[Matt Stoller]

"So what does Vance think? He is in agreement with the views of a rising set of younger conservatives, populists like Sohrab Ahmari and Oren Cass, who assert that libertarianism is a cover for private rule, most explicitly in Ahmari’s book Tyranny, Inc. It is flourishing of the family that animates this new group, not worship of the market. At Remedy Fest, Vance was explicit in his agreement with this notion, saying “I don't really care if the entity that is most threatening to that vision is a private entity or a public entity, we have to be worried about it.”"

An interesting analysis of JD Vance's economic ideas - at least as described here, I'm actually not in disagreement. The free market is cover for private rule. Lina Khan is doing a great job.

I'm less impressed with his backers Andreessen and Horowitz's ideas, which are tied up with military might and a self-interested misunderstanding of what happened in relation to the downfall of the USSR. The idea that Elizabeth Warren "hates capitalism" is nonsense. It's a very thin defense drawn from their particular mode of capitalism coming under threat of regulation.

The trouble is, as I've described, all the social policies that go along with it. Sure, try and influence both political parties to be beneficial to your businesses all you want. But if you throw mass deportations, military policing of our cities, and fascist reconstructions of government in the mix, you'd better be ready for the repercussions.

#Democracy

[Link]