Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Cheez Whiz's avatar

To frame your argument in a way someone like me can understand, the 2 factions have a common goal, to tear down the current state. The conflict becomes an issue as that goal approaches because the religious faction wants to build a theocratic state with them in control, and the tech faction wants as little state as possible leaving them in (supposed) control of their feifdoms.

And control is the subject Vance studiously avoids with his technology tapdance and focus on how the current system has failed "the workers" as his explanation for no conflict, no conflict, you're the conflict. Doubtless the pitch is the tech faction elite will be part of the exempt ruling class in Giliad while their workers go to madatory morality classes. Good luck with that guys. I know who I'm putting my money on.

Expand full comment
Andrew Dolan's avatar

Outstanding piece, and I have been waiting for someone to take this contradiction on so ably for a while. Many specific examples come to mind from manufacturing, too. The Big 3 are saying that it forced to reshore production that is low on the value chain they’ll automate it as much as possible. How can the circle be squared here between the populists and techno-optimists? Is Trump going to try to ban AI and automation in factories? If so, it really puts the lie to his admin’s overtures to the innovators. If not, the populists aren’t going to get any jobs.

The baseline claim that a closed economy will be good for innovation is deeply bizarre.

Expand full comment
36 more comments...

No posts