And then the Russian Apologists Left, Complaining about TDS

Ben Smith has a much-discussed story about what he admits is just one of innumerable online chat threads that create unseen but powerful nodes of opinion formation. The Signal chat Ben writes about is, he says,

the single most important place in which a stunning realignment toward Donald Trump was shaped and negotiated, and an alliance between Silicon Valley and the new right formed.

He says that, in part, based on the centrality of Marc Andreessen, even though the piece also describes Andreessen participating on multiple different chats at once (indeed, doing little else with his life).

there is no equivalent to the intellectual counterculture that grew up over the last five years on the tech right, and no figure remotely like Andreessen, the towering, enthusiastic 53-year old who co-founded a16z and, before that, invented the modern web browser.

[snip]

he flipped on his phone from group chat to group chat, responding and engaging with manic speed.

And while, especially as someone who wrote a dissertation on some of these historical practices, it is amusing to hear the various words — samizdat, Republic of Letters, salons — self-indulgent billionaires use to describe the very male public sphere in which they participate, the existence of networks of chats as a powerful influence on politics is not the breaking news Ben sells it as.

Crazier still, Ben dates the beginning of the group chat to 2018, when an entire criminal case was built around a series of such chats started in 2015 and professionalized by Daily Stormer webmaster Andrew Auernheimer, one which Donald Trump’s failson appears to have used to make stolen John Podesta files go viral. Ben seems to think the billionaires — the Silicon Valley ones, not the scions of Queens real estate and reality TV wealth — invented Signal chats, when one thing we know to have happened is that the white nationalists and other far right activists cultivated certain billionaires into them.

That omission is pretty important given the way Ben allows Rufo to serve as the triumphalist tour guide of this story.

“A lot of these technologists hoped that the centrist path was a viable one, because it would permit them in theory to change the culture without having to expose themselves to the risk of becoming partisans,” he said. “By 2021, the smartest people in tech understood that these people were a dead end — so the group chats exploded and reformulated on more explicitly political lines.”

Rufo had been there all along: “I looked at these chats as a good investment of my time to radicalize tech elites who I thought were the most likely and high-impact new coalition partners for the right.”

As far as we know, the Silicon Valley billionaires were not in those earlier far right chats, but there have been plenty of public breadcrumbs showing the Nazis and the billionaires joining together.

So the existence of the chat, which Ben brags he has discovered, is useful information, but not earthshaking news. The mapping of the Chatham House chat he treats as his reporting subject (Ben is undoubtedly a participant in similar networks incorporating self-indulgent billionaires, but one does not treat those chats as a reporting subject) is useful, but a topic that other journalists also cover, and cover well.

It’s in that mapping, though, that provides the main newsworthy thing about this piece.

The split we’re seeing in public extends into these private chats.

Trump’s destabilizing “Liberation Day” has taken its toll on the coalition Andreessen helped shape. You can see it on X, where investors joke that they’ll put pronouns back in their bios in exchange for a return to the 2024 stock prices, and where Srinivasan has been a leading critic of Trump’s tariffs.

“Group chats have changed on the economy in the last few weeks,” said Rufo. “There’s a big split on the tech right.”

Billionaires, it turns out, react badly to innumerate destruction of the world economy. Who knew?

Ben ends the piece with this narrative, with no further comment.

By mid-April, Sacks had had enough with Chatham House: “This group has become worthless since the loudest voices have TDS,” he wrote, shorthanding “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” Then he addressed Torenberg: “You should create a new one with just smart people.”

Signal soon showed that three men had left the group: The Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire, the bitcoin billionaire Tyler Winklevoss, and Carlson.

Ben includes a screen cap — presumably an egregious violation of the rules of the chat — showing not just Maguire and Wink taking their toys and going home, but (as Ben noted) Tucker Carlson and David Sacks, whose influence on these networks merit at least as much focus as Andreessen’s.

David Sacks, who is probably not even a billionaire, does have tolerance for innumerate destruction of key economies, as he showed when he helped crash Silicon Valley Bank and subsequently begged for taxpayer help to reverse his work. But he is also, along with Carlson, one of the people in this network who most stupidly parrots Russian propaganda (though both men are being challenged on that front by Steve Witkoff).

Which is to say that one of the consequences for Trump’s decision to destroy the global economy is not just that one of Marc Andreessen’s chat groups is getting a divorce, but that in the divorce, two critically important Russian useful idiots are leaving.

