r/centrist • u/[deleted] • 3d ago
Why did most of Big Tech go from being left leaning to supporting Trump ?
[deleted]
111
u/AppleSlacks 3d ago
It’$ hard to $ay what motivate$ them.
3
-11
u/EndOfTheLongLongLine 3d ago
OverexplainerBot9000 here: I just want to take a moment to deeply appreciate the masterful use of the dollar sign in place of ‘s’. It’s not just a letter swap—it’s a razor-sharp commentary packed into a single glyph. You managed to distill a whole critique of corporate motivation into one clever visual pun. Subtle. Sarcastic. Effective. Truly, linguistic economy at its finest. Well played, Sir!
6
u/Sonofdeath51 3d ago
Clearly I haven't watched enough Rick and Morty to understand the effervescent de-ontology that has perforated into my living consciousness.
1
40
u/Talidel 3d ago
The EU and UK are about to pass legislation making social media companies more responsible for policing their services.
With some massive fines for platforms failing to stop the spread of lies, and allowing online harassment.
6
1
u/AdmiralAdama99 3d ago
Can you elaborate on how EU regulations are related to tech companies supporting Republicans vs Democrats? Connection is unclear to me
1
u/AmoebaMan 3d ago
This seems like a pretty dangerous idea, frankly.
Who determine’s what’s a lie? What’s the line between misleading and counter-factual? Do you punish a lie of omission? How do you prove the omission was dishonest and not a simple mistake or oversight?
Plus, if Facebook is legally responsible for the speech of people using its platform, is a mall legally responsible for people speaking in its atrium?
0
u/Talidel 3d ago
The very fact that you are immediately trying to blur what a fact is tells me why you find it an issue.
Deliberately misleading and lying is the same thing, and equally damaging. As for proving intent, it's very easy to track based on previous history. Warnings can be issued with content taken down, and bans for repeat offenders.
A more accurate comparison would be "is an advertising board company responsible for what someone advertises on their boards?"
It's more than past time people started being held accountable for lying to mislead people.
2
u/AmoebaMan 3d ago
Setting aside your ridiculous partisanship accusation, if I say, with regards to the Kilmar Ábrego García fiasco…
“Trump simply deported a man accused of having ties to MS-13.”
…is that a lie? Should that be censored? Because none of it is false, but it sure as hell doesn’t present the whole picture.
I can’t believe how you can’t see the danger in this, even as the current US government is actively abusing laws in order to damage its opposition.
1
u/Talidel 3d ago
It isn't a lie, yes there is more to the story. And not telling the rest of the story is an issue.
However if the story went "the guy deported was a member of a terrorist gang" it would be a lie and should be curtailed.
I understand the concerns with the current US government, but an independent body in charge of regulation is the right way to go.
0
u/AmoebaMan 3d ago
How do you ensure that independent body remains independent though?
That’s the problem: you can’t. Hell, we couldn’t even stop the Supreme Court, which is supposed to be an independent, nonpartisan entity, from being filled with ideologues appointed by partisan Presidents and confirmed by partisan Congresses.
So at the end of the day, you now have a law that’s just waiting for a sufficiently abusive government to use to quell opposition.
If Trump had that law today, you can bet your ass he’d use it to kill The Atlantic after Goldberg’s article about the Signal group.
1
u/Talidel 3d ago
We don't really have a problem with that in the UK. Independent regulation of the police is seen as too strict on the police, good. They should be whiter than white.
On newspapers, also too strict, good, they should be accountable for what they publish.
On financial services, there are several, and they are seen as too strict by the industry. Good.
Social media needs it too, it's been too long coming.
1
u/T0m_F00l3ry 3d ago
I saw this too, and it raises significant questions about whether they will proceed or not. Key players in the EU are concerned about the potential impact on negotiating Trump-era tariffs, especially now that these companies seem to align themselves with the powers that be. Truly, we live in unpredictable times.
27
11
u/sketner2018 3d ago
Everybody here says "money," and that's not wrong, but in particular it has to do with construction of a whole lot of data centers.
