15 ms·
Tech bosses are globalists, not libertarians
- jrs95 9y ago<deleted>
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- diminish 9y agofirst generation rich people tend to be different than later ones. SV bosses who are owners of successful startups would fall in the former category imho. that explains most traits attributed by OP to the SV people.
- drawnwren 9y agoDo you have numbers to back this up? The first generation of tech darlings almost exclusively come from upper middle and above backgrounds. I'm genuinely interested if that has changed.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- Shivetya 9y agotheir categories are broad enough to arrive at any result they wanted. still I never ever considered any of the SV bosses to anything close to libertarians.
- nyolfen 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Californian_Ideology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Californian_Ideology
- JPKab 9y agoI think that SV founders fall into a pretty solid category of people who were raised by educated, successful people. My main concern with this is that people raised by successful, hard-working people don't understand poverty and the culture around it. Zuckerberg is a perfect example. He's a guy who preaches about tolerance, diversity, and inclusion, but he grew up in an upper middle class suburb that was lily white and had no diversity itself. As a guy who grew up in a working class family with major cultural dysfunction that was mirrored by people all around me, I recognize that the typical "solutions" tossed out by these people are useless. I WISH that the only reason minorities were underrepresented in tech was racism. The real reason is the culture of poverty. This spans race. How many white people from trailer parks in West Virginia or Kentucky do you encounter in the tech scene? Probably a similar number to black people from poor inner-city neighborhoods. Almost none. In fact, when you encounter minorities in SV, they are typically from middle class families with college-educated parents. It's a perfect example of why the "surface" aspects of diversity are not only a bad metric, but one that contributes to the problem by acting as a red herring from true root causes. Yet the SV CEOs think they know everything because they built a web app that streams music.
- aaron-lebo 9y agoExactly. It drives me crazy to hear people who never moved 20 minutes outside of downtown Manhattan and went to a 30k a year high school act like they possibly understand what it's like to be working class or that they can begin to diagnose major issues in society. They've never seen anything but the upper crust of it.
- harveywi 9y ago>The real reason is the culture of poverty. That's a bold claim.
- uncletaco 9y ago
- mattnewton 9y agoI think more simplistically: when you take this group of people and average them out what you get are beliefs that benefit the large companies they represent. That's the signal that is correlated with running a big tech company, and the rest is probably mostly noise. That's all really, they aren't for or against free trade in aggregate, they are for their company trading profitably, on average.
- civilian 9y agoBullshit. You're committing the fallacy that comes from Marxist thought--- that one's position/class/socio-economic-factors are the determining factors in their values and beliefs. People are not so simple, their thoughts can come from elsewhere. You're wildly underestimating the sentience of these people. I think a better model is that: People who understand economics tend to both be entrepreneurs (they understand the rules of the game they're playing) and they are in favor of free trade and less regulation. Free trade _does not_ benefit large companies. Large companies want, and generally get, favorable regulations and tariffs that make it hard for outsiders or for small guys.
- malandrew 9y agoYeah, companies don't generally want regulations. It's almost always a headache and distraction from the core business. However when regulation is finally foisted upon them, they make sure to take the time to influence what regulation they are subject to so that it benefits them and becomes a barrier to entry for new entrants.
- jnbiche 9y ago> Yeah, companies don't generally want regulations I disagree strongly with this. The leading companies of any given industry sector routinely lobby for more regulations, or at the very least they lobby to retain existing regulations. As a younger man, I used to be perplexed by this until learned about regulatory capture.
- hibikir 9y ago
- lubesGordi 9y ago"would like to live in a society where government does nothing except provide national defence and police protection, so that people could be left alone to earn whatever they could," -- obviously encapsulates the libertarian philosophy.
