They have all the
money and now they want all the influence too. They can buy it. Russian
oligarch Ilan Shor paid money for votes in Moldovan elections and was rightly banned
for interfering in elections. Elon Musk makes the same offer to unregistered
voters, albeit a chance at winnings rather than cash upfront. Apparently, the
DOJ informed Musk, the world’s richest man, that what he was doing might be
illegal. I’m not sure how that will play out. Meanwhile, Jeff Bezos, the world’s
second richest man, orders (or approves his editor’s decision after recommending)
that the Washington Post not endorse Kamala Harris as was widely expected, and apparently
within hours Blue Origin executives meet with Trump. Was Bezos considering potential
new government contracts for Blue Origin if Trump were to win? A story in the
Guardian, referenced below, suggests a deeper conspiracy, or a quid pro quo. In
any case, the non-endorsement resulted in a lot of subscription cancelations,
although some questioned the value of cancellation in protest. Thus far, two
long-time columnists have resigned over the issue. Post associate editor Jonathan
Capehart remains at the Post but called the non-endorsement ‘abominable’ in a
video statement. Oddly, perhaps, a similar series of events played out at the
LA Times, owned by billionaire Patrick Soon-Shiong. The LA Times also declined
to endorse Harris as expected. An email asking for reasons for the decision has
had no reply thus far. Columnists also resigned and the Trump campaign praised
the decision.
What I am trying
to say is that our elections are being influenced in deliberate ways by the
richest people in the world. How the influence will play out is still up in the
air, but I think the real issue is why they are getting involved at all. These
may be the two richest men in the world, but they get one vote in an election
just like we do. In that sense we are equal. However, if they are out there throwing
money around and declaring obvious against-the-grain non-endorsements, they are
influencing votes in the way they want them to be. Are they not satisfied with
their one vote? It’s bad enough we have to worry about the Russians, the
Chinese, and the Iranians. Now, we have to worry about the billionaires too. Musk
also owns X so both own media. Musk has used his ownership of X in a few ways
to bend the rules for his own interests and now Bezos is doing the same. If
they were not going to make an endorsement, they could have announced it many
months ago instead of waiting till the last minute. The timing certainly seems
to give away the intention, that Bezos favors Trump.
Maybe we regular people,
who also have one vote, but little chance of any influence, don’t wanna hear
about billionaires throwing their weight around. I also don’t wanna hear them
complaining about things, anything. They have billions of dollars, and they still
manage to complain.
The latest rumor
about Musk is that he has been in regular contact with Vladimir Putin, as Trump
apparently has been as well. I’m shocked at the audacity of both of them. While
J.D. Vance tries to walk yet another thin line in saying Putin is an adversary
but not an enemy and that negotiating with him will be necessary, Ukraine will not
agree to Americans negotiating with Russia for them under terms Trump dictates.
He seemed to suggest that Trump and Putin could somehow negotiate Ukraine’s
fate.
The Democratic National
Convention had a weird billionaire moment when just after Bernie Sanders railed
against the billionaire class as he does, he was followed by billionaire
Democrat governor J.B. Pritzker. Oops!
Indeed,
billionaires are all over our politics and the spectrum. Michael Bloomberg,
Trump, Tom Steyer, Musk, Bezos, and Peter Theil to name some.
It just seems to
make sense to tax the super-wealthy more, especially as it could help the less
wealthy to survive better. Some psychologists say we have an innate sense of
fairness. Perhaps the extreme inequality inherent in the quantitative definition
of the term ‘billionaire’ evokes that sense. It might seem to be a grotesque
example of excess and inequality when many have nothing.
The latest news
from WAPO is that some prominent billionaires and CEOs are hedging their bets
toward Trump by failing to endorse and saying positive things about him since they
know Trump will use that against them if he were to get elected. It’s kind of
gross and sad to see them line up to kiss his ass just like all the Republicans
did after bashing him in the past. At a recent meeting of the Business Council,
a group for CEOs only, they reported that “some attendees wound up discussing
how to protect themselves and their companies if Trump wins the presidency next
week and tries to use the power of the Oval Office against his perceived
enemies, said the people, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe
private conversations.” Trump rather openly encourages business leaders to court
his favor and fear his disfavor, as he routinely uses threats as part of his
MO. They also note that according to Trump campaign advisors: “numerous
executives have been trying to reach out to the former president’s team late in
the race.” They advisors also said this: “I’ve told CEOs to engage as
fast as possible because the clock is ticking … . If you’re somebody who has
endorsed Harris, and we’ve never heard from you at any point until after the
election, you’ve got an uphill battle,…” “People are back-channeling,
looking at their networks — they’re talking to lobbyists to see what they can
do to connect with the president and his team.” That all just sounds gross
to me and not the way government should work. And here is another Trump team quote:
“Bezos not endorsing Kamala Harris — I think that’s a $50 million
endorsement for Trump. Not picking a horse is picking a horse.” One-time
Trump team lawyer Alan Dershowitz said this: “In the last two weeks, there
has been a greater recognition of the possibility of a Trump presidency, and
I’ve spoken to several very wealthy people who are interested in hedging their
bets and figuring out how to protect themselves.” “It’s a natural
phenomenon of people who depend on government support for their wealth.” I
guess it’s kiss ass or pay the price! Even Warren Buffet decided not to endorse
Harris after endorsing Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Biden. Sure, maybe these
endorsements are not really necessary and maybe endorsements should become more
limited as we let the people decide, but to see all these big changes at the last
minute as the super-rich try to suck up to the guy that wants to be authoritarian-in-chief
is just yucky. The article also notes: “Trump said in a coffee table book
published in September that he was watching Zuckerberg closely and that the
executive would “spend the rest of his life in prison” if he did anything
illegal in this year’s election.” Zuckerberg praised Trump as “badass” after
the assassination attempt. It seems that fear of punishment and retribution has
taken over the realm of billionaires and CEOs who are not (yet) MAGA enough.
References:
Bezos
faces criticism after executives met with Trump on day of Post’s
non-endorsement. Michael Sainato. The Guardian. October 27, 2024. Bezos
faces criticism after executives met with Trump on day of Post’s
non-endorsement
Second
Post columnist resigns while others defend publication. Opinion by Greta Reich.
Politico. October 27, 2024. Second
Post columnist resigns while others defend publication
The
'abominable' non-endorsement decision by The Washington Post. Jonathan Capehart.
October 27, 2024. The
'abominable' non-endorsement decision by The Washington Post | Watch
Ex-WaPo
editor claims Jeff Bezos colluded with Trump to kill Harris endorsement:
‘Quid-pro-quo’. Anna Young. New York Post. October 26, 2024. Ex-WaPo
editor claims Jeff Bezos colluded with Trump to kill Harris endorsement:
‘Quid-pro-quo’
Some
billionaires, CEOs hedge bets as Trump vows retribution. Jeff Stein, Jacqueline
Alemany, Josh Dawsey. Washington Post. October 28, 2024. Some
billionaires, CEOs hedge bets as Trump vows retribution
No comments:
Post a Comment