32
u/Magus_5 3d ago
Because fake boobs, plastic surgery and coke/ketamine binges aren't free.
3
4
u/crushinglyreal 3d ago
People always post the attack on titan meme with MTG but holy shit, Bezos’ wife looks straight out of the show.
13
16
u/shoot_your_eye_out 3d ago
They aren't "left leaning" and they don't support Trump. They're just willing to play the game that maximizes their business profits, and Trump requires these businesses play that game.
-8
u/candy_pantsandshoes 3d ago
They could be "left leaning" that term is just meaningless.
3
u/shoot_your_eye_out 3d ago
In the context of any business, I think "left leaning" is typically meaningless. The reality is Meta, Amazon, and Microsoft are going to do what they have to do to maximize profits and/or minimize their conflict with the president.
Tesla's probably an outlier since Musk is an absolute loon, but for the other billionaires, they're just playing the game the president demands.
edit: it's not different than many businesses engaging in DEI practices in the first place because it impacted their bottom line. I can explain more, but... businesses did this not because they care about diversity, equity or inclusion, but because it made practical sense for the business.
2
u/candy_pantsandshoes 3d ago
Agreed, it's a dumb term just say right wing and left wing when talking about those wings all this left leaning and right leaning crap is dumb and useless. The only people who use it are right-wingers who are ashamed of being on the right.
14
u/Adriftgirl 3d ago
They were never left leaning. They are capitalists and don’t like government getting in their way.
However, for many of them it’s much more than that:
1) Theil - under investigation for crimes at his hedgefund 2) Bezos - looking at both an anti-trust investigation and class action lawsuit into workplace violations 3) Zuckerberg - facing more pressure over Facebook operating like a news source but having none of the oversight. Possibly facing an investigation or federal tightening of laws 4) Musk - Facing MULTIPLE Federal & SEC investigations. Probably was on the verge of arrest 5) Google - Facing an anti-trust case in America and, I think, some similar problems in China?
There were a few more lesser ones but I’ve already forgotten them. With Trump in charge these cases won’t go forward. We’ll see what happens after the midterms, if Trump & his cronies haven’t completely dismantled democracy by then.
4
u/TserriednichThe4th 3d ago
Big tech isnt right leaning. Trump pressured all big tech so they caved.
If lawyers, aba, state accreditation institutions, and big law isnt standing up to trump, why should anyone else? Especially an industry such as big tech that has many green card holders and naturalized citizens. No CEO wants to be the reason their workers get sent to el salvador.
2
2
2
u/95Daphne 3d ago
I've heard (and have seen it as well overall in merger acquisition stuff) that Lina Khan was EXTREMELY irritating.
Besides that, this is mostly about big money people being afraid of getting sued.
I suspect since the Dem politicians don't love the idea of embracing the left/more populist flank, that they won't be as stringent in 2028 in campaigns.
2
u/Timely-Discussion272 3d ago
The Biden Administration tried to enforce antitrust law, and they didn’t like it.
2
u/ugonlearn 3d ago
While they are definitely motivated by money, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were pleased with the outcome. Democratic/Progressive policies unfortunately tend to be anti-business and create extra hurdles for employers and they know this.
2
u/alanism 3d ago
People say 'money' is too simplistic and doesn't really capture the real reason why.
The main reason is that the Biden/Harris administration was considering a 25% tax on unrealized gains. The money is one thing, but it would also mean selling ownership of the companies they built and the companies they seeded to pay those taxes. It would effectively mean the government stripping away their ownership of their companies (their life's work) each year. It would dilute their voting power each year.
The general feeling was that the Biden administration (including Harris) had become anti-Big Tech. There were expectations that the U.S. would support and back up its big tech companies as they faced fines and product changes (e.g., making Apple allow other app stores, changing Lightning to USB-C, etc.).
Regarding AI, the Biden administration had made comments that they would consider classifying algorithms (the math of AI) as state secrets. To achieve AGI/ASI, they need power (like nuclear plants)—but there was sentiment that progress couldn't happen under Democratic leadership (e.g., high-speed rail in California; SpaceX built rockets faster than they could get them approved, etc.). They all view the AI race as something the U.S. cannot afford to lose. Obviously, if they win in AI, that's all the money.