- raldi 9y agoThe stereotypical right-wing position is, "This government program is poorly-run; let's get rid of it" The stereotypical left-wing position is, "This government program should be left alone, even if it's poorly-run" The stereotypical Gray Tribe position is, "This government program is poorly-run; let's debug it"
- wutbrodo 9y ago> The stereotypical Gray Tribe position is, "This government program is poorly-run; let's debug it" Until the Gray-Triber realizes that there's no real feedback loop between policy effectiveness and actual policy and end up as either a resigned left-winger or bitter right-winger
- enraged_camel 9y ago>>The stereotypical left-wing position is, "This government program should be left alone, even if it's poorly-run" No, it is "This government program is poorly-run probably because it is severely underfunded." After all, "government is poorly-run" tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy: it is used to justify spending cuts, which does in fact result in performance problems.
- mythrwy 9y agoWhich is often another ways of saying "This government program is poorly-run. So lets double it!".
- projectramo 9y agoI don't like these categories but while we are playing this game: Aren't libertarians also globalists?
- sremani 9y agoThe current global trade (non-software) relies on security provided by US Navy. Global Trade is not Free Trade! You need a security under-writer for it. I think Libertarians have a "blind-spot" there.
- davidivadavid 9y agoI'm not sure about that, unless you're conflating libertarians with anarcho-capitalists. Minarchist libertarians would actually consider that making free trade possible through military might is in the purview of the state.
- sremani 9y agoYou may be right, but what is libertarian idea of maritime trade in hostile world and how would a free market established in such circumstances. (I am not asking for full answer.. you can point me books or links)
- WalterBright 9y agoYou might want to check out what the US Navy did to the pirates. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates#18th.E2.80.9319th_centuries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_pirates#18th.E2.80.931...
- CalChris 9y agoYou are saying that the minarchist Night Watchman State will have 10 carrier strike groups? I don't think that word means what you think it means.
- 9y ago
- granfalloon 9y agoThere was a comment about the political influence and aspirations of certain big names in tech, but it has suddenly disappeared. It contained some criticism of Paul Graham and Sam Altman, but seemed totally reasonable to me -- can anyone say why it was deleted?
- aaron-lebo 9y agoI wrote it, I don't feel like being an ass and I'm feeling overly aggressive today, not to mention I am a guest in someone else's house. ...but my overall point is that the tech elite is composed of a lot of rich white guys with connections, who naturally help each other out. Sam Altman runs YC now and as of last year was apparently seriously considering running for governor of California. That strikes me as grandiose and not good for society. Sam is 33 and because he's a tech billionaire thinks that he should run the most developed economy in the world? He genuinely believes that people outside of tech and business know who he is? He's qualified, because he's shook hands with the best off of society for the past decade? Why does he deserve that power? Why does Zuckerberg deserve to be president? What makes him qualified? He made a PHP app that got big. Come on. That's what all this boils down to: money and power and a lot of people value that more than anything else in life. How about we be honest with ourselves as individuals and societies and stop enabling that?
- _0ffh 9y agoI suppose everyone thinks "Trump did it, why shouldn't I? I'm certainly better than that guy!"... but I think they forget that they weren't playing a successful authority figure on TV for years.
- Iv 9y agoTrump lowered the bar so much that most people think they can do a better job than the current president, and are probably right. What they miss is that running as a republican is very different than running as a democrat (as I guess most tech people would want to). Zuckberg would beat Trump in the democratic primaries, no question about that. But he won't be in front of Trump, he would be in front of many experiences politicians who actually have a clue about how one manages a country.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- md224 9y agoAnyone else here familiar with "liberaltarianism"? I think that might be what the data is showing: the desire for a robust and efficient free market tethered to a redistributive social safety net. I think it's a pretty good idea.
- dbroockman 9y agoYep, that is exactly what the we find and argue. I think the NYT article about our work does a better job highlighting that central finding: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/technology/silicon-valley-politics.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/technology/silicon-valley....
- milcron 9y agoGood idea but an awful name. "Liberal" has an existing meaning which has been warped by American politics. Both the American parties have a liberal heritage. Republicans are conservative liberals, and Democrats are largely progressive liberals. Libertarianism is a reactionary liberal ideology that seeks to return to a freer, less-regulated market. The confusion happened due to FDR. He ran on a progressive platform but the term "progressive" was poisoned in American politics at the time, so he called himself "liberal". There is already a term for what you're describing, simply "left-libertarianism" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism
- jim-jim-jim 9y agoI agree with what you said about liberalism, but I think you're off the mark with regards to left-libertarianism. It's a disparate label, but I can't imagine any of these schools of thought showcasing "the desire for a robust and efficient free market" the parent comment calls for. Liberal markets + social safety net sounds like garden variety Nordic model democracy to me. The term "left-libertarian" is usually ascribed to groups like Catalonian anarchists or Zapatistas.
