Saturday, March 2, 2024

The Despots of Silicon Valley


At the day that Elon Musk purchased Twitter for $44 billion, he tweeted, “the chicken is freed,” an overly quick word, even by means of the factors of Twitter (now X). And but it incorporates such a lot of innuendos and unanswered questions. Was once the chicken shackled ahead of? Is the person who freed it … a liberator? Freed to do what precisely?

Musk has all the time talked a large sport on loose speech or even described himself as a “loose speech absolutist.” However his possession and control of X has published the deep inconsistencies between his professed values and his movements. And it isn’t simply Musk. During the arena of tech, proof of illiberalism is on the upward thrust.

On this week’s episode of Radio Atlantic, Adrienne LaFrance, the manager editor of The Atlantic, names and explains the political ideology of the unelected leaders of Silicon Valley. They’re main a motion she calls “techno-authoritarianism.”

Pay attention to the dialog right here:

The next is a transcript of the episode:


Information Archival: That is the large marvel in Silicon Valley these days. Sam Altman, the face of the generative-AI growth and CEO of OpenAI, he’s out of the corporate.

Adrienne LaFrance: You almost certainly take into account seeing headlines proper ahead of Thanksgiving a couple of bunch of drama at OpenAI.

Information Archival: That roller-coaster experience at OpenAI is over. No less than we expect it’s over. Ousted CEO Sam Altman has been rehired, and the board that driven him out is long past.

LaFrance: I imply, it was once some of the dramatic tale in tech, perhaps of this century. I imply, in reality dramatic.


Hanna Rosin: That’s Adrienne LaFrance, the manager editor of The Atlantic, and he or she’s been following tech for many years. So you could possibly be expecting that she would in finding this Silicon Valley place of work gossip dramatic.

However the unexpected factor is, numerous other people did—which is most definitely as a result of beneath that “will they or gained’t they rehire Sam Altman?” query, there was once a extra elementary debate occurring.


LaFrance: On one facet, you have got other people arguing for a extra wary technique to construction of synthetic intelligence. And at the different, you have got a controversy or a kind of worldview that claims, This era is right here. It’s taking place. It’s replacing the arena already. No longer best must we now not decelerate, however it might be irresponsible to decelerate.

So it’s this simply dramatically other worldview of, you already know, nearly polar opposites—of in the event you decelerate, you’re hurting humanity, as opposed to in the event you don’t decelerate, you’re hurting humanity.

Rosin: So probably the most oversimplification is like scale and cash in as opposed to warning.

LaFrance: Precisely. However the people who find themselves at the scale-and-profit facet would really like you to imagine that also they are working in humanity’s very best pastime.


Rosin: That is Radio Atlantic. I’m Hanna Rosin. The drama at OpenAI was once an extraordinary second the place an ideological divide in Silicon Valley was once so central, and specific.

We’re now not going to discuss the Sam Altman saga these days. However we’re going to discuss those underlying ideals, as a result of in an business outlined by means of innovations, and IPOs, and tech bro jokes, it’s simple to omit what a elementary driving force ideology will also be.

In a contemporary tale for The Atlantic, Adrienne argued that we must read about those perspectives extra in moderation and take them a lot more significantly than we do. And she or he put a reputation to the ideology: techno-authoritarianism.


Rosin: So, we’re used to pondering of a few tech titans as villains, however you’re more or less defining them as villains with political importance. What do you imply whilst you name them the despots of Silicon Valley?

LaFrance: So I’ve been fascinated by this for years, truthfully, and one thing that have been irritating me is I believe that we, as a society, haven’t correctly positioned Silicon Valley the place it must be, relating to its precise significance and affect.

So all of us comprehend it influences our lives. And, you already know, I would like to discuss displays and social media and the entire relaxation, however Silicon Valley has additionally had this profound affect politically and culturally this is a lot larger than simply the units we’re conserving in our wallet.

Rosin: Mm-hmm.

LaFrance: It has troubled me as a result of I believe like we haven’t correctly known as that what it’s, which is a real ideology that comes out of Silicon Valley this is political in nature, despite the fact that it’s now not a political birthday celebration.

It’s this worldview this is intolerant. It is going in opposition to democratic values, which means now not the Democratic Birthday celebration however values that advertise democracy and the well being of democracy. And it presupposes that the technocratic elite is aware of very best and now not the folk.

