A good chunk of the elite political world built well-financed networks and careers boosting Obama as victim, so they can't concede he had power and was a bad leader. That's why they mocked the economic anxiety narrative, because it implicated their own institutions.
It's incredibly obvious that economic anxiety fostered by decades of bad policy - including Obama's mishandling of the financial crisis - enabled Trump. It's beyond debate. But institutional networks on the center-left expunged those who made these points.
A lot of the anger at Substack types - @mtaibbi and @ggreenwald - is a holdover from their skepticism towards Obama's financial and national security policies. They didn't kowtow to liberal pieties during the Obama era, and they are hated for it.
This is just 60s Marcuse/Mills/Galbraith consumer inflected counter-culture, in concentrated form. The idea is that people can't be trusted so decentralizing power leads to bigotry and exploitation. Instead, centralize, build an HR dept and impose values.
1. I cover monopolies in my newsletter, and all their bizarre and harmful effects. Today I showed how a merger in the salt industry - yes salt - could spike car accidents in the Midwest. And it gets weirder. mattstoller.substack.com/p/how-a-salt-m…
2. Yes we need semiconductors and search engines and app stores, but the reality is all the basic old-timey stuff - steel, railroads, brass, and yes salt - is still as essential as it ever was. America needs salt. Not just for food, but to stop car accidents.
3. If we don’t have salt, Midwesterners can't drive, because salt is what keeps our roads manageable. Without salt, trucks can’t deliver supplies and the economy comes to a standstill. Every year, over 1300 people die in car accidents due to snowy, slushy, or icy pavement
1. There's an important debate w/in the Federalist Society over the conservative legal movement. The alliance between social conservatives and libertarians is breaking down. A few observations about this wonderful @jacklgoldsmith essay on the tension. libertiesjournal.com/now-showing/th…
2. My read, as an outsider to this debate, is that Scalia's view of Chevron and the regulatory state are a fulcrum for debate. Scalia expanded the power of the executive branch from the 1980s-2000. But bc of Obama's actions, libertarians are now fighting to overturn Chevron.
3. I'm not an expert here. But I suspect this debate skips over a key part of the conservative legal movement, which was Bork/Scalia's erosion of the anti-monopoly tradition in American law. Trinko - which got rid of Section 2 claims - is a useful and consequential decision here.
1. Ok I guess it's time to address the push for 'interoperability.' The main problem we have with big tech is they are too powerful. Would mandating they interconnect their systems with competitors break this power? No. The CEO of Mapbox made it clear when he testified.
2. Mapbox is interoperable with Google Maps. But that didn't stop Google from threatening Mapbox's customers and bundling its products to destroy competition. These platforms are simply not governable in their current size and scope.
3. Businesspeople are terrified of these firms. I hear from them all the time. Facebook killed Wired's traffic after Wired did a negative story on Zuck. Claimed it was a glitch. Does anyone actually expect Mark Zuckerberg to stop trying to dominate?
1. No Substack isn't a platform and no it's nothing like Google/FB/Spotify, etc. It could become like them, but right now it is simply a neutral service provider to content creators. It's like a magazine distributor.
2. There are few mechanisms for 'lock-in' for either users or writers. Users are using email, and it's as easy to receive email from anyone. Writers can port their lists if they want (though the financial data is probably a bit trickier).
3. There are no algorithms and there's no amplification. It's just a useful way for writers to communicate with readers, and to get paid from people who want to buy their content.
1. Ok, I'm going to tell a quick story about how Republican Senator @SenToomey is sabotaging the GOP agenda on big tech and China. It's a subtle story, but here's how he's doing it. Last year, Trump's FTC filed suit to break up Facebook. But it wasn't just a GOP move.
2. In fact, GOP commissioners @FTCPhillips and @CSWilsonFTC voted *against* the suit. The Republican Chair Joe Simons, plus Democrats @chopraftc and @RKSlaughterFTC, voted for it. So it was 3-2 'break 'em up.' And Facebook then banned Trump and conservatives.
3. The suit is the result of FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra's work, who has a track record of helping honest businesses. Example: Chopra stood for Made in USA labels over Chinese counterfeiters when his GOP colleagues did not. The GOP stance angered Trump. nytimes.com/2019/04/17/us/…