- mmirate 9y ago> a robust and efficient free market tethered to a redistributive social safety net. The latter would destroy or corrupt the former. It's a horrible idea.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- yellowapple 9y agoIf they favor free trade and redistribution of wealth, then they're still able to be libertarians. Libertarianism and globalism are not mutually exclusive. There's a whole spectrum of libertarians from anarcho-capitalists to libertarian socialists (I'm somewhere in the middle-left, I'd reckon). The unifying trait is the belief that individual freedom is paramount.
- dbroockman 9y agoAuthor of the study they wrote about here. I think the NYT write up is better: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/technology/silicon-valley-politics.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/06/technology/silicon-valley.... Study here: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers/wealthy-elites-policy-preferences-economic-inequality-case https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/working-papers....
- lliamander 9y agoA couple thoughts: - The survey covers just SV elites. It would be interesting to see how those beliefs compare to rank-and-file SV tech company employees (and to see that broken down further by profession). Differences in values between employees and bosses could lead to conflict further down the road. - I'm reading more lately about the degree to which our temperament (the Big 5 personality index) influences our political beliefs. For instance, the managers and executives of established companies tend to be very high in Conscientiousness, which correlates with conservative beliefs. Entrepreneurs on the other hand score very high in Openness, which correlates with Liberal beliefs. I suspect their differences from standard Democrat politics stems from a relatively lower score in Agreeableness. Edit: formatting and extended a thought.
- dbroockman 9y agoGreat points on both. On #2, we wanted to include those, but space constraints :/. Given the interest in this survey we'll probably do another after collecting more suggestions like these. Thanks!
- devmunchies 9y agoI downloaded the study just to see if my company (Qualtrics) was used for the survey and sure enough it was. :)
- gcb0 9y agothe nyt open with: "Silicon Valley has long preferred to remain aloof from national politics, but the Trump era has altered that stance." which is kinda of hard to defend since Obama constantly blocked the bay area on reelection campaigns and most of his advisors came from/went to silicon Valley companies.
- zht 9y agoPlease excuse my ignorance with modern political parlance, but I always got the feeling that "globalists" was actually dogwhistle codeword for Jew. Is that the case?
- lliamander 9y agoInteresting, that's never been my understanding. More refers to anyone who desires world government (or the diminishing of local governments) and who finds the desire to preserve one's culture, community, and national identity as backwards and unenlightened. I suppose it could be used by some as a dogwhistle, but it seems there's also a meaningful set of ideas that can be represented by that term.
- pvg 9y agoRefers to anyone who desires world government (or the diminishing of local governments) and who finds the desire to preserve one's culture, community, and national identity as backwards and unenlightened. That's not what 'globalist' means outside of the fringes. It's certainly not the way the linked article uses it.
- lliamander 9y agoWell, I'll have to re-read the linked article. In any case, while I probably did not phrase it in the language that globalists themselves would use, but would they flat out refute my definition? Or would they merely nuance it?
- pvg 9y agoYes, yours is the Breitbart definition. Just google 'globalist', look at the wikipedia page, etc. If I defined 'libertarians' as, say, 'people who won't answer the question "How often do you beat your spouse?" with a simple yes or no', it would be just inaccurate and loaded, not something libertarians would want to 'nuance'.
- 9y ago
- ulrikmoe 9y agoClassical liberalism does not oppose universal healthcare. When you had prohibition, in Denmark we had classical liberalism, universal healthcare and a marginal taxrate of <15% (1/4 of yours). This is the society that I prefer and hopefully Denmark can get back on the right track :)
- jsf666 9y agoIt does as "universal" means you need to FORCE everyone to partake in it. But it doesn't prohibit socialized healthcare - all the socialists can gather and create an insurance company that will socialize the costs amongst it's members. But they love someone else's money too much it seems
- maxxxxx 9y agoWhat are these strict categories good for? The real image is much more complex.
