Las Vegas Review-Journal

The perils of plutocrati­c pettiness

- Paul Krugman Paul Krugman is a columnist for The New York Times.

The sultans of Silicon Valley are in a political snit, with some billionair­es suddenly turning against Democrats. It’s not just Elon Musk. Other prominent players, including Jeff Bezos, have lashed out at the Biden administra­tion, and we now know that Oracle’s Larry Ellison participat­ed in a call with Sean Hannity and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., about overturnin­g the 2020 election.

The timing of this hard right turn by some tech aristocrat­s is remarkable given what’s happening in U.S. politics. It’s hard, for example, to imagine what kind of bubble Musk lives in that he could declare Democrats “the party of division and hate” at a time when Tucker Carlson, not a politician but still one of the most influentia­l figures in the modern GOP, is devoting show after show to “replacemen­t theory,” the claim that liberal elites are deliberate­ly bringing immigrants to America to displace white voters. (Polls show that nearly half of Republican­s agree with this theory.)

The plutocrats railing against Democrats are also remarkably petty; nothing says “visionary titan of industry” like sending poop emojis. But the pettiness may actually be central to the political story. What’s going on here isn’t mainly about greed (although that, too). It is, instead, largely about fragile egos.

It’s true that some real economic interests are at stake. Democrats have proposed new taxes on the wealthy, while President Joe Biden has appointed officials known for advocating much stronger antitrust policy. It’s also true that tech stocks have fallen substantia­lly over the past few months, reducing the paper wealth of moguls like Musk and Bezos.

But at this point these look like policies at the edges. Even if Democrats defy the odds and retain control of Congress this November, there is no realistic prospect of a New Deal-type campaign against extreme inequality. Furthermor­e, any conceivabl­e redistribu­tive policy would still leave billionair­es incredibly wealthy, able to buy anything they want (except, possibly, Twitter).

What wealth can’t always buy, however, is admiration. And that’s an area in which the tech titans have suffered major losses.

Let me get nerdy for a minute. At least since the work of Max Weber a century ago, social scientists have realized that social inequality has multiple dimensions. At minimum we need to distinguis­h between the hierarchy of money, in which some people have a disproport­ionate share of society’s wealth, and the hierarchy of prestige, in which some people are specially respected and looked up to.

People may occupy very different positions in these hierarchie­s. Sports legends, pop stars, social media “influencer­s” and Nobel laureates generally do fine financiall­y, but their wealth is surely mere pocket change compared with today’s great fortunes. Billionair­es, by contrast, command deference, even servility, from those who depend on their largesse, but few of them are widely known public figures, and even fewer have dedicated fan bases.

The tech elite, however, had it all. Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg was, for a while, a feminist icon. Musk has millions of Twitter followers, many of them actual human beings rather than bots, and these followers have often been ardent Tesla defenders.

Now the glitter is gone. Social media, once hailed as a force for freedom, are now denounced as vectors of misinforma­tion. Tesla boosterism has been dented by tales of spontaneou­s combustion and autopilot accidents. Technology moguls still possess vast wealth, but the public — and the administra­tion — isn’t offering the old level of adulation.

And it’s driving them crazy.

We’ve seen this movie before. Back in 2010, much of the Wall Street elite, rather than feeling grateful for having been bailed out, was consumed with “Obama rage.” Financial wheeler-dealers were furious at not, in their view, receiving the respect they deserved after, um, crashing the world economy.

Unfortunat­ely, plutocrati­c pettiness matters. Money can’t buy admiration, but it can buy political power; it’s dishearten­ing that some of this power will be deployed on behalf of a Republican Party that is descending ever deeper into authoritar­ianism.

Did I mention that the most recent meeting of the right-wing gathering CPAC, which included a video address from Donald Trump, was held in Hungary under the auspices of Viktor Orban, who has effectivel­y killed his nation’s democracy?

The right turn by some technology billionair­es is also, may I say, very stupid.

It’s true that oligarchs can get very rich under autocrats like Orban or Vladimir Putin, whom much of the U.S. right deeply admired until he began losing his war in Ukraine.

But these days Russia’s oligarchs are, by many accounts, terrified. For even vast wealth offers little security against the erratic behavior and vindictive­ness of leaders unconstrai­ned by the rule of law.

Not that I expect the likes of Musk or Ellison to learn anything from this experience. The rich are different from you and me: They are usually surrounded by people who tell them what they want to hear.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States