates the terms of our existence.
India, with its rapidly growing middle class, is being drawn into the web of global finance and trade, much of it shaped by U.S. policy. The country’s dependence on foreign direct investment (FDI), for example, is heavily influenced by Washington’s economic interests. While India benefits from this relationship—especially in the tech and defence sectors—it also faces the danger of being tethered to a system that prioritizes profit over people, and military dominance over diplomacy. The outcome of the U.S. election will determine how these dynamics evolve, and whether India continues to be a junior partner in the U.S.-led world order or attempts to carve out a more independent path.
One of the most glaring examples of this is the growing military cooperation between the U.S. and India, particularly through frameworks like the Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue), which includes Japan, Australia, and the U.S. This cooperation is framed as a counterbalance to China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region. But while India is increasingly aligning itself with U.S. military interests, there are also signs that this relationship may come at a cost. Will India be forced into a military confrontation with China as a proxy for American interests? Or will it be able to maintain its independence while navigating the geopolitical tensions in the region? The U.S. election will determine much of that trajectory.
The Farce of Democracy
Of course, none of this is acknowledged in the mainstream media discourse in the U.S. or abroad. The U.S. elections are presented as the epitome of democracy, a moment when the American people choose their leader and, by extension, decide the future of the world. But as Chomsky has long pointed out, this is a carefully orchestrated performance. The real decisions are made by those who control the wealth, the media, and the military—the corporate elites whose interests shape every aspect of American life, from the healthcare system to foreign policy.
In India, where democracy is still a work in progress and often strained by the weight of economic disparity and political corruption, the U.S. election is often viewed with a mix of admiration and scepticism. On the one hand, it is seen as a testament to the power of popular participation. On the other hand, it serves as a reminder of the ways in which wealth and power subvert democratic institutions. The truth is, both the Democratic and Republican parties serve the interests of corporate America. And while they may argue over the finer details of policy, when it comes to the big issues—like military spending, global capitalism, and the protection of elite wealth—their positions are strikingly similar.
The Conclusion: The Global Spectacle
So, what does all of this mean for India? For a nation trying to assert itself in a rapidly changing global order, the U.S. election represents a critical moment. But it’s not about the candidates themselves—it’s about the system that underpins their rise to power. The outcome of the U.S. election will shape the global economic and political landscape, and India will inevitably be affected. The question for India is not just about which party wins, but how the country can navigate a world in which U.S. interests dominate and the voices of ordinary people are often drowned out.
The US election is a spectacle. It’s a show. But as Chomsky has consistently pointed out, it’s a show that serves to mask the real dynamics of power. The winner will not change the structural forces that keep the elite in control, both at home and abroad. And as India watches, it must remember that the global system is rigged. The real question is: how long will it continue to play the game?
In the end, the U.S. election doesn’t matter much for the masses—whether in America or in India. The only thing that matters is which faction of the corporate elite gets to dictate the terms of the next four years. And when that happens, democracy remains, as always, for the rich.