Broligarch Dilemma: Techno-Fascism or Humanism?

A common belief among the new breed of tech-bro oligarchs is that more innovation will save humanity and therefore nothing should stand in the way, not even governments or elections. It was laid out in the Techno-Optimist Manifesto, a 5,000 word post written by Marc Andreessen. He’s the venture capitalist who co-founded Netscape, once known as a Silicon Valley kingmaker.

A key goal of these would-be” masters of the universe” is unfettered free speech, at least for themselves. Other priorities include the success of Artificial Intelligence, their underlying contempt for old media, and skepticism about diversity quotas, political correctness, and the “elite consensus.” You know, all that DEI stuff. It turns out their concerns mesh well with Trump’s transgressive agenda. 

In the end, techno-optimism is about growth — at almost any cost. Move fast and break things, as they used to say. Regulations, safety, popular opinion, even logic, can just get in the way of innovation. 

If we don’t watch out, this kind of thinking could replace liberal humanism, which prioritizes self-determination, reason, and human rights. 

It started about twenty years ago with the co-founders, executives and engineers of PayPal. Elon Musk was there, and David Sachs, who became the White House crypto cazar. And Peter Thiel, not one of the richest in the gang, but a key player. Thiel co-founded PayPal, and later Palantir, a data analysis behemoth that has been infiltrating and replacing government-run systems. He was the first outside investor in Facebook, jump started J.D. Vances’s political career, and secretly funded the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that took down the Gawker website.

After PayPal made them rich, they launched other companies, invested in each other's projects, and sat on each other's boards. If you wanted to make it in Silicon Valley, you sought approval from that Mafia.  

By the way, several of them were from South Africa, born during apartheid. So they started out with some privilege — in an authoritarian regime.

So far I’ve mentioned Musk, Sachs, Andreessen, and Thiel. Add Mark Zuckerberg, the second richest person in the world. And Jeff Bezos, Oracle’s Larry Ellison, Alphabet’s Larry Page, and Microsoft’s Ex-CEO Steve Ballmer. These guys are usually numbers 3 through 6 in global wealth. Bill Gates was once part of the gang, but has broken away, somewhat. Put them together and, brand-wise, you have Tesla, Space X, Facebook, Amazon, Google, Alphabet, Oracle, and Microsoft. The new techno-industrial complex. 

The broligarchs meet regularly at conferences and “summits.” Take the annual Sun Valley Conference, a modern Bohemian Grove, known as Summer Camp for Billionaires. They’re usually all there. They also attend private dinners and smaller gatherings, networking and building relationships. Plus one-on-one meetings and invitation-only sessions, ‘pods’ for peer-to-peer exchanges that are rarely announced. 

The conferences and summits include CES — which calls itself the world’s most powerful tech event, MWC Barcelona — which bills itself the most influential connectivity event, the Web Summit, SXSW, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, and others on AI. These are chances for them to network, discuss trends and reach consensus.

Five of the world’s ten wealthiest people were at Trump’s inauguration. Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Page, Thiel, Andreessen, all of them and more were there — France’s Bernard Arnault of LVMH, India’s richest man Mukesh Ambani of Reliance Group, Apple’s Tim Cook, Google’s Sundar Pichai, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, TikTok’s Shou Zi Chew and Uber’s Dara Khosrowshahi.

Where is all this actually going? Some call it techno-fascism, techno-feudalism, cyber populism, or authoritarian technocracy.  They claim that the internet, social media and the technological innovations ahead can be tools of liberation. But it’s ultimately about seizing the power to decide how the future looks. It’s the merging of big tech with authoritarian politics, a system where power is centralized through digital governance, algorithmic control, and elite corporate influence rather than democratic processes.

After World War II, techno-optimism fueled the government’s investment in technologies that a number of broligarchs now control. Since then the dynamic and focus have changed. The emphasis now is on their profitable contractual ties with military systems, border security, and mass surveillance. New forms of communication are putting capitalism on cyber-steroids, high tech forms of knowledge extraction and manipulation. 