Rosin: I imply, authoritarian is an overly robust phrase. We’re used to the use of “authoritarian” in a unique context, which is our political context.

LaFrance: Surely. I imply, I assume the nuance I’d need to upload is that this isn’t political within the conventional sense. It’s now not as even though you have got authoritarian technocrats seeking to come to energy in Silicon Valley by means of elections or coups, even. They’re now not even bothering with our methods of presidency, as a result of they have already got situated themselves as extra necessary and influential, culturally. And so it’s nearly like they don’t want to trouble with executive for his or her energy.

Rosin: I see. So it’s a type of energy we don’t even acknowledge, as a result of we don’t precisely have buildings to place it in or realize it.

LaFrance: Neatly, we would possibly not acknowledge it as readily on account of that, however I feel in the event you glance now not even that intently, it’s lovely undeniable to look.

Should you simply take note of how other people discuss what they suspect issues, who they suspect must make choices, who they represent as their enemies—establishments, mavens, reporters, for instance. , if it looks as if an authoritarian and quacks like an authoritarian, then, you already know: ta-da.

Rosin: Proper. Proper.

LaFrance: The explanation I sought after to take a look at to outline what this ideology is, is I do really feel as even though over the last 5 to ten years, one thing has shifted, regularly in the beginning after which extra temporarily. This type of subversion of Enlightenment-era language and values to justify an authoritarian technocratic worldview was once alarming to me. And so, for instance, you’ll see numerous other people on this class describing themselves as free-speech absolutists—I feel a in reality simple instance of this could be Elon Musk—and announcing the entire issues that somebody who believes in liberal democracy would possibly believe on its face, however then performing otherwise.

So, to mention you’re a free-speech absolutist however then tailor your privately run social platform to serve your individual wishes and ideology and select to your perceived enemies—I imply, that’s now not free-speech absolutism in any respect.

And so this feeling of aggrievement has speeded up and develop into, you already know, extra vitriolic and extra ostentatious. It simply turns out love it’s getting extra pronounced.

Rosin: When did you get started taking note of tech titans? When did you get started following the business?

LaFrance: I first began in reality writing about tech for The Atlantic in 2013.

Rosin: Mm-hmm. What was once the promise of tech again then? How have been tech titans framing their very own paintings or behaving another way than now?

LaFrance: Proper. I imply, so 10 to fifteen years in the past, we have been speaking in regards to the morning time of the social cell age. So smartphones are nonetheless kind of new. (Social media isn’t utterly new. , Fb began in 2004. It’s worthwhile to return to, like, Friendster or Myspace ahead of that.) Uber was once new. It was once very a lot an period of other people nonetheless being wowed.

And admittedly, I’m nonetheless wowed by means of this. Like, you select up this smartphone—this new, glossy, gorgeous instrument—and also you press a button at the telephone, and one thing can occur in the actual global: You summon a taxi or, you already know, meals supply. All of these things turns out utterly commonplace to us now, but it surely was once this miraculous time the place other people have been growing some way of interacting with the arena that was once utterly new.

And so there was once nonetheless, I feel, for sure wholesome skepticism, however you had numerous the bright-eyed optimism that I feel began, for sure, within the ’90s that also carried over.

Rosin: And was once there a worldview connected to that awe? Like, I take into account the word, “Don’t be evil,” however I will’t position it in time. Like, was once there some thought of—

LaFrance: I will’t take into account when Google retired that, however there for sure got here some extent the place it turned into ridiculous to put on that optimism to your sleeve. There was once this time the place Silicon Valley was once a spot for underdogs, for other people with large desires and the power to code, they usually’d come and do wonderful issues.

I feel we even have to keep in mind—I don’t need to be too starry-eyed about it—even then, this was once an period the place you had, like, the bro-ish tradition, and girls running in numerous those corporations on the time document simply horrible reviews.

And so there are flaws from the beginning, as with all business or any tradition. However I feel 10 or 15 years in the past is across the time issues began to curdle somewhat bit.

I imagine it was once 2012 when Fb sooner or later purchased Instagram, with its $1 billion valuation, and it was once this second the place other people have been like, No. Come on. Like, That’s an insane sum of money. Is it in reality value that?

