The bro-ligarchs have a vision for the new Trump term

I don't really mind the "science fiction, transhumanism, and immortality" bit but the economic policy - slash spending and tarif war everyone - seems kind of nuts. I hope we don't have a twitter like economic result.

&gt; <i>All of these men see themselves as the heroes or protagonists in their own sci-fi saga. And a key part of being a “technological superman” — or ubermensch, as the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche would say — is that you’re above the law. Common-sense morality doesn’t apply to you because you’re a superior being on a superior mission. Thiel, it should be noted, is a big Nietzsche fan, though his is an extremely selective reading of the philosopher’s work.</i><p>&gt; <i>The ubermensch ideology helps explain the broligarchs’ disturbing gender politics. “The ‘bro’ part of broligarch is not incidental to this — it’s built on this idea that not only are these guys superior, they are superior because they’re guys,” Harrington said.</i><p>[…]<p>&gt; <i>The so-called network state is “a fancy name for tech authoritarianism,” journalist Gil Duran, who has spent the past year reporting on these building projects, told me. “The idea is to build power over the long term by controlling money, politics, technology, and land.”</i><p>Also maybe &quot;Why big tech turned right&quot;:<p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.vox.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;397525&#x2F;trump-big-tech-musk-bezos-zuckerberg-democrats-biden" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.vox.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;397525&#x2F;trump-big-tech-musk-bezo...</a>

It’s interesting that phrases like ‘oligarch’ are applied so casually, especially in a discriminatory way, using terms like ‘bro’. Vox has long been a progressive site, but they apparently ignore their own social justice worldview when it comes to attacking their opponents. I also don’t understand why ‘oligarch’ is not applied to the other side, when Harris had a much broader base of corporate support and raised more funding overall.<p>The article is otherwise unsubstantial and makes a lot of vague claims without good arguments. I think the ‘vision’ the Trump team and their advisors have is a lot less sinister than these hyperbolic articles make it out to be. It’s really just about restoring freedom of speech, reducing the power given to certain institutions (for example, “fact checkers”), reducing the national debt, creating an environment for technological superiority (which is critical for the US and free world to stay ahead of authoritarian adversaries), and things like that.<p>The other philosophical things that some people have mentioned at times (for example the compatibility of democracy and freedom) is less about how they’ll govern and more like thinking out loud, which they’re allowed to do. That doesn’t mean they’re committed to those possible ideas, let alone going to act on them.