- unabridged 9y agoThere is a category called left libertarian that describes them pretty close. Basically american libertarian + UBI (or other types of wealth redistribution).
- Chiba-City 9y agoMathematicians are globalists. Software is like High Latin or sheet music. CPU's are its translators or maybe pipe organs. What could anyone miss here? This was, is and shall remain the very overt and enduring goal of cultured people. I did get to study nuclear strategy relevant game theory with Thomas Schelling decades back. But I should not be newly informing software guru CPU composers that "good jobs for good wages to impress ladies" or "sky bomber tools" are not goals. Those are minimal essential system basslines or nothing. Math applies everywhere we listen. There is no politics or wishing to it whatsoever. Just more math and music.
- wallace_f 9y agoGloablist vs Libertarian is a strange dichotomy to me. As a Libertarian this study would mark me as a 'globalist.' I believe free trade and immigration are good, and that foreign policy is important. They go on to ask SV if 'they are libertarians' by asking if they believe in Minarchism--that the State should only provide police and military, which most libertarians themselves don't even agree is an ideal interpretation. What a silly piece of work. There's a whole lot of corporate and political pushback against libertarians, which is getting to be crazy. Google defunded Ron Paul's Youtube channel, which is ridiculous. Libertarianism is not the opposite of globalism or socialism. In fact, there exist prominent libertarian socialists, Noam Chomsky for example. The reality is libertarianism is the opposite of authoritarianism.
- throwaway2016a 9y agoThank you, I came here to say something about this, the whole article seems to misunderstand libertarianism. The extreme fringe of libertarianism is anarchism and I think that is really what they were getting at. But most Libertarians as with any political affiliation are not at the fringe (though they may be the loudest). This would be like judging all Republicans based on the Tea Party or all Democrats based on Socialism.
- conanbatt 9y agoI thought chomsky was anarco-sindicalist.
- current_call 9y agoThis isn't news, is it? Google hates decentralization. Visa and money transfer restrictions force them to improve the areas they're based out of. Open communication makes it harder for them to control public opinion. Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, coauthored a book, The New Digital Age, about how in the future there won't be any border restrictions and 'fake news' will be censored away. Here, I have quotes! More effective communication across borders and languages will build trust and create opportunities for hardworking and talented individuals around the world. Bureaucratic obstacles that prevent this level of decentralized operation today, like visa restrictions and regulations around money transfers, will become either irrelevant or be circumvented as digital solutions are discovered. Imagine all of your accounts -- Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Google+, Netflix, New York Times subscription -- linked to an "official profile." Within search results, information tied to verified online profiles will be ranked higher than content without such verification, which will result in most users naturally clicking on the top (verified) results. People who try to perpetuate myths about religion, culture, ethnicity or anything else will struggle to keep their narratives afloat amid a sea of newly informed listeners. Oh, and if any of you disagree with them, don't worry. They made a point of saying they can't be held responsible, and that boycotting their products or refusing to work for them will hurt you more than them. It is, after all, much easier to blame a single product or company for a particularly evil application of technology than to acknowledge the limitations of personal responsibility. Certain subsections of the technology industry that receive particularly negative attention will have trouble recruiting engineers or attracting users to and monetizing their products, despite the fact that such atrophying will not solve the problem (and will only hurt the community of users in the end, by denying them the full benefits of innovation.) Don't be evil. Don't be Google.
- puranjay 9y ago> People who try to perpetuate myths about religion, culture, ethnicity or anything else will struggle to keep their narratives afloat amid a sea of newly informed listeners. This is pretty damn terrifying. Who is the authority on what qualifies as a "myth" or a "lie"? We're coming closer to a Ministry of Truth every single day. And people who I would otherwise call 'smart' are actively cheering for it if it protects their own sacred belifs
- _pmf_ 9y agoI think some sarcastic slow clapping is appropriate here.
- dominotw 9y agothe survey seems not to be anonymous and people lie if they know that their position as a ceo would be associated with their political views.