In the weeks ahead, both those timelines — the destruction of the global economy and Trump’s attempts to capitulate to Vladimir Putin — will reach a head at the same time.

And it is genuinely useful to know that the Russian apologists have decided to start their own network of influence with “just the smart people” who applaud both destruction of the global economy and also obeisance to Russia.

Share this entry
64 replies
  1. Rayne says:

    What happened in those threads was followed by money — specifically, Andreesen’s a16z money.

    • a16z is one of the financers behind Musk’s acquisition of the former Twitter which transformed into a Nazi bar;

    • a16z is one of the financers behind Substack, which still has an ongoing problem with platforming Nazis.

    Elon Musk’s Twitter Buyout Backers: Who Are They & How Much Did They Invest?
    https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/elon-musks-twitter-buyout-backers:-who-are-they-how-much-did-they-invest-0
    Written by Yaёl Bizouati-Kennedy for GOBankingRates May 10, 2022 — 11:13 am EDT

    Substack Says It Will Not Ban Nazis or Extremist Speech
    Responding to criticism of its hands-off approach to content moderation, the company said it would not ban Nazi symbols or extremist rhetoric so long as newsletter writers do not incite violence.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/22/business/substack-nazis-content-moderation.html
    By Eduardo Medina – NYT Dec. 22, 2023

    Americans need to stop thinking techbros are smart people; they can be and in very narrow niches, but they can also be incredibly stupid. Ex: a16z was exposed in the Silicon Valley Bank collapse.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/analysis-regulatory-filings-reveals-1-215459942.html

    You’d think the techbros would have discussed *that* in their little private clubhouse before SVB got over its head but no.

    ADDER: If you’re a journalist, get out of Substack. Your work is being used as bait to attract readers to the Nazi content. You have no excuses when Molly White has done all the work and proven self-hosted Ghost is a better platform.

    https://www.citationneeded.news/substack-to-self-hosted-ghost/

    Need an example of a journalist besides White who migrated?

    Substack Loses Major Newsletter Platformer Over Nazi Content
    An article in The Atlantic previously reported that 16 newsletters on Substack contained “overt Nazi symbols”
    https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/substack-platformer-leaving-nazi-content-1234945461/
    By Charisma Madarang – RollingStone January 12, 2024

    • drhester says:

      Wow, thank you. Incredibly enlightening post and response.

      Americans need to stop thinking techbros are smart people; they can be and in very narrow niches, but they can also be incredibly stupid. Ex: a16z was exposed in the Silicon Valley Bank collapse.

      For a long time I have wondered if any of these techbros communicate with any women around them, that is… if there are any.

      [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the SAME USERNAME and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You attempted to publish this comment as “drhestery” triggering auto-moderation; it has been edited to reflect your established username. Please check your browser’s cache and autofill; future comments may not publish if username does not match. /~Rayne]

      • Rayne says:

        From Ben Smith’s Semafor article:

        … And of course it’s true that many of the best great conversations can only flourish in an atmosphere of trust. I have been singed in my time by leaked secret groups, and also probably pulled a bit by their groupthink. I was, mostly, a lurker in JournoList, a hundreds-strong email group founded by Ezra Klein (described in a 2009 Politico article on the subject as “the 24-year-old American Prospect blogging wunderkind”). I’m not sure if any Chatham House members were also on JournoList, but the cultures sound similar: male-dominated, time-consuming, and veering between silly and brilliant, windy and addictive. (The conservative writer and activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali is one of the relatively few women with a big voice in Chatham House, participants said.)

        Emphasis mine. Now look at the gender of folks I’d call whistleblowers, like Sarah Wynn-Williams who wrote Careless People about Meta, or Frances Haugen who also disclosed uncomfortable facts about Meta in 2021. They’re not all women but there are far more women as a percentage than there are in the techbro treehouse.

        • drhester says:

          That’s the issue. There are no moderating forces whispering into their ears. These techbros feel as if they are unstoppable. I am praying they are wrong. For sure they are, to a man, unwise. The effect of Elon’s Doge will take years and years to undo.

          Btw, Wynn-Williams’ book is a quick and queasy read.