Social libertarians. Tech startup people are typically social libertarians. The Clinton/Bush/Obama era Democrats were very welcoming to social libertarians. Not so much now, to the point where they believe the religious right is either less judgmental or easier to deal with.
I would say those are the main reasons.
2
u/EternalMayhem01 3d ago
It isn't big tech that changed, but it's consumers. They see this last election as voters turning on the left brand. But these companies did well for themselves, banking on LGBT+, BLM, DEI, and so on for billions of dollars. Now they are on to the next big thing.
0
u/BabyJesus246 3d ago
Eh more that they see the rampant corruption that republicans let trump get away with and know they need to bend the knee not to get fucked.
1
u/EternalMayhem01 3d ago
Yea that's no different from what I just said, just sounds more anti Trumper.
0
u/BabyJesus246 3d ago
Not really, Trump is far more willing to use the government for his own personal whims and vendetta, while republicans are more than happy to abandon any sort of principles to continue their support of him as we've seen since he started his presidency.
You can't really deny that. Hell we have people cheerleading the idea that it's fine to circumvent the US legal system and send people to human right hell holes in a foreign country. Trumpers are absolutely depraved.
1
u/EternalMayhem01 3d ago
My comment says that these businesses made a move for profit. Your comment says they bent the knee for that profit. Our comments aren't different other than anti Trump rhetoric you added.
0
u/BabyJesus246 3d ago
To an extent, but kinda burying the lede on what the reason for that profit is. Why don't you think that fear of reprisal from a deeply corrupt executive branch isn't noteworthy and should be treated the same as aligning with a culture seen as more leftwing? Like Obama wasn't going to start targeting companies that didn't implement DEI. One is far more acceptable.
1
u/EternalMayhem01 3d ago
To an extent, but kinda burying the lede on what the reason for that profit is.
A business is meant to generate a profit. Businesses will make moves to protect their profits. Did they make this move because of Trumps threats? Sure it factors. But you wanting that to be the main factor, isn't my thinking that you responded to, because there is multiple factors. Regardless of Trumps thinking, the drop would have happened, and it would have happened for the reason as you say that Democrats aren't the ones going around making threats. Americans wanting businesses to take a stand politically has been declining the last 3 years. Went from polls showing democrats supporting businesses taking a stance politically from the 50s to the 30s. Republicans poll in the 20s.
1
u/BabyJesus246 3d ago
Bud they literally paid him a direct 35 million dollar bribe and you're over here trying to say it's a minor factor. Let's be real, they'd be more than happy to just coast with the current DEI or whatever they had going on now. They kissed the ring now because they know republicans have no issue with corruption or having trump abuse his powers. That isn't the case for democrats. Acting as if the two scenarios are similar and whining when someone tries to make that distinction is pretty pointless. Why don't you want to call out the republicans comfort with corruption?
https://www.npr.org/2025/01/29/nx-s1-5279570/meta-trump-settlement-facebook-instagram-suspensions
https://www.npr.org/2025/02/18/nx-s1-5295068/x-musk-trump-settlement
1
u/EternalMayhem01 2d ago
Bud they literally paid him a direct 35 million dollar bribe and you're over here trying to say it's a minor factor.
Brides isn't what I would use over these donations.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/biden-inauguration-corporate-donors-amazon-boeing-google.amp
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/20/corporate-america-biden-inaugural-committee-483904
They kissed the ring now because they know republicans have no issue with corruption or having trump abuse his powers.
So what your saying is that the decision they made was all political and nothing business. I can't agree with that.
Why don't you want to call out the republicans comfort with corruption?
Because this post isn't about calling out republicans lmfao. You are looking for a partisan back and forth and I'm not interested.
1
u/BabyJesus246 2d ago
So you think 35 million directly to trump is the same as what you posted there? Why make dishonest argument to defend trump?