And also you had a string of those kind of obscene quantities of cash. And what you have been witnessing—and I feel other people began to appreciate this then, too—was once just like the monopolization and those giants gobbling up their competition. The forces set in movement that led us to the surroundings that we’re in these days.

And we didn’t comprehend it till a few years later, however 2012 was once additionally the 12 months that Fb was once doing its now-infamous mood-manipulation experiments, when it was once appearing customers various things to look if they might attempt to make other people satisfied or unhappy or indignant, with out their consent.

And by means of then, I feel, most of the people was once beginning to notice, you already know, there could also be some downsides to these kind of glossy issues.

Rosin: Yeah. After which got here 2016, when it felt like Fb’s function within the election was once one thing everyone spotted.

LaFrance: Proper, and a wide variety of questions on focused advertisements for positive populations and election interference, overseas or another way. So, certainly, there was once every other wave of intense grievance for Fb then. , severe questions on those corporations wreaking havoc had been round for years.

Rosin: It’s been 8 or 10 years. So, like, what feels other now?

LaFrance: The explanation I wrote this now’s we’re, in The united states, for sure, and in different places on this planet, dealing with an actual combat for the way forward for democracy. And the stakes are top. And it gave the impression necessary to me, you already know, at a time when everybody’s going to be targeted at the 2024 presidential election, as they must be, and at the stakes there, there are different forces for illiberalism and autocracy which might be permeating our society, and we must reckon with the ones too.


Rosin: After the spoil, we discuss a voice that turns out to seize techno-authoritarianism completely. And naturally, we reckon.


LaFrance: So in the event you take a look at the social prerequisites that assist galvanize political violence or stoke other people’s urge for food for a robust guy in rate—or select your destabilizing social, political, cultural power—numerous the ones issues cross in combination and overlap.

And I feel numerous those self same prerequisites are exacerbated by means of our dating, particular person and societal, with era after which additional exacerbated by means of the tech titans who need to shield in opposition to any grievance of the present surroundings.

Rosin: I see. So the tolerance for political autocracy and our tolerance for technological autocracy, they more or less meld in combination and bring the similar effects.

LaFrance: I feel so. I imply, simply consider, like, Orwell or Ray Bradbury. We all know that—I imply, the ones have been futuristic books of their occasions, pondering of 1984 and Fahrenheit 451

Rosin: Politics and era, the interplay between—that’s the engine of sci-fi.

LaFrance: Yeah, or simply take a look at how Hitler used the radio. Like, era isn’t inherently evil. I like era. I desperately love the web. Like, I if truth be told do.

However I feel in case you have extremely robust other people placing their worldview relating to, Development is inevitable, and, Any person who doesn’t need to simply transfer ahead for the sake of transferring ahead is at the facet of evil, simply the starkness of ways they body that is so simple.

There’s no nuance, and it’s in in reality authoritarian phrases. Simply, it must scare other people.

Rosin: K. I feel I need to get to the specifics of what this ideology if truth be told is.

LaFrance: K. So an invaluable instance is Marc Andreessen, the project capitalist. , Andreessen Horowitz is his company. He’s an overly well known, influential, however pugnacious man.

And he has written what he calls “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto,” and it’s an overly lengthy weblog submit, however I feel a revealing one and value studying within the sense that it lays out a few of what I’m describing right here.

He lists, kind of, what a techno-optimist would imagine, and I’m paraphrasing right here, however: growth for growth’s sake, all the time transferring ahead, rejecting custom, rejecting historical past, rejecting experience, rejecting establishments. He has an inventory of enemies.

You take a look at the smartly that individuals are drawing from, and it will provide you with a way of this sort of the highbrow stress, I’d say, of simply: What we’re doing is excellent as it’s what we’re doing, and we’re going to do it as a result of we’re doing it.

There’s kind of this, like, round good judgment to it. So anyway, that’s one instance, “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto.”

Rosin: Let’s learn one of the strains, simply to typify his taste of writing and pondering. I imply, the person who I all the time consider, is the only in regards to the lightning.

LaFrance: It’s in reality dramatic. [Laughs.]

Rosin: I take into account pondering, once I learn that line, I’ve by no means perhaps learn the rest as smug as this.

LaFrance: I do know, smartly, however we shouldn’t snicker at it, as a result of he’s severe. Have you learnt what I imply?