        • Error Prone says:

          Semafor? Who is that, Rayne, if you’d help me. I have gotten onto their emailing, but am unsure of what to make of it. Marcy links there, and I can follow the link but still not get a grasp. Any help is appreciated. Other’s may also wonder, yes/no?

        • Error Prone says:

          Replying to Ryane – They are not just all men. They are all white men, comparably aged, like minded from interacting with one another. I read MA’s “It’s time to build,” (https://a16z.com/its-time-to-build/), and it seems part Chauncey Gardner, part John Galt. Which is to say, things said before, not profound. How we handle people and needs, with factory automation and LLM offering writing automation is not about building, it is about adapting to leisure time without drugs taking too much, but only enough. It seems a reality is China is about conformity and a Marxist flavored single party capitalism, while the U.S. has become at best a socially tolerant and diverse two party thing where each party differs little, with a capitalist economy, so a question is how you handle things in what’s shut to be a capitalist environ. These chat groups don’t go there as best as I can infer. Banking plays a role in China and the U.S. centralized and interconnected with other national banks. Chat groups like to feel important, but their nature seems to be to winnow and not expand.

        • Rayne says:

          Oh yes, it’s mostly cis-het white men with the occasional self-hating gay.

          But there are also tokens like Thomas Chatterton Williams who straddle the line and never fully grasp they are being used. Williams annoys the fuck out of me because he has openly bashed American liberals and defended wretches like Bari Weiss, preferring to live in France thereby exercising his privilege as a light-skinned man while Black women who can’t leave the US do the dirty work of democracy. Fucking right-wing tool.

          What reeeeallly irritates me about this little exclusive treehouse is their idiocy about what it took to make the US what it was, as if they slept through K-12 education never mind college, as if they totally wrote off their own families’ histories. As if substituting all labor with digital pixie dust is possible.

          Let me know when we don’t need plumbers or electricians any more, and when we’re going to see an end to corrupt right-wing politicians who are bottlenecks to building. Andreesen’s whining about a failure of imagination needs a good cold slap with reality.

    • Matt Foley says:

      I hadn’t known about any of this (post and comment). I feel like I need a high-flow shower to wash off the MAGA filth. I am so sick of entitled rich overconfident assholes thinking they can and should secretly shape how the rest of us live our lives. The fact that they’re doing it with their thumbs on a phone is even more enraging. Still, I am grateful for EW for exposing the filth to sunshine.

      • Rayne says:

        I know I wrote about the investors in the dead bird app, perhaps you missed it, and perhaps I was too focused on the 30-35% funded by Saudi Arabia’s Prince Alwaleed and Qatar’s sovereign fund — on the tail of prosecution of Saudi spies who worked at Twitter.

        These guys are fucking tools of hostile foreign entities and they just don’t give a shit because they have zero loyalty to the US, just their own asses and their little boys-only-treehouse.

        • Matt Foley says:

          I missed it. I was surprised to learn he had investors to buy the dead bird. I guess he wasn’t rich enough.

          I was in the ER getting a catheter put in when I saw the news he wanted to buy it. That should’ve been a warning it was gonna be painful.

        • Discontinued Barbie says:

          I never knew about these chats either. Although I had wondered how so many were in lockstep and I just assumed
          they met at drug fueled parties and exchanged info.

    • ken melvin says:

      I’m excited about Substack; think it is an evolutionary step for media; provides a forum for high level discourse. Expect to see Instagram cat videos and Russia psy-op type stuff try to make sure that doesn’t.

      p.s. — I post on substack

  2. Ed Walker says:

    My favorite part is that this group chat is responsible for mianstreaming the “monarchist Curtis Yarvin”. Either none of them ever read his stuff, or the billionaires and pundits are as half-assed as he is.

    • Rayne says:

      Ed, I swear they don’t read anything; they certainly haven’t read history. They operate based on what is shared in bite-sized portions in their private boys-only-treehouse chats and on podcast material.

        • Bugboy321 says:

          “We don’t read history – we make history.”

          That’s pretty much what someone from the Bush the Lesser Administration said (likely K. Rove):

          ‘We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality.”

          You know the rest.

        • Thomas_H says:

          The late, great Skoop Nisker, news “reader”* for KSAN in the late sixties and early seventies, used to sign off with “if you don’t like the news; go out and make some of your own!”

          *Skoop was able to make clever puns, jokes and witticisms on the spot about the days news

    • PeteT0323 says:

      The ole saw “follow the money” would seem to have some applicability.