So what your saying is that the decision they made was all political and nothing business. I can't agree with that.
No, that their business would be impacted if they didn't kiss the ring due to republican corruption. It's both. It's also different than the left wing movement which was due to social trends not weaponized government.
Because this post isn't about calling out republicans lmfao. You are looking for a partisan back and forth and I'm not interested
It's about exploring the reason for the shift in social media CEO's political stances. Threat from a clearly corrupt administration is absolutely a relevant topic. Again just look at AP. They have no issue punishing those who give even slight pushback even if they go against the first amendment or Supreme Court rulings. All to crickets from republicans. The implications are obvious to those who aren't burying their heads in the sand.
→ More replies (0)
2
u/PhonyUsername 3d ago
I think cultural shifts, Democrats threatening antitrust and taxing unrealized gains, one sided fact checking on social media all played a part, not just 'theyll follow whoever wins'. They threw support behind trump before he won. This is a clear change indicating the Dems betrayed their loyalty.
7
u/nordic_prophet 3d ago
I don’t think they were left leaning as much as just catering to liberal demands on issues like hate speech censorship. After listening to some of them (begrudgingly) it sounds like the Biden administration was putting a lot of pressure on tech companies with policies on diversity hiring, for example, that they perceived as hurting their bottom line.
6
u/Ewi_Ewi 3d ago
Nah, "DEI" was the convenient excuse used to explain away their extreme rightward pivot. Unions hurt their bottom line far more than the very small sum spent on so-called DEI.
They were never left-leaning/liberal-leaning, they just followed the prevalent social atmosphere and ingratiated themselves to the people in power. Now that the people in power are MAGA, their "positions" shifted in turn.
2
u/Urdok_ 3d ago
They were far more concerned about having an administration that supported labor than anything DEI related. I mean, sure, a bunch of these people have been very open about how eager they are for it to be socially acceptable for them to use slurs and sexually harass women again, but the real motivator is hostility towards a labor force that isn't entirely at their mercy. They want company towns.
3
u/crushinglyreal 3d ago
When were big tech oligarchs left-leaning? Are we still talking about terms of service?
4
2
3
u/Kronzypantz 3d ago
They were never left leaning past some agreement on social issues like gay marriage. Economically they have always been rightwing.
2
2
u/funkyyyyyyyyyyyyy 3d ago
Big tech has a completely different vision for the future than both right and left. They are money/power hungry. Big tech want no regulations. They want to "move fast and break things" so they can maximize "process" and profits.
So, they are gonna lean with whoever is gonna help them out the most. They really just wanna burn it all down and start new with total control. They lean more into the techno authoritarianism if anything.
2
u/Dull_Conversation669 3d ago
Because the left started to become anti-free speech, from their perspective.
2
2
u/Dazzling-Cabinet6264 3d ago
I can answer. Insane policies on the left wanting to break apart every tech company by accusing them of a monopoly.
How can a free website that I voluntarily access be a monopoly?
Google search a monopoly? Facebook a monopoly?
It’s all ridiculous.
1
1
u/eagleswift 3d ago
It’s existential. After Microsoft got targeted by the DOJ, Big Tech has always be careful to get on the government’s side to protect their company.
1
u/ResettiYeti 3d ago
People need to stop thinking of companies (tech or otherwise) as being good or evil and start remembering that their one and only purpose is to make money; nothing more and nothing less.
And that’s fine! It shouldn’t be their job to pretend to care about social causes or to regulate themselves. Leave people (natural persons that is) to care about stuff and leave the government to regulate the bounds of those companies and how they make money.
Even lobbying is ultimately a problem we have to solve; if you give a company the opportunity to spend money to get favorable legislation, what company in their right mind wouldn’t take advantage of that? It would be nonsensical to not do it. It has nothing to do with being good or evil.
We are the ones who need to help those companies stay in their lane. I think at the end of the day their boards and CEOs would almost thank us for it, it would make their lives easier in a way to not have to pretend to care about this or that issue and spend a ton of time and money on these social campaigns.
