Introduction
The thought of Rudolf Kjellén, the father of geopolitics, is not merely a historical relic but remains an active matrix for understanding contemporary power. This article analyzes his concepts within the context of biopolitics, the welfare state, and the AI revolution. Kjellén viewed the state as an organic whole, blending geographical determinism with the political will of institutions. In the digital age, these categories clash with the new realities of data sovereignty. You will learn how these concepts help explain modern configurations of power—from technological giants to the challenges facing Poland.
Rudolf Kjellén: The State as an Organism and Life Form
Rudolf Kjellén defined the state as a life form (Staten som livsform), rejecting a purely legalistic view of sovereignty. In his model, the state is an organism manifesting in five spheres: geopolitics (space), demopolitics (people), ecopolitics (economy), sociopolitics (society), and kratopolitics (governance). Here, geopolitics examines the material foundations of power, while biopolitics (a subset of demopolitics) manages the biological substrate of the population.
A key element of this vision is Folkhemmet—the idea of the "People's Home," which evolved from conservative solidarism toward the modern welfare state. Kjellén also distinguished between the Great Game of superpowers and the Small Game of middle powers. The latter, though subject to the pressures of geography, can build their agency through internal cohesion, technology, and culture, neutralizing natural determinism with conscious political voluntarism.
Artificial Intelligence and Global Models of Biopolitics
In the 21st century, artificial intelligence is redefining the boundaries of geopolitics. Data has become the new strategic resource, and computing infrastructure the equivalent of ancient trade routes. The Arab model (e.g., Saudi Arabia) is a technocracy where AI serves as the backbone of the economy, and biopolitics takes the form of a "data citizen" within a monitored, digital home. Conversely, the USA pursues corporate geopolitics, where private platforms, rather than the state, manage the behaviors and needs of the population.
Through the AI Act, Europe is attempting to impose a kratopolitical framework on this chaos, protecting fundamental rights and the foundations of Folkhemmet. However, a dilemma arises: will rigorous regulations weaken European competitiveness? If the European Union overly restricts the development of its own AI infrastructure in the name of privacy, it risks losing its agency in the global power race, becoming merely a digital periphery.
Poland in the Small Game: Demographics and Digital Sovereignty
For Poland, Kjellén’s thought points to three pillars of security. First, biopolitics: the country faces a demographic crisis and a migration transition. Social transfer policies (like 800 Plus) alone are insufficient; a deep reform of living conditions and population integration is necessary. Second, infrastructural sovereignty: computing power and national AI models must become part of the defense doctrine, much like energy or military infrastructure.
Third, internal cohesion is the guarantor of existence for middle powers. Participating in the "Small Game," Poland must build regional networks of interdependence (e.g., with Baltic and Scandinavian countries). Reducing internal axiological divisions is crucial, as polarization diminishes the state's capacity for long-term planning. Kjellén’s thought teaches that only a state that is internally integrated and technologically proficient can effectively navigate the shadow of great power rivalry.
Summary
Kjellén’s legacy, though rooted in the age of steam and steel, resonates today in the digital world of data and algorithms. Power over space has transformed into power over information flows, and concern for the population has evolved into the management of data regarding bodies. To survive as an organism, the modern state must combine traditional geopolitics with modern technological sovereignty. In this new reality, will the state remain a community of fate, or will it become merely an algorithm optimizing data flows?
📄 Full analysis available in PDF