5 ms·

Ask HN: Is YC entangled with Trump’s rich supporters?

26 points by stonethrowaway 2y ago

Given all the endorsements from Silicon Valley billionaires that are courting Trump, does this put YC in a situation where they have to look the other way at what is happening and play ball so that their startups will be the next Valley/VC darlings? Will startups that share the vision in some way with these billionaires who are endorsing Trump gain preferential treatment as a means of securing funding rounds or difficult contracts? Related is the rebranding of Palmer Luckey from a Trump supporter to a liberator of Ukraine, as well as the over all anti-Trump sentiment post-2016 election that was permeating through the start up world (SV in particular). Edit: Thank you to the poster who brought this pg comment to light: https://x.com/paulg/status/1814805327210291551 https://x.com/paulg/status/1814805327210291551 Shame this question is flagged.

nektro 2y ago
the paulg tweet isnt encouraging :(
pedalpete 2y ago
I'm not in the US, not American, though I have lived in the US portions of my life. I'm going to go so far as to say it us unamerican to mix business with politics to the level that you are suggesting here. The rhetoric in the US about one against the other is quite ridiculous. Families are worried or even unable to celebrate Thanksgiving dinner because not everyone can agree on their political affiliations. We should identify in our belief in something, not against, and a belief in a party or an individual is just asking for trouble. Let me ask you this. If you had a life threatening illness, would you ask your doctor what party they are going to vote for? That's kinda what you're asking here. You're asking if YC is involved in who the founders they invest in are going to vote for. Ignoring the fact that many of the founders are in the US on a visa, and probably don't care one way or another. Can't Palmer be both a Trump supporter and liberator of Ukraine?
- solardev 2y ago
  In the US, our democracy doesn't really respond to the whims of everyday people. Between the two party system, campaign financing, the electoral college, etc., voting doesn't really do a whole lot. So boycotts become an alternative avenue to change, or at least another place to vent frustration. It flip flops every few years though, like with the diversity and equity stuff that was so popular a few years ago and now getting shut down. The average person here has zero power to affect anything at all in Washington, so yelling at companies is all we can do lol. Wall St is somewhat more responsive than our elected officials. Kinda sad, but that's the country for ya.
jarsin 2y ago
PG recent tweet seems on topic https://x.com/paulg/status/1814805327210291551 https://x.com/paulg/status/1814805327210291551
- dang 2y ago
  FWIW pg's twitter feed has been strongly anti-trump for a good 9 years now, so I don't think that post is telegraphing any political alignment. (To my eye it's about resisting ideological pressure regardless of political affiliation but that's just my take.)
  - dredmorbius 2y ago
    I'd been meaning to comment by email, but ... that tweet is an extraordinarily bad look for HN & YC in my book. One that makes me question my own participation here. One of my major concerns with HN specifically has been its overt status quo bias. Where the status quo stands to go stridently fascist, and the founder of the company and founder don't actively oppose this ... I have extreme reservations. I've similar concerns about other VC firms (e.g., a16z), and quite frankly the VC / tech startup ecosystem as a whole. Xoogler Vic Gundotra's own revelation as a Trumpist a few years back only cemented my own initial sentiments about him. (I'd been an active participant in G+, and what I saw of him there ... stank badly.)
    - tptacek 2y ago
      I don't think Graham has much of an operating role in YC; he's been retired (from YC) for some time now. I think he holds a board seat? I disagree with a lot of what he has to say about politics, but this seems pretty cooly observed. To me --- one of the advocates Graham is referring to --- it seems like an odd thing to get worked up about.
      - dredmorbius 2y ago
        Appreciate your view, as yours was one I was thinking of canvassing. That said, the "how to deal with Nazis in the bar" story comes strongly to mind: <https://old.reddit.com/r/bartenders/comments/j7y3cu/how_to_deal_with_nazis_in_the_bar/ https://old.reddit.com/r/bartenders/comments/j7y3cu/how_to_d...> I remember when YC had some group with PT on it. What I remember is that rather than kick PT out, the group itself was dissolved ... and then reformulated, with the prior members sans PT. That seemed to me at the time an elegant solution. Reading what pg had written, and is writing now, makes me strongly doubt my previous rationalisation. I've written on this ... sometime, somewhere, though apparently not on HN at least by Algolia's search. The story itself is mentioned by BuzzFeeed News <https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/y-combinator-cuts-ties-with-peter-thiel-ends-part-time https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/y-combinator-cu...> and Business Insider <https://www.businessinsider.com/y-combinator-billionaire-venture-capitalist-and-trump-supporter-peter-thiel-2017-11 https://www.businessinsider.com/y-combinator-billionaire-ven...>, both on 17 November 2017. As for PT: he's told us enough times who he is. I'm taking the well-founded advice to believe him.
dang 2y ago
Users flagged it. We can only guess why users flag things, but in this case I've turned the flags off - see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=by%3Adang%20moderate%20%22less%2C%20not%20more%22&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... for how we approach that sort of thing. As for your question: I'm not privy to insider discussions but have been around YC a lot and can tell you I've never heard anything of this nature. From my perspective YC is focused on finding and funding good founders and that's it. Just speaking for myself here though.
- stonethrowaway 2y ago
  Low effort post but just wanted to say thank you for unflagging it, I appreciate the support.

tptacek 2y ago
My opinion of Thiel hasn't changed, but YC's management has, as has my take on collective action in our industry --- I can be supportive of a pressure campaign to divest from a bad actor if it's part of a widespread and general mobilization across the industry, but I find it a lot harder to get wound up when a single, small target doesn't cave to a loud fringe, which is what we ended up being.
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  I'd be interested in what your take on effective collective action is. As for pg's recent comments: whether or not he's on YC's board (I can't find confirmation either way, though he's listed as a founder: <https://www.ycombinator.com/people https://www.ycombinator.com/people>, snapshot: <https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223830/https://www.ycombinator.com/people https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223830/https://www.ycomb...>), his essays are featured on YC's homepage (<https://www.ycombinator.com/ https://www.ycombinator.com/>, snapshot <https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223921/https://www.ycombinator.com/ https://web.archive.org/web/20240723223921/https://www.ycomb...>), and he's making comments clearly indicated as guidance for both YC and other firms. My own goal isn't persuading pg so much as YC's present leadership, and that of other firms (incubators, VC, or commercial enterprises). Opposition to populists has generally been "fringe", until it wasn't, or until all possible hope of opposition is lost. There are other examples of notable organisations distancing themselves from founders. EFF and John Gilmore come to mind: <https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/10/john-gilmore-leaves-eff-board-becomes-board-member-emeritus https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/10/john-gilmore-leaves-ef...>
  - tptacek 2y ago
    I'm trying not to overthink or noodle on this too hard. I'm definitely not looking to pick a bone with Paul Graham. My thing here is simple: I think if you want to make a case that a particular billionaire is an advocate and activist for literal fascism, that makes sense if there's something productive you can do with the impulse. But to do anything productive, you need to mobilize the industry, to confirm to everybody that the push you're making is broadly reflective of the industry as a whole and not just a loud, concentrated special interest. That didn't happen: the politics of the rank and file of the tech industry are well understood, but they're simply not going to organize and act in a meaningful way. It's too big a lift. Fair enough. If it's not going to happen, I don't have a problem with people recognizing that it's not going to happen, like Graham did, and I don't see why we'd keep chasing performative measures.
    - dredmorbius 2y ago
      Thanks. I disagree, though how and why specifically is hard to articulate. Regardless, I'd asked for a clarification and not an argument. I got that first.