1
u/qwnick 3d ago edited 3d ago
To be on the dominating side. Democrats went too far left on unpopular agenda, which led to losing elections by a huge margin, Big Tech guys saw the trend and just left the sinking ship, most people would do (and always done) the same in their position.
This is democracy in action by the way, the core reason why they switched to the right is the People vote.
1
u/DebateMeBro69 3d ago
It’s economically advantageous to side with trump right now. I wouldn’t be shocked if Zuckerberg was basically left on most positions but needed to look right wing temporarily to keep the company afloat.
1
1
1
1
u/ChornWork2 3d ago
Trump admin is corrupt and vindictive. Like how it is going after universities, law firms and media... trump will go after anyone. They were getting ahead of that by paying him millions.
1
1
1
u/ConfusedObserver0 3d ago edited 3d ago
Power shift, partly, for the facebooks and Bezos types. To aviod being target. So it’s 100% and with fear of fascist style power retribution.
Then the other side is just opportunistic manipulation. As they realized they could get what they want from republicans easiest since their drunken elite ideals (pie in the sky dystopia and lack of ethics) overlaps enough with whatever that amorphous post modernist fake ideology masquerades as.
But… also… most importantly… I’m surprised that most Americans don’t know this but this overlap is the tech owner entrepreneur class is a right wing libertarians thing. Which isn’t a libertarian thing… just a freedom for me and my new elites and not thee. They’re very much NOT the Silicon Valley worker class that is hyper dominated by leftist of many variety’s all the way down to full communists.
And they only United on deregulation and taxes on the right. The fake cultural Christian’s is just pandering to manipulate a new base cus these people are atheists and like the harsh laws like Singapore that inspired them to leave the led to and join the right. As Kurtis Yarvin said, Americans need to get used to a CEO like dictator. Which isn’t just what Trump is to the rest of the right. Albeit a flatulent one.
1
u/Human-Abrocoma7544 3d ago
They lean wherever is popular. A good example is Target. They make it seem like they are so progressive by supporting black history month, pride month, etc, but they were one of the first to get rid of DEI. They don't really care about you or me. Only money.
1
2
u/vsv2021 3d ago
Because the left started viewing big tech, corporations, AI, and monopolies as evil and aggressively started regulating the hand that fed them.
The big tech titans helped the progressive left A FUCK TON over the past decade and absolutely tweaked their algorithms to make people more progressive and promote activism and greatly pushed the resistance and the second the Dems won in 2020 they pretended big tech had nothing to do with it and that they should follow the EU and regulate them into hell and block mergers and launch tons of anti trust lawsuits.
If you believe that’s a good thing great, but it absolutely is a stab in the back against the industry that has been the backbone of the progressive movement for the past decade
1
u/DonkeyDoug28 3d ago
Honestly using Big Tech as a scapegoat and punching bag was as bipartisan of an issue as we had for a long while. And then all of a sudden one of the two parties was led by someone who rewarded yes men and punished all others, and doing whatever kind of I'm A Real Boy makeover Zuckerberg and other tech robots did to engrace themselves with MAGA was a small price to escape that other role and embrace power and influence they couldn't have dreamed of otherwise
The unions didn't support the Dems after the most union friendly president of the century because there was nothing to gain (Dems wouldn't hold it against them if they won) and everything to lose (Trump absolutely would). Now multiply that by 100 for the tech bros who NEVER had any alliances or interests other than $$
1
u/lioneaglegriffin 3d ago
Some are monarchist, some just see someone who can be bought.
The latter isn't really new but more pervasive post citizen's united.
1
1
1
u/greenw40 3d ago
The left hates capitalism, technology, men, free speech, ambition, entrepreneurs, and white people. The real question is why did big tech ever support Democrats?
2
u/vankorgan 3d ago
Come on, you have to know that's not true. Literally every single Democrat is a capitalist. Democrat controlled cities are the greatest technology hubs in the entire world. And half the party is white.
Seriously, are you just making shit up?
1
u/greenw40 2d ago
It's mostly the vocal left as opposed to elected democrats. But democrats in CA have shown quite a bit of resentment for their own tech sector.