Rosin: Neatly, let’s get to that, however simply so other people perceive the way—

LaFrance: K. [Demonstratively clears throat.] I’m in reality now not going to snicker. K. He says, “We imagine in nature, however we additionally imagine in overcoming nature. We aren’t primitives, cowering in worry of the lightning bolt. We’re the apex predator; the lightning works for us.”

Rosin: “The lightning works for us.” Wow. That’s one thing.

LaFrance: Glance, I am getting, like, there’s a model of this that, harnessed correctly, may just encourage other people to do impressive issues.

And, like, there’s one thing gorgeous about nice creativeness in tech. That’s nice. However yeah, announcing, “The lightning works for us,” is slightly a lot.

Rosin: I if truth be told have bother working out optimist as opposed to pessimist.

LaFrance: Proper. He’s so mad for an optimist.

Rosin: Sure. It’s a mixture of, kind of, Ayn Rand discuss and a type of indignant Twitter manifesto.

However it’s darkish and apocalyptic, and I did marvel about that. Like, why is it known as “The Techno-Optimist” and but it feels extraordinarily reactionary? Like, it echoes a type of reactionary language that you simply pay attention in some corners of the Republican Birthday celebration and Trumpism. It’s somewhat bit like “Make The united states nice once more.” The way in which other people mentioned that’s the maximum pessimistic political slogan that anybody’s ever gained with.

LaFrance: Completely. I imply, I feel you’re hitting the precise level, which is that they take—I’ll discuss only for Andreessen right here. He’s describing himself and this manifesto as constructive, however in the similar means that some technocrats take Enlightenment values and declare to beef up them whilst announcing the complete opposite of what the ones values if truth be told imply. And so I feel it’s a subversion of which means. It’s: We’re optimists. We’re the great guys.

And you then learn it and also you’re like, That is frightening.

However this isn’t some Reddit discussion board within the nook that best six guys are studying and agreeing with every different. Those are probably the most robust other people on the earth, they usually’re vastly influential and other people purchase into it.

Rosin: May just you assist me perceive, what’s without equal purpose of a techno-optimist? Is it social trade? Is it an perspective shift? Is it cash?

It’s very exhausting to grasp. Is it simply scaling an organization? Or is it cultural, societal trade? Like, what do you suppose they’re after?

LaFrance: Neatly, I wouldn’t name it a techno-optimist. I wouldn’t use that time period.

However the worldview that’s being expressed right here, I feel the purpose, for sure, is to retain energy and to maximise cash in. And one of the vital mentioned objectives from the manifesto is quote, “to make sure the techno-capital upward spiral continues perpetually.” In order that’s obviously speaking about endured enrichment for those robust other people, who’re already very rich. However you already know, they need to construct new issues and make a ton of cash.

Rosin: Mm-hmm. That’s the bizarre factor. Like, it doesn’t sound like a industry technique.

LaFrance: [Laughs.]

Rosin: It feels like a manifesto for social overhaul. And so it’s exhausting to grasp what it’s.

LaFrance: I can say, to be truthful, I feel this encapsulates additionally the people who find themselves growing world-changing tech for excellent, which is going on.

I imply, in the event you take a look at even the area of AI, we are hoping—we haven’t observed it but, however I totally be expecting we can see AI that is helping remedy illnesses. That’s outstanding. We must all want for that end result. And I’m hoping that the folk running in this are singularly inquisitive about that more or less paintings.

And so I feel in the event you have been to invite somebody like Marc Andreessen or Elon Musk or select your favourite technocrat, they might say, We’re replacing the arena to make it higher for humanity. We’re going to visit Mars. We’re going to remedy illness.

And those who have this worldview would possibly, in truth, assist do this, which is improbable. However as a way to get to Mars, what’s the trade-off in the event you’re speaking about this worldview?

Rosin: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. A few of the leaders of main tech corporations, how prevalent do you suppose this perspective is?

LaFrance: It’s a in reality excellent query. In truth, there are such a large amount of tech corporations, I don’t really feel relaxed announcing that it’s in style throughout each and every one. Like, there’s such a lot of tech corporations, proper?

Rosin: Mm-hmm.

LaFrance: However it’s extremely visual and vocal amongst many very influential leaders in tech. So in the event you have been to have a look at each and every unmarried tech corporate, it would possibly not also be a majority. However a number of the maximum robust other people, it’s extremely visual and prevalent.

