8 ms·
The broligarchs are trying to have their way
- ggm 2y agohttps://archive.ph/Gbrjo https://archive.ph/Gbrjo
- walkabilitee 2y agoNot a fan of how "bro" is now a slur for, "non-obese male who holds opinions with which I disagree"
- eesmith 2y agoIt isn't that well defined. To start with, which opinions? I may disagree with your (hypothetical) opinion that Go is the best language developed so far. I would not call you "bro" because of that, even if you were a non-obese male. Bro in this context refers to "tech bro' oligarchs" (https://www.wordorigins.org/big-list-entries/broligarchy https://www.wordorigins.org/big-list-entries/broligarchy dates the popularity starting last month). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brogrammer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brogrammer notes that '"Brogrammer" or "tech bro"' are "often used pejoratively to describe toxic masculinity and sexism in the technology industry". This definition highlights how it's not merely 'opinions with which I disagree', but a specific set of opinions. FWIW, The Atlantic is the publication which brought us the term "Bernie Bro", "to describe young, white, progressive men who, in his view, support unrealistic progressive policies and promote the Bernie Sanders campaign obnoxiously", including "sometimes attack in very sexist ways" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Bro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Bro The connection there is the toxic masculinity and sexism.
- lilharddad 2y ago[dead]
- orwin 2y ago'non-obese' when talking about 'tech bro' / Musk is a stretch. He probably is medically obese (above 30 BMI). I know it isn't what USians call obese, but basically, for a man, once fat can be seen on your face, you're obese (I'm an ex-obese, I know).
- aaron695 2y ago[dead]
- oceanplexian 2y ago> Eight years ago, the PayPal and Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel was an outlier in liberal Silicon Valley for publicly supporting Donald Trump. Is the opening sentence supposed to imply that Thiel (and Elon) are no longer outliers? I thought 99% of the SV elite were still donating vast sums of money to the other party. Since, all of a sudden, everyone is concerned with billionaires why the obsession with Elon? It’s OK when big money donates to one side but not the other?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- kombookcha 2y ago>why the obsession with Elon Elon is notorious for chasing the limelight and keeping it on him personally more so than the product. Most billionaires are content with doing this type of stuff fairly quietly, hence they attract less attention. If you do shit for attention all the time you're probably going to get more of it, but it won't necessarily be flattering or directed in the way you want.
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoJohn McAfee-style.
- rtpg 2y agoTo be honest my impression is that any "loud" VC is firmly in the Musk camp. And maybe just disagrees with Musk on a tactical level but generally would like for a lot of discussions to stop happening. There's probably a bit of a "intellectual dark web" silliness going on where they all think they are being oppressed for their opinions, despite probably being the silent... plurality I guess in their cohort. Of course when they talk about this in public fora, many people outside their cohort[0] will react negatively to them. [0]: glibly, outside their bubble.
- jimbob45 2y agoIt’s OK when big money donates to one side but not the other? For those not familiar with American politics, virtually all large money donors donate to both sides to varying degrees. This is primarily to get both your favored candidate in the race and remove tough matchups from the opposing side via the primary process. The real difference is who you choose to vocally support.
- rmaiti 2y agoEh not just the broligarchs, consulting giants want in on the action too - Will AI Eat Consulting? A Consultant’s Perspective (https://rimaiti.substack.com/p/will-ai-eat-consulting-a-consultants https://rimaiti.substack.com/p/will-ai-eat-consulting-a-cons...)
- whatever1 2y ago[flagged]
- ArtTimeInvestor 2y agoWhat I find most frightening is the trick Musk played on regular investors via his pay package that is now worth tens of billions. Multiple times more than what Tesla earns per year. No regular investor digs into this kind of company details. Nor do they understand the risk reward mechanics at play. And they shouldn't have to. If the stock market gets played with unusual contracts like this one, regular investors will be cheated out of the value that is created by replacing more and more jobs by AI.
- trilbyglens 2y agoEveryone will get cheated out of the value created by AI unless collective action is taken. Value extraction is the USP of AI.
- Llamamoe 2y ago> If the stock market gets played with unusual contracts like this one, regular investors will be cheated out of the value that is created by replacing more and more jobs by AI. The only people in the world who deserve money even less than sociopathic billionaires are investors. I'd say cheating them out of their money should be free game. Isn't that basically what they're doing to every worker-class human being in the world as it is?
- blitzar 2y agoyou are not less worthy than sociopaths
- Gud 2y agoworker-class humans SHOULD BE investors too.
- klipt 2y agoYou realize the government funds most people's pensions/retirement via investment right? Either directly via pension funds or indirectly by encouraging people to save in 401ks etc?