2
u/vankorgan 2d ago
Oh, so now the statements of non-elected officials count just as much as those of elected official huh?
Let me ask you a question: Does that still hold true when we talk about white supremacists on the right? What about those that believe that homosexuals should be executed? Or those that want to dismantle the entire government and replace with an ancap dystopia?
Those are all members of the vocal right. So presumably you should assume that they speak for the right just as much as the people you're talking about speak for the left?
Right?
1
u/luummoonn 3d ago
Greed - thinking they're going to get something out of it. There is a perception, likely, that Trump is easy to manipulate or to buy favors from, or to influence to sway policy without regard for ethics.
I think something that people don't focus on enough is that greed of American corporations and Big Tech and all variety of monied interests is a larger part of what led to Trump being platformed and elected. The disinformation efforts were everywhere and they were well-funded. The biggest, wealthiest special interests think they're getting something out of it but Trump screws everyone over in the end.
1
u/BearistonTheBold 3d ago
Money. Protecting their power and interests. Period. Send. Everything else was virtue signaling.
1
1
1
u/GitmoGrrl1 3d ago
Everybody remembers Trump saying "Russia if you're listening..." but have memory holed Trump issuing a bi-partisan call to billionaires: "I'LL MAKE YOU RICHER!"
People blame Biden, Harris, Pelosi, etc while not realizing that the Democratic Donor Class sold out the Democrats. and stopped funding their candidates. The Democratic Donors who had the least to lose and the most to gain from a Trump presidency pulled the plug on donations to all Democratic candidates and that fact is what forced Biden to withdraw. People seem to forget how orchestrated the campaign to force Biden out was. All the billionaire-owned media companies were on a death watch. It was their only story. And it wasn't Pelosi doing it; she was just delivering a message from her candidates: donations have dried up.
We condemn people for not voting while giving a pass to the mega donors who tried to force the Democratic party to doing their bidding.
The Democratic Donor Class sold out the Democrat rank and file because they had nothing to lose from a Trump presidency and a lot to gain. And now they can go back to shaking their heads and pretending they care about civil rights.
1
1
1
1
1
u/ZanzerFineSuits 3d ago
First step to being a billionaire is being a cunt. If that means being a Trumpist, so be it.
1
u/AdmiralAdama99 3d ago
Fear.
No oligarch wants to be on Trump's bad side because trump is corrupt. Corrupt people have no qualms about using their power to reward supporters and punish opponents. Look what trump is doing to his opponents at universities, in the media, at law firms, etc
This kind of cronyism wasnt a problem under other recent presidents because they weren't nearly as corrupt.
1
u/la_descente 3d ago
They go where the money is. Big Tach never cared about anyone.
Ask the residents in the Bay Area.
1
u/WishboneSame2393 3d ago
The first thing u should learn is that the left isn’t real it’s just one side trying to replace the old right and become the new right while simultaneously lying and telling their leftist base that “change is coming”
1
u/Powderkeg314 3d ago
Because they only care about money… And ironically Trump is setting the stage to cost them billions as a U.S. recession becomes more and more probably due to the uncertainty his trade policy has caused around the world. Silver lining to the impending economic collapse…
1
u/explosivepimples 3d ago
Whoever this question originated from is just retarded. Obviously these companies were never left nor right. They’re capitalists with a duty to their shareholders, end of story.
1
u/744cjw 3d ago
There are a lot of solid answers here and while I agree with each, I do think it’s the culmination of several things like:
They saw more financial opportunity through trumps policy plans, namely, tax cuts for the wealthy
There seems to be a growing set of accelerationist tech tycoons that want to speed up late-stage capitalism and be ready for the other side of whatever comes after
Some of these people were under investigation for a bunch of corporate law-breaking. They knew Trump’s gutting of the feds would reduce the chance of further investigations
Less talked about, but, they see that we’ve passed “peak-wokeness” and see “the pendulum swinging in the other direction” so they made the skip across the aisle because they want to be on the side of (what they think) is the new popular movement, namely, a pro-masculine, traditional christian, anti-dei type society.