Rosin: And the way would you evaluate it with the attitudes of, say, the robber barons of previous eras?

LaFrance: There may be if truth be told a super e book known as Railroaded by means of the Stanford historian Richard White this is most commonly about robber barons, however all the time I used to be studying it, I used to be fascinated by Silicon Valley, as it’s an overly herbal comparability.

You may have this type of, you already know, world-changing era this is unexpectedly enriching this handful of robust males—most commonly males—and this query of, you already know, Did railroads trade The united states for excellent? Without a doubt. After all, they did. However, there are questions of monopoly and what sort of energy anyone particular person must hang and the entire questions that get a hold of Silicon Valley, too.

So, I feel there are similarities there, however I feel there are boundaries to the similarities, partly as a result of I feel the way in which that the present tech developments are replacing our lives are taking place on a world scale a lot sooner. And I don’t suppose numerous other people correctly remember the fact that, like, we’re nonetheless simply originally of working out what smartphones and the web have accomplished to us, and AI is right here now. And it’s just like the level to which the arena is replacing is, I feel, such a lot larger in magnitude than it’s conceivable to grasp on an ordinary human timeline.

It’s wild. It’s means larger than railroads.

Rosin: I assume the effects of items taking place sooner, in a extra more or less chaotic means, is that society doesn’t have time to catch up, and so you find yourself being extra reactionary. I imply, that’s typically what occurs, traditionally. And governments don’t have time to catch up, as a result of they’re slow-moving, so the traditional, sluggish laws that you’d installed position, there simply isn’t time to, kind of, agree on them.

So, you’ve discussed historic roots of fascism. What do you imply by means of that?

LaFrance: Neatly, I need to watch out, as it’s invoked casually and lazily. And I’m now not calling technocrats of these days fascists, simply to be utterly transparent. And I don’t suppose, for example, that “The Techno-Optimist Manifesto” is a fascist file, and I don’t suppose that it’s expounding a fascist worldview. However, in the event you take a look at the highbrow origins of one of the concepts that this manifesto incorporates, you obviously will probably be reminded of the beginnings of fascism.

So, in the event you glance to the Thirties, which is when this sort of first American technocracy motion flourished, it was once taking place at a time when there was once this push for modernism, in poetry basically but additionally artwork, and that had discovered its footing amongst futurists in Italy as smartly.

And so one determine, particularly, involves thoughts and is somebody who Andreessen occurs to say as considered one of his patron saints of techno-optimism.

It’s a person named F. T. Marinetti, who’s continuously described as the daddy of futurism. He writes the [Manifesto of Futurism], which is value studying, utterly. I believe Andreessen on that entrance. And it professes this worldview of fascinated by people’ position within the device age and the whole lot rushing up and the wonderful thing about the long run and the chance. It is vitally techno-optimistic in nature.

And, 10 years later, Marinetti then writes The Fascist Manifesto, and lots of the figures who led the futurism motion in Italy helped get started fascism in Italy.

, I’m now not suggesting that this becomes fascism, however I’m pointing to proof that displays {that a} motion that’s cultural will have massive political energy when stoked by means of the correct social prerequisites and charismatic leaders.

Rosin: Proper, so a motion that has its origins in creativity and creativeness can sooner or later more or less curdle be manipulated right into a motion the place the individuals who have the creativity and creativeness are (a) virtuous and (b) the herbal leaders of a society, after which that may flip and develop into fascistic.

LaFrance: Proper. And simply because somebody says they’re devoting their lifestyles or their worldview to growth—it sounds excellent. Or they’re optimists—it sounds excellent. It doesn’t imply it’s excellent.

Rosin: Proper.

K. You’ve discussed there are excellent issues about era and, to make certain, there are glorious issues taking place. So I would like to take a look at and piece a few of this aside.

Andreessen talks so much about AI chance. Like, it’s advanced right into a cult. All we ever discuss is AI chance. I feel there’s a professional critique that each political events continuously best see era’s risks and, in truth, don’t depend sufficient on or inspire sufficient technological fixes to glaring issues that exist. What do you consider that?

LaFrance: I like era and believe you, simply to be transparent.

Rosin: I imply, like, I used to be pondering, local weather trade is an instance. Like, numerous other people would say we have been too chance averse. We didn’t—by means of we, I imply the American executive—create laws to inspire technological innovation.