Most broligarchs have resisted attempts to restrain their vision of progress with religious zeal. Even the restrictions of nationalism, which their agenda could make obsolete. It’s an emerging global religion, a new type of social darwinism, combined with a blind faith that absolves them of moral or civic duty, or serious consideration of the actual social costs.

But it’s not the only option. Evolutionary humanism agrees with the techno-optimists that humanity possesses the unique ability to shape the future of life on Earth. But being an agent of evolution also means we are responsible for our biological, cultural, and intellectual progress. Having choices means that conflict is inevitable and essential to the process. 

Techno-optimists believe that when forces collide, the smartest and fittest must press forward, sometimes regardless of popular resistance. It’s essentially positive that shrewd, brilliant innovators push aside restrictions, they claim. In the end, despite missteps, it makes us stronger and more prosperous.

If we hold back extraordinary people, the argument continues, the result could be degeneration, even extinction. This is alarmist and untrue. Unfortunately, it is the kind of thinking that led to the rise of the Nazis. They co-opted concepts from evolutionary theory and eugenics to justify a racist ideology. Adopting a twisted social Darwinism, they argued that the "Aryan" race was evolutionarily superior and destined to dominate, attempting to justify forced sterilization and the Holocaust. 

Championed by thinkers like Julian Huxley after World War II, evolutionary humanism was a reaction against Nazi atrocities. Huxley, who coined the term, sought to separate the progressive study of human evolution from the racist and eugenic horrors of the Third Reich, aligning evolutionary biology with universal human rights.

In other words, techno-fascism need not be the next step. Evolution isn’t over. Instead, with expanded consciousness, positive values and peaceful means, an evolutionary humanism that embraces both technology and limits can emerge, flourish, and help to meet the challenges we face.

Oligarch Wine in a New Bro Bottle

Techno-optimism, information power, and the rise of the broligarchs 

By Greg Guma

 The Alienation Index is rising, and reveals deep disenchantment with the power structure. My favorite pollster was explaining statistics I barely understood. The new AI, he explained, had replaced the old Misery Index, which was calculated by adding the unemployment and inflation rates. But as the Marmot Poll made plain, expectations concerning the constructive use of government power were cratering. It had happened before and I wasn’t surprised.

”People are as mad as hell,” he explained, “but they’re also seriously bummed out.”

I admitted to feeling alienated myself. But as a senile US Senator recently said, “people will get used to it.” Perhaps. Yet I wondered, could this matter and mean something?

The answer was quick and brutal. “It means that the people know exactly what’s going on around here,” Jack said. That’s not his name, but what I call him. “They’re seriously pissed about not being able to make a difference anymore, here at home or anywhere else. Sure, they feel guilty about the past, you know the racism, invasions and all that. But they really enjoyed how we used to be the envy of the world, and think this is being purposely eroded. They feel hurt, forgotten, betrayed, and powerless to do anything about it. I call this syndrome RS — Reality Shock.”

Billionaire Row at the Trump Inauguration

”But how? Why? Isn’t Trump starting to get things under control? Bombing Iran, neutralizing enemies, co-opting critics, the deportation round ups, putting alligators back to work. It’s a reptilian renaissance.”

Jack found my attitude vaguely amusing. “People aren’t that dense, despite their voting choices — or their belief in our reptile overlords. They see things being changed, disrupted. And it doesn’t look much like what they were promised. The system is being rearranged, with techno-optimism, redistribution to the top, and the rise of the broligarchy.”

”You’ve lost me. What’s all this?”

My iPhone went silent. Then he whispered, “I can’t talk here. Meet me at the old place.” And hung up.

We rendezvoused in an abandoned mall whose location I won’t reveal, where I briefly felt a slight case of RS myself. There used to be consumers and thriving businesses in this place. But my resignation was followed by paranoid awareness.