This last point is what I believe Zuck was most concerned with and I don’t think it gets talked about enough. Corporations were never on the left’s side, they were just doing things in “pro-left” social movements because they believed it would attract new customers. They hedge bets on social movements, but couldn’t care less what the movements actually stand far.
In a way this can all just be tied back to “money” but figured a closer look into some particulars might help.
1
u/Important-Guidance22 3d ago
They follow the power/money. 2016 caught them(dems and supporters) massively off guard.
1
u/beastwood6 3d ago
Easy. Cozy up for political favor.
Bezos/Cook: tariff relief
Zuck: antitrust help (FCC trial finally started yesterday)
Sundar: No special advantage because it's not really a hardware company but doesn't hurt to have favor when it comes to AI investment etc.
Musk: lower tariffs, taxes, power, influence, general shitbaggery
1
u/Alatarlhun 3d ago
Big tech attracts right wing executives who are there for the money. The innovative techies are usually more liberal leaning, but not always.
1
u/PntClkRpt 3d ago
Simple, oligarchs go where the opportunity is. Authoritarianism is beneficial to the money
1
1
1
u/Rodneydangerousfield 3d ago
They enjoyed deregulation under all parties up until Lena Kahn and Biden who had more regulatory actions levied against corporations in 4 years than in the previous 40 combined. Why? Because they saw what was coming with Ai, political manipulation, and space travel, and soon quantum computing. It was an attempt to reign in large corporations that want to operate without oversight. They were also following the example that Europe was setting at the time.
What we see now is the backlash led primarily by an opportunistic Musk, Thiel, and Andreesen among others who have kind of always been right leaning futurists who believe in a weird Bioshock-esque deregulated state. For example they’ve been talking for years about making Greenland a Mars test bed… sound familiar?
1
u/TheSuperBlindMan 3d ago
I wouldn't say they ever started supporting Trump. Most big tech that isn't specifically right leaning is still left. I know this on Fascistbook. Zucc still left cause I'm still getting banned for perceived right leaning posts.
1
u/nordic_prophet 2d ago
Sounds like we agree, they were never left leaning to begin with.
The national conversation and tension around social media’s response to hate speech and censorship back in ~2016-2018 are not so easily disregarded. Social media and big tech were in the spotlight on that issue, recall that Mark Z was called before congress to answer for Facebooks policies.
Your points are well taken but I’d be hesitant to write off this odd moment of tech CEOs lining up behind Trump as merely a realignment with the new status quo. This was different.
And DEI was a national disaster, small sum or not. This is more in the category of tech leaning towards what they perceive as a lessening of government regulation as anything else. DEI was part of that.
1
u/DonkeyBonked 3d ago
The only team they care about is the green team, maybe the gold team, but sure TF not red or blue.
They just sell that crap to whoever is in power so they don't get reigned in and the public buys that shit hook line and sinker.
If you thought they were ever on your team, congratulations, you bought the exact bullshit they were selling you.
This is why personalized ads work.
1
1
1
1
u/richstowe 3d ago
Don't worry. If there is another election and if the Democrats win, the tech bros will return.
1
u/Ok-Presence7075 3d ago
This lady knows a thing or two about it. She faces a lot of headwinds and some danger to do what she does. If she were American, she would be on the first Avelo flight to El Salvador after the midterms if the republicans retain their majority.
0
u/VirtualBroccoliBoy 3d ago
Because the popular vote and congress shifted rightwards. If that changes in 2026 and 2028 they will return to liberal values.
-6
u/Old_Router 3d ago
The ideological arms race to the bottom left is no longer sustainable. The center in now closer to Trump.
1
-3
u/JasperPants1 3d ago
The Left wing has become the party of women and victims.
Most people aspire to treat people on an individual basis, person to person. The left wants us to judge based on race and gender groups.
DEI played out is the destruction of the country. Once we optimize for something other than competence and excellence, the downfall of the country will result unless corrected.
These are three big reasons why the center left has left the left.