We’re kind of sluggish on that. We’ve Construct Again Higher, and it’s like we’ve got those kind of outdated, infrastructure-y concepts about how one can support society, after we may have inspired much more technological innovation.

LaFrance: Proper. Neatly, something I consider so much is Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, one thing he stated to our colleague Ross Andersen ultimate spring, which was once, you already know, In a practical society, executive could be doing this paintings that I’m doing at OpenAI, however we don’t have a practical executive. Mainly, I’m paraphrasing what he stated.

, I feel this must be the paintings because it was once in, you already know, the mid-Twentieth century, that the nice medical innovation must be taking place with public investment, with no matter level of law is deemed essential by means of the general public.

Rosin: Like an NIH similar, principally.

LaFrance: Yeah, and even at a school. Like, universities aren’t main the way in which right here, which is tragic, I feel.

Rosin: I consider if I had requested you this 10 years in the past, like, What executive law must be in position? What sort of controls would you have got sought after? chances are you’ll’ve stated none, since you simply were given your new smartphone, or one thing. How do you consider this now?

LaFrance: I’m reluctant to discuss law for 2 causes: (1) It’s so uninteresting, Hanna—come on—and (2) I in reality am now not a professional on law, and I can confess that I don’t suppose it’s the swiftest trail to the answer that’s very best for the folk, in lots of instances.

Rosin: Mm-hmm.

LaFrance: I’m now not, like, blanket in opposition to law. Like, I see the entire some ways the place it’s—

Rosin: I imply, I feel with law, it’s like excellent law is excellent; unhealthy law is obstructive. Like, it’s a case-by-case foundation.

LaFrance: A hundred percent. And the opposite factor is, even though, that we do have some check instances. Like, in the event you take a look at one of the Ecu (or in different places) law of social media, for instance, it’s now not, I don’t suppose, essentially excellent for the general public’s proper to grasp issues or loose speech, for instance. Like, numerous what’s took place in different international locations would by no means resist scrutiny relating to free-speech demanding situations.

Rosin: So what’s without equal price you’re seeking to maintain?

LaFrance: , perhaps that is me being an optimist, however I feel we’ve got extra energy and company to modify the tradition than it infrequently seems like. And for sure there are spaces the place it’s in reality exhausting and norms are already established however, like, we must reside in a global the place we keep watch over how we use tech and the way tech is used in opposition to us.

And there’s numerous lip provider paid to that concept, in fact, by means of other people in Silicon Valley, who’re creating a ton of cash off conserving other people captive to their units. But when sufficient sensible other people take possession of this as a factor to resolve and, like, are leaders of their communities, of their households, of their offices—anywhere it can be—I’ve far more religion in particular person other people than the federal government to control, even if law is most definitely additionally necessary.

Rosin: It’s fascinating. We all the time finish up on this position. It simply got here to thoughts, this symbol: I met an overly beautiful 19-year-old who has a turn telephone, after which every other one that has a turn telephone. However I’m pondering that, like, lovable child along with his turn telephone has to by hook or by crook—

LaFrance: It was once like hipsters purchasing report avid gamers in 2010.

Rosin: Precisely like that, and they have got to by hook or by crook hang the barrier in opposition to Meta. It’s this younger child as opposed to Meta.

LaFrance: Neatly, I imply, the facility of youngsters pointing out what’s cool is if truth be told a vastly influential cultural power. So, like, teenagers, in the event you’re listening, save us.

Rosin: Yeah. Move purchase some turn telephones. All proper. K. Neatly, we’ll need to commit every other episode to precise answers.

LaFrance: Highest. I’ll be there.

Rosin: All proper. Thanks for becoming a member of us.

LaFrance: Thank you such a lot for having me.


Rosin: This episode of Radio Atlantic was once produced by means of Kevin Townsend. It was once edited by means of Claudine Ebeid, fact-checked by means of Yvonne Kim, and engineered by means of Rob Smierciak. Claudine Ebeid is the manager manufacturer for Atlantic Audio, and Andrea Valdez is our managing editor. I’m Hanna Rosin. Thanks for listening.


Rosin: Techno-authoritarianism. Boy, that’s a mouthful. [Inflects pronunciation.] Techno-authori-tarianism. Techno-authoritarianism. Techno-authoritarianism.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Stories