      But, geez how many of these tech bros started out as immature little socially awkward nobodies – smart perhaps, maybe brilliant even – that created some tech that money got mainlined into. I am thinking Zack’s ignominious start before FB, but probably equally applicable to Musk, Andreessen, Thiel, etc.

      It’s just an observation. It is not root cause analysis, but the (venture) capital injection of obscene amounts of money to secure liftoff and then the obscene amounts of naked capitalism at work once there is a shred of “success”.

      That, to me, is broken, but probably not fixable.

      • Bob Roundhead says:

        Tech bro = incel who became obscenely wealthy.
        Yarvin is not a monarchist. He is a sociopath.
        These are spoiled children who have serious problems with self regulation. They alone have decided they are masters of the universe, who can move public opinion with the toys they created.

        • Spencer Dawkins says:

          “I’m a master of the universe, who can move public opinion as long as I don’t try to move public opinion in public” …

          Am I too old to get degrees in counseling? That’s gotta be the next growth industry …

      • Frank anon says:

        Similar arc with hedgies. Nose to the books and up the appropriate keisters during their high school valedictorian speech, grades to make HBS followed by 10 years doing 18 hours a day at Goldman. Suddenly they have the power that 9 or 10 figures bring and the social skills of a bratty nine year old, the men with no knowledge of women. The only tool in their social tool kit is money, and money is potent so it becomes their social and erotic vessel to wretched ends for all of us

        • P J Evans says:

          The valedictorian of my class (dead way too young) wanted to be an actor – and he was, in HS. Also, clearly, very smart, at a [public!] school where a lot of kids were well above average. (I was average. Or so I thought. Until I got out and worked with actual average people.)

      • Sandor Raven says:

        “It is not root cause analysis …”

        In a comment a few days ago I suggested using Simone de Beauvoir’s “The Ethics of Ambiguity” to help us figure out what it is that motivates people, especially those who seem to have so much. I, at least, wanted to begin to better understand “where they are coming from.” Some responses (thank you) to my comment were insightful. They suggested that, rather than my speculating on the cause of their deep-seated motivations, beyond the desire for more power and money, I should simply see that the techbros, Yarvin, etc., are … just freaks, with shallow personalities, espousing shallow philosophies, and smoking things that should never be smoked. Not kind, but it does help me to put that issue to rest.

  3. allan_in_upstate says:

    Excellent analysis, as always.

    A bit OT, but given recent events at NSF, I can’t refrain from saying: Ben Smith writes,

    “Andreessen … who … invented the modern web browser.”

    The irony/hypocrisy that Andreessen, who in 2025 would otherwise be yelling at immigrants to milk his cows faster,
    had the opportunity as an undergraduate at UIUC from East Cheesehead, Wisconsin,
    to have the job at the NSF-supported National Center for Supercomputer Applications
    that launched his career, and now is totally OK with destroying NSF, is breathtaking.

    • johno808 says:

      Not only that, the NSF funded the development of the Mosaic web browser – which Andreessen based his Netscape browser on – which made him rich.

      • Rayne says:

        The development of the entire internet was supported by federal grants. My god, ARPANET for crying out loud.

        This is just like Bezos’ billions made with the support of the US Postal Service as cheap, reliable carrier, or Musk’s SpaceX contracts carrying NASA and DoD payloads. They think they got wealthy on their own and they’re too fucking stupid to realize they could ensure the public helped build out even more opportunities for wealth.

        • SVFranklinS says:

          “they’re too fucking stupid to realize they could ensure the public helped build out even more opportunities for wealth.”
          Can’t agree – Elon may be full of himself and ketamine to being delusional, but Bezos isn’t.
          I suspect it’s more that they see that these government programs can be wealth-generators, and they want to pre-empt that – pulling up the ladders behind you.

        • Rayne says:

          Nah. Bezos could be selling textbooks to every public school in the country, but instead he’s attacking the roots of public education — as just one example.

    • wa_rickf says:

      @ allan_in_upstatesays April 28, 2025 at 3:44 pm

      That is typical ladder-puller behavior. Who has Musk ever helped succeed, besides himself?