Jack started with a wry observation about how, the last time we met here, my big concern was the Trilateral Commission, the old school corporate league that tried to control the world through power sharing by key governments. David Rockefeller was the kingpin then, with the help of OGs like Kissinger and Brzezinski. How naive and short-sighted.

”It’s no longer about oil and resource scarcity. Now it’s all about the algorithms and the whole ROTTEN alliance.”

I had no idea what he was talking about. “What’s ROTTEN?”

”Just an acronym. Rich Oligarchs Tech Titans Egomaniacs and Narcissists, the real global power players today.”

”They call themselves that?”

”They prefer Broligarchs. They don’t agree on everything, but enough. And they have an ideology called techno-optimism. The basic idea is that technological innovation will save humanity and nothing should stand in the way, especially governments or elections. It was laid out in the Techno-Optimist Manifesto. That’s a 5,000 word blog post written by Marc Andreessen. He’s the venture capitalist who co-founded Netscape. Used to be known as a Silicon Valley kingmaker, but financially they’ve moved way beyond him.”

“Ok, I’ll bite. What do they believe?”

”Unfettered free speech, at least for themselves. Artificial Intelligence, contempt for old media, and deep skepticism about diversity quotas, political correctness, and the elite consensus, all that DEI stuff. It meshes well with Trump’s agenda. Techno-optimism is about growth at all costs. Move fast and break things, that’s what they say. Regulations, safety, even sanity just get in the way of innovation. If we don’t watch out, it could replace liberal humanism.”

“Sounds delusional. Who are these guys?”

“Call them crazy, but they are all billionaires. It started about twenty years ago with the PayPal Mafia.”

”Now you’re just making things up!”

”Hardly. I’m talking about the co-founders, executives and engineers of PayPal. Elon Musk was one of them, and David Sachs, who became the White House crypto cazar. And Peter Thiel. He’s not one of the richest in the group, but he is a key player. Co-founded PayPal, then Palantir, that big data analysis business that’s begun taking over government systems. He was also the first outside investor in Facebook and jump started J.D. Vances’s career. Plus, he secretly funded the Hulk Hogan lawsuit that took down Gawker. Seriously far Right.

“After PayPal made them rich, they started a ton of other companies, invested in each other's projects, sat on each other's boards. If you wanted to make it in Silicon Valley, you needed that Mafia. They were so sure of themselves they once posed for a Fortune photo shoot. Thirteen of them, dressed as mobsters — track suits, leather jackets, shoulder pads, gold chains, cigars, slicked back hair, poker chips and whiskey. Then I noticed, several were from South Africa, born during apartheid. They started out with vast privilege — in an authoritarian regime.”

“Maybe they were just kidding around,” I protested. “I need more, real proof of a conspiracy.”

“You want receipts, Ok. I’ve already mentioned Musk, Sachs, Andreessen, and Thiel. You can add Mark Zuckerberg, the second richest person in the world after Musk. And Jeff Bezos, Oracle’s Larry Ellison, Alphabet’s Larry Page, Microsoft’s Ex-CEO Steve Ballmer. They’re numbers 3 through 6 in global wealth. Bill Gates was also part of the gang, but he’s broken away, somewhat. Put them together and you have Tesla, Space X, Facebook, Amazon, Google, Alphabet, Oracle, and Microsoft. The techno-industrial complex.”

”That doesn’t mean they’re working together.”

“They meet often enough. Take the annual Sun Valley Conference, a modern Bohemian Grove. They’re usually all there in Idaho. It’s known as Summer Camp for Billionaires. They also attend private dinners and smaller gatherings, networking, building relationships. Plus all the one-on-one meetings and invitation-only sessions, ‘pods’ for peer-to-peer exchanges. They’re rarely announced.

“And don’t forget the conferences and summits: CES — which calls itself the world’s most powerful tech event, MWC Barcelona — which bills itself the most influential connectivity event, the Web Summit, SXSW, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, or the ones on AI. These are chances for them to network, discuss trends, reach consensus.