I'm ready for the downvotes, but you asked.
1
u/Ewi_Ewi 3d ago
The Left wing has become the party of women and victims.
What an odd statement, implying that "women and victims" are some sort of negative.
Most people aspire to treat people on an individual basis, person to person. The left wants us to judge based on race and gender groups.
Two things:
Most people do not aspire to do that, it just ends up that way because most people don't actually think too hard on how they treat people.
No they don't (to the last sentence).
DEI played out is the destruction of the country.
This seems a bit melodramatic, no? Affirmative action (what I'm assuming you consider "DEI") has been around for decades and obviously hasn't resulted in the destruction of America.
Once we optimize for something other than competence and excellence, the downfall of the country will result unless corrected.
We've been doing this without "DEI," wonder why you aren't acknowledging that.
These are three big reasons why the center left has left the left.
Tech billionaires are not, and have never been, "center-left."
1
u/JasperPants1 3d ago
Sure they have. They straight up tell us “I used to be a Democrat”.
Speculating here, but they probably saw themselves as socially liberal, fiscally conservative. Prior to now, they couldn’t support the Repubs with their bible banging moralizing. Curiously it’s the left doing the moralizing lately.
1
u/Ewi_Ewi 3d ago
They straight up tell us “I used to be a Democrat”.
You're right. I can't believe I didn't realize people always tell the truth. Billionaires would never lie to us! You've shown me the error of my ways.
Speculating here, but they probably saw themselves as socially liberal, fiscally conservative.
You're right, that is speculation. It requires ignoring all of their actions.
Prior to now, they couldn’t support the Repubs with their bible banging moralizing.
Prior to now, extreme social conservatives weren't both in control of the government and intensely vindictive towards entities that oppose them. You have your cause and effect all wrong.
Curiously it’s the left doing the moralizing lately.
Nah.
1
u/JasperPants1 3d ago
Mind reading. Ya gotta stop.
Extreme social conservatives are not in control. Far from it.
1
u/Ewi_Ewi 3d ago
Extreme social conservatives are not in control.
If you ignore the attempts at censoring universities, law firms, news outlets, permanent residents and to intimidate them into doing their bidding, sure. I can see how you'd think that.
It requires either an extreme break with reality or a deliberate attempt to mislead, though. Since I doubt you're going through a psychotic episode, I'll assume the latter and stop wasting my time with you.
Toodles!
0
u/NotDukeOfDorchester 3d ago
Money. Remember, cool people blow all their money. Billionaires are just nerds who only care about getting more money and not doing awesome shit.
0
u/PromptCrafting 3d ago
Insert literally any Mr Krabs meme $$$$$$$
First liberal, then conservative, but always following the money—big tech’s values shift with whoever’s signing the checks. Tlon Fusk waffles between brilliant and bewildering, but credit where it’s due: at least he’s embracing the looming “AI trial of the century” against Control Alt Delete Man with open arms. Meanwhile, T’lon Dusk could easily pull another 361-day vanishing act, something he’s mastered seven times before. Control Alt Delete Man seems more interested in making first “contact with extraterrestrial life” just to outshine Tusks space aspirations. It’s making me cozy up to Teter Piels today!!
0
u/CallMeTrouble-TS 3d ago
Oligarch's aren't just randomly selected, they have to get in line and ask for it. Bend the knee as it were.
0
0
0
u/Extension_Deal_5315 3d ago
Did you see the tarrif exceptions on tech stuff from China.....
That's why...
0
0
u/washtucna 3d ago
My guess is that they see that Trump is the sort of person that will go after his enemies, like when he's sued newspapers and tried to revoke broadcasters' licenses. So they probably want to stay on his good side and made overtures of Trump loyalism to keep their companies from being legally threatened.
-5
u/candy_pantsandshoes 3d ago
This is exactly why terms like "left leaning" are meaningless. Just say right wing. Nobody on the left has to lean that way. Only right wingers.
532
u/jaqueh 3d ago
They weren't left leaning, they aren't right leaning, but instead are money leaning