  4. CaptainCondorcet says:

    I wonder if any of those apparently even more diehard than diehard Russian apologists have actually looked at Russia. The somewhat wealthy, if they aren’t one of the “lucky” few oligarchs, are in danger of mafia from below and autocracy from above. And Russians have notably less purchasing capacity, requiring many of the wealthy to use European and backdoor American markets, which will continue to collapse as mainstream economy does. These idiots won’t even be lords of ashes, barely middle managers.

    • Rayne says:

      They could have seen Russia, but what they would have seen isn’t the average Russian citizen’s lived experience — like that stupid fuck Tucker Carlson’s trip where he marveled all the cool things in Russia which don’t exist in US *but don’t also exist for the average Russian citizen living outside Moscow.*

      These rich snots are completely out of touch with the rest of this country. They have zero idea what basic expenses like health care are doing to this country but they insist everything must be privatized as just one key example.

      • P J Evans says:

        They’ll never have to live in the conditions they’re busy creating for the rest of us. And they should have to do that.

        • P J Evans says:

          Rayne, that’s what I’m thinking. And it goes for the ones in government, also, *especially* the ones who think they’re immune to consequences.

        • Spencer Dawkins says:

          I’m replying to you and to Rayne –

          Living on Social Security and Medicare would be a fitting reward, but aren’t most of these people in their 50s? If they don’t understand how people live who are not obscenely rich, they could start now by living on SSI and Medicaid, and then transition, unless DOGE has dismantled all four critical programs before they become eligible …

        • P J Evans says:

          I’m wondering what they’ll do when their coffee and whiskey double (or triple!) in price. They forget that we import so very, very much.

        • Rayne says:

          Reply to: P J Evans
          April 28, 2025 at 1:32 pm

          They won’t feel it. They’re so wealthy the increases in prices of household commodities don’t even register on their wallets. This is why billionaires shouldn’t exist — they are no longer human in the sense they can no longer feel what humans feel.

        • Matt Foley says:

          Sure would be nice to force them to inhale Clean Beautiful Coal Exhaust that powers their AI data centers.

      • CaptainCondorcet says:

        That they’re heartless, mercenary, and elitist is a given. Sayings about camels and needles come to mind. What’s mind-boggling is how stupid they are. There is no guarantee that the wealth any of them could attain will save them, even in Moscow. Unless you are BOTH rich AND politically connected (or so obscenely rich that you can buy connections), Russia is not exactly a safe place to stick out. Dashcams are almost omnipresent even for crappy cars because of so much fraud, extortion rackets are fine as long as they know who to avoid, and your non-liquid wealth is one “national security” executive order from at best being plundered, if not vanishing.

        If it wasn’t for all of us going through even worse hell, there’s a part of me that hopes they get the paradise they’re aiming for. Wonder if they would change their mind as they “fell” out the window or right before they hit the ground.

  5. bawiggans says:

    Parasites having a chat group is interesting. It seems that some members are getting a little nervous that the uber parasite they helped persuade their host to ingest is threatening to kill it with his unbridled appetites. The ones who left the chat, supposedly over disloyal thoughts being shared, may be concealing that they have secretly adapted to thrive off dead things.

  6. ThreeDayCondor says:

    This is a wonderfully adroit take… on a now nearly intractable problem.

    Thank you Dr. Wheeler, for seeing clearly — and as ever, speaking truth.

    Maybe we all will end up moving to… penguin territories — for sanctuary.

    Onward. Resolutely, just the same.

  7. ToldainDarkwater says:

    Andreesen’s radical support for crypto plays a very large role here, it seems to me. Since the Biden Administration was at least (appropriately IMHO) somewhat negative on crypto, Andreesen engaged in some Anyone-But-Biden thinking. And the Trump team was more than willing to coo sweet nothings at him vis-a-vis crypto. Much like they did with the pro-Gaza people.

    Chats like this were a platform for them, and an opportunity. The secret channel is the best vector for lies and half-truths. Unfortunately they are a fact of human life, and this new technology just enshrines an ancient habit.