“Of course you know, five of the world’s ten wealthiest people were at Trump’s inauguration. Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Page, Thiel, Andreessen, all of them and more were there — France’s Bernard Arnault of LVMH, India’s richest man Mukesh Ambani of Reliance Group, Apple’s Tim Cook, Google’s Sundar Pichai, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, TikTok’s Shou Zi Chew and Uber’s Dara Khosrowshahi.”

“OK, I get it,” I said. “But where is all this going?”

“Depends on who you ask. Some call it techno-fascism, techno-feudalism, cyber populism, or authoritarian technocracy. But those are just words. Basically, their claim is that the internet, social media and all the technological innovations ahead can be tools of freedom. But it’s actually about more wealth and giving them the power to decide how the future looks.

“After World War II, techno-optimism fueled the government’s investment in technologies the broligarchs now control. Since then the dynamic has changed. Now the emphasis is on their close ties with military systems, border security, and mass surveillance. New forms of communication are putting capitalism on cyber-steroids, high tech forms of knowledge extraction and manipulation. The Bros despise any attempts to restrain their vision of progress. Even the restrictions of nationalism, which their agenda could make obsolete. It’s like a new global religion, one that absolves them of moral or civic duty, or any serious consideration of the real social costs.”

Some call this evolutionary humanism. Related to Darwinian evolutionary theory, it says that conflict is essential, inevitable, and pushes us forward. When forces collide, the smartest and fittest should simply press forward, regardless of popular resistance. It’s good that shrewd, brilliant innovators push restrictions aside, they say. It makes us stronger and more prosperous.

Evolution never ends. The argument goes: If we hold back extraordinary people, the result could be degeneration, even extinction. It’s the kind of thinking that unfortunately led to the rise of the Nazis. Yet that isn’t the inevitable result. If combined with an evolution of consciousness, positive values and peaceful means, evolutionary humanism could help us to meet the serious challenges we face. As Friedrich Nietzsche put it, “That which does not kill us makes us stronger.” Confronting adversity can lead to positive change and resilience, helping us to honestly face future challenges. But not necessarily.

I was exhausted and even more alienated and confused than when our conversation started. The current crisis has made the old conspiracies look quaint, the era when groups like the Council of Foreign Relations or Trilateral Commission thought they could manage or renovate international relations through elite meetings, position papers, and clever policies. The Broligarchs are leading us toward a society in which it will be impossible to disconnect from all-knowing networks. Humanity is in danger of being stripped of its basic autonomy and free will. Yet millions of people are passively accepting this future. I can remember a time, decades ago, when the very idea of using social security numbers as universal identifiers, an early way to create a national data bank, was considered unthinkable. How quaint.

A few weeks after we met, I called Jack again late one night. It was after the announcement that Trump had chosen Palantir, the company Thiel founded, to implement an Executive Order instructing government agencies to share their data and create a master database that can keep track of everyone in the country. They started off with $133 million in government money, but recently had been given another $795 million.

Palantir was talking with the Social Security Administration and IRS about buying its technology, and was already working with the Department of Health and Human Services and other agencies. What began with Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) was continuing to gain momentum. His departure made no difference.

“How’s that affecting the Alienation Index? Are people beginning to wake up and do something?”

“They’re concerned about misinformation and deep fakes, but hesitate to express their opinions,” he explained. “Their big fears are criticism, retaliation, and being physically attacked. They’re overwhelmed by the complexity of protecting their privacy. Most people feel they have little control nowadays over how their personal data is collected and used. Sure, they’d like more protection, but they’re afraid of crime and terrorism, and willing to sacrifice more privacy to feel secure.”

”Why don’t journalists write more about this? We don’t hear much about the dangers.”

”According to the polling, it would only increase the Alienation Index. And that means even more Reality Shock.”