In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Editorial: the populist wave
  • Ben Little

One of the focuses of this issue is the rise of populism, and the question of how it might be embraced by the left - if indeed it should. This is clearly an important issue in a political terrain marked by Trump and Brexit.

But the left also has to work out how to respond to opposition to Trump from business interests and other right-wing populists. I focus here on the tech industry in the US, which has been very interesting in its responses to Trump. There is no easy analogue to Silicon Valley in Europe: outposts of the same culture exist in cities like London and Berlin, but there is nothing to match the scale, wealth and power of the Valley anywhere this side of the Atlantic. However, the global reach of digital giants such as Facebook and Google, and the continued centrality of the US in world affairs, means that the ways in which the situation develops in the US will certainly have political implications for the rest of us.

The significance of the industry has not been lost on the new administration. One of the first things that Trump did on winning the presidency was to call a meeting (on 14 December) of senior figures in Big Tech, in a conference room in Trump Tower. In the room were some of the most vocal opponents to his presidency, and to his platform, among the powerbrokers of American capitalism. Trump was deferential and flattering - 'There's no-one like you in the world' - and, in an attempt at echoing the iconoclastic ideology of Silicon Valley, he insisted that there was no hierarchy in his administration. He told them that his door was open: he was 'here to help [them] do well'. Elon Musk, who had previously said he'd move to China if Trump won, now joined the administration's business advisory board, following his fellow PayPal founder (and Trump donor and advisor) Peter Thiel.

The bungled travel ban, however - which could be understood as resulting from Trump's incompetence but also as a quick test of potential levels of resistance to the more illiberal parts of his platform - produced a clear and negative reaction from Silicon Valley. A letter signed by the vast majority of big tech firms, including Microsoft, Apple and Facebook, stated: 'We are a nation made stronger by [End Page 4] immigrants'. Sergey Brin, President of Google's parent company Alphabet (also a signatory to the letter) was spotted at an airport protest in San Francisco against the ban. Many of the letter's signatories also offered their weight to legal challenges to the ban, in the form of a supporting briefing. After a short delay, even Musk allowed his companies Tesla and SpaceX to be added as signatories to the letter.

At the same time, a group of lesser known Valley investors offered to match public donations from their own pockets in an initiative to raise funds for the American Civil Liberties Union to oppose the ban. This was followed by a flurry of articles within tech media about the grassroots movements resisting Trump, often couched within the logic of start-up culture (a sort-of Darwinian, winner-takes-all logic best summarised by Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook's favourite maxim 'move fast and break things'). Not only are the tech industry providing funds and protecting their business interests, but now, it seems, they are also attempting to provide intellectual leadership in the popular resistance to Trump.

Trump has rightly identified the tech industry as a critical industry for the success of his administration. But it could also make a fearsome opposition. With near unlimited funds, a honed PR machine and a presence in almost everyone's pocket, Big Tech - and Trump's relationship to it - will be a major shaper both of the administration and the resistance to it.

It is important to remember here, however, that although Silicon Valley is frequently presented as an interest group, Big Tech is not a single homogeneous entity: it is both geographically and ideologically more spread than its common metonym normally implies, and it includes far more corporate types...

pdf

Share