  8. Error Prone says:

    IBM is still around and doing well, after ultimately abandoning punch cards. And they did business with Nazi Germany. Punch cards and arm tattoos are not incompatible concepts, one being a way to track the other. Watson, IBM’s founder worked for NCR initially. When spinning off his thing, International Business Machines was aimed to surpass National Cash Register. And there was DEC with a keyboard and CRT in place of punch card decks, and Xerox pioneering the GUI. Lots of pioneers ended up disappearing, but Andreessen did keep on the move. Netscape, AOL, and SUN Microsystems are among the dead pioneers Andreessen touched. All after IBM spun off “The Little Tramp” that ate all those lunches. Now Nvidia is the hardware darling of today, Jensen Huang, who differs from the white cabal, as Chinese, while TSMC makes the chips and the Dutch make the chp manufacturing machinery, mirror optics because lens tech at their ultraviolet wavelengths have opacity problems. AI has a future, but we don’t know what. Innovators do have a place, and the one killer line from the Godfather films, “Mike, we’re bigger than U.S. Steel.”

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Your discussion of IBM’s technological movement away from punch cards left out tape, digital tape, mechanical and digital hard drives. But mostly you left out segues between your historical events.

      • emptywheel says:

        Also the all-important detail that 1) children in upstate New York were trained to color on punch cards mom and dad brought home from work and 2) an certain 11-year old girl and her older brothers were told to play with the rotating personal computer in the dining room over the course of about 6 weeks and that was a key part of IBM’s human factors research for the PC.

        • johno808 says:

          In spring 1975 the teacher in my Electronics tech class brought in an Altair computer. He was impressed that I wrote a program that ran a light show on the front panel LEDs. I then forgot about it and went back to partying with my friends at rock concerts. Bill Gates had a different take.

  9. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Ben Smith’s “much-discussed” story lost me in his first two paragraphs. He admiringly quotes billionaire Joe Lonsdale, co-founder of Palantir, critiquing another billionaire, Balaji Srnivasan, for his “CCP thinking” about China and for being overtaken by “a crazy China mind virus.” That was in response to Srinivasan writing in Singapore, that over the past 45 years, China has skillfully executed its economic development plan.

    I spent the first twenty years of that period working on foreign investments in China. Srinivasan’s is as anodyne an assessment as it is possible to make. Whatever these billionaires are fighting over, and using cutouts like Ben Smith to do, it’s not that assessment.

    • gmokegmoke says:

      I noted that over-reaction to China too.

      Little do they know what’s coming down the pike on the Belt & Road. DeepSeek is just a coming attraction.

    • P J Evans says:

      I get the feeling that Smith and Lonsdale never actually go into stores and see where stuff is made. Including looking at their phones.

  10. earlofhuntingdon says:

    OT, but useful for Ed Walker’s series on Curtis Yarvin

    Curtis Yarvin, the middle-aged software engineer and amateur political theorist…has drawn attention for his techno-monarchist philosophy….[Since] the early 2000s… he has been a consistent advocate for the importance of IQ as a measure of human worth. In the late 2000s, as an exponent of…the Dark Enlightenment, or “neo-reaction”, he suggested IQ tests could be used to disqualify voters in post-apartheid South Africa.

    Yarvin’s IQ fetishism was an organic outgrowth of the intellectual subculture of Silicon Valley. People who manipulated symbols and wrote code all day…put special stock into the “general intelligence” measured by IQ, which gauged the proximity of minds to computers defined by logic, memory and processing speed.

    The inhumanity in Yarvin’s work is palpable.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/28/maga-iq-inhuman-future-intelligence-ai

  11. DiffPaul says:

    I have much respect for the contributors here and it’s so nice to be reinforced that there are good folks with good brains and hearts doing good work(s).

    So much so that I want to remind all to get outside the mainstream more often and hang out in the eddies. Trees still smell wonderful and there are still some lovely places, mostly outside of the eastern US, where one can get away for a mental health vacation or rehabilitation.

    Fighting the good fight *all the time* just leads to a lifetime of fighting.

    • Rayne says:

      Save this crap for an open thread because it’s not on topic. Don’t presume to tell folks in this community who’ve been here for approaching two decades how to navigate, especially with a history here of seven comments total since August 2024.

  12. zirczirc says:

    Andreesen worries about censorship when there is no censorship; there’s just people disagreeing with his arguments and his premises loudly and publicly. But his censorship concern is more about his and his chatmates failure to accept responsibility for their words and actions. Already, the man they funded and sought to install into the presidency has caused the docks of the west coast to be almost bereft of incoming traffic, and soon shop shelves will be emptying. Farms will fail, and prices will rise. None of that will be Andreesen’s fault, or so he will claim. And those who disagree with that claim will be guilty of censorship.

Comments are closed.