Joel Kotkin, over at The Beastly Day:
Whom do the oligarchs’ wish to destroy? Of course, Donald Trump, whom they find understandably offensive, but who also owes little or nothing to them. Perhaps even more threatening are the populists of the left variety, people like Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who openly seek to drain their riches and regulate their empires. It could prove a difficult task.
I'm not so sure about Sanders, but Warren seems eminently coöptible; she'll get as cozy with the tech oligarchs as with any others, once they buy her off.
And, in any case, laws and regulations ostensibly meant to rein in the oligarchs have a tendency (once influence has been brought to bear) to rein in the upstarts instead, protecting the entrenched interests. Indeed, the oligarchs will loudly support such measures, once they're certain of escape clauses and selective application.
Remember: regulatory compliance costs don't scale, so a tiny startup, subject to the same regulatory regime as an entrenched monopoly, will find compliance to be an insuperable obstacle. Unless they simply pretend the laws and regulations don't apply to them (see: Uber), which works fine, right up until it doesn't (see: Uber).
On the other hand, I tend to agree with Kotkin's overall argument - and note that his article (unsurprisingly, given the venue) doesn't mention the name "Gab", let alone the aggressive conspiracy-in-restraint-of-trade by which that upstart has been denied payment-processing and hosting services.
Comments