- 2y ago
- rndmize 2y ago[flagged]
- ruok_throwaway 2y agoTo a reasonably informed outsider the entire US political system looks like a cynical dirty circus. I have no horse in the political race; I only wish for the US to be strong, since I see it as a shining beacon for many good in the world. That said, you mentioned the ridiculousness of one side, with completely ignoring what has happened on the other. So let me list some of the hard to believe details regarding that other side: - the current presidential candidate has not won a single delegate in the primaries in 2020 - in 2020 they have had an attrocious performance while campaigning - they've been a steady stream of cringe and embarrassment for the US in their public appearances for the last 4 years - in 2024 the primaries have been shut down, only for this candidate to be hot-swapped in! ... so now as an opposition to the ridiculous orange candidate that you described on the other side, you now have a candidate that no one has voted for! How is that a democracy? Your entire two-party political system is rigged and you should own up to it, or not engage with it at all.
- klipt 2y agoYou can't say nobody voted for the vice president, they are part of the presidential ticket. If the president can't serve, they literally become president. Hypothetical scenarios: 1. Biden/Harris wins presidency. Biden steps down. Harris is now president. 2. Biden/Harris wins Democratic nomination. Biden steps down. Harris is now nominee. How is 2. any less democratic than 1.?
- ruok_throwaway 2y agoNo one voted for them when they were campainging by themselves in 2020 - 0 delegates won. 2024 primaries were shut down - so no one voted them again. They wouldn't have won the primaries if the primaries were held. --- The fact that you mention they have been voted for because they were the second person on the ticket that won the presidential election is exactly what is wrong with the US. They only managed to win by association and now they hope to fail-upwards solely on name recognition (gained through association!) In the US you don't win on merit anymore, now the game is: 1. get a small win by association 2. use the newly gained name recognition to fail upwards What a shame.
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoAt least it's clear now: It's not about blue or red, it's all about who has the green vs. everyone else. "There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently … and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties." - Gore Vidal
- karmakurtisaani 2y agoI feel like this quote stopped being as true as it once was around the Trump era. The blatant authoritarianism among Republicans is something else.
- trilbyglens 2y agoNot without a sea change in the democratic establishment it won't.
- r0ckarong 2y agoFinal stage capitalism: Monarchy sanctioned by money not god.
- jzellis 2y agoThere's a reason Thiel and those weirdos are cozying up to loonies who call themselves "neo-monarchists".
- nataliste 2y agoWhen Sheldon Edelstein, the Koch Brothers, Michael Bloomberg (who famously during the 2020 Democratic primary debates had a Freudian slip of admitting outright buying congressional seats) and sundry other oligarchs throw their assets around, it's a non-issue, but suddenly new blood and noveau riche start doing it and it's somehow gauche and a threat to democracy, while also being outright misandrist. Selective rigor is the enemy. It's bad when anyone does it, not just when your outgroup does it.
- jauntywundrkind 2y agoNah. There was plenty of pushback & rage against the previous ultra-rich & their ability to exert such massive political control over what nominally was a democracy too. Selective rigor this is not. Nor should it be; it's all gross as hell & a horrible perversion of democratic interests. And the stridency with which these folks work against democracy has only intensified. The article cites what books/influences these people have spoken for, and this is worthy coverage to consider. > ...The Sovereign Individual, by James Dale Davidson and William Rees-Mogg. The text unironically likens the ultrarich to "the gods in Greek myth," and assures readers that they deserve no less than world domination: "Commanding vastly greater resources and beyond the reach of many forms of compulsion, the Sovereign Individual will redesign governments and reconfigure economies. Democracy should remain vigilant to enemies within and without. It's hard for me to read something like this & not form a belief that these people are working against our democracy in ever more direct conflict. Perhaps even more vigor is needed, given the magnitude of the conflict.
- nataliste 2y ago>Nah. There was plenty of pushback & rage against the previous ultra-rich & their ability to exert such massive political control over what nominally was a democracy too. Citation needed. Especially from outfits like the Atlantic, replete with invented pejoratives.
- Incipient 2y agoWhy you lot (the US) still let the rich buy politicians is beyond me. I get you don't have a choice in the matter, because the rich are in power, but still kinda sucks.
- RestlessMind 2y agoPlease tell me which country you live in, where the rich don't control the state.
- worik 2y agoIt is a matter of degree
- RestlessMind 2y agoOk, go on. What are 5-10 countries where rich control the state to a low degree?
- 6510 2y agoThe jolly heretic can sometimes be accused of saying interesting things. He recently seemed to coin a new measure of how bad things are going: Just before the end politicians [continue to] lie about everything knowing that everyone knows they are lying and everyone knows they know. Infinite recursion. What they know that we don't isn't even important, it is bad enough not to see the point of simply doing their job.