Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on ‘what the papers don’t say’ – without fear or favour.
To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.
At Donald Trump’s inauguration, they were all there. Elon Musk as expected, but also Meta’s Zuckerberg, Amazon’s Bezos, Google’s Pichai, OpenAI’s Altman and Apple’s Cook. Even TikTok’s Shou Zi Chew was present. Each worth one or more billions of dollars, each impacting billions of users.
Surrounded by Trump’s family and far-right celebrities, the tech moguls witnessed a presidential speech laced with fascist tropes: promises of a prophetic “golden age”, attacks on minorities, the expansion of “our” territory through colonisation, and a new era of “law and order”, meaning pardons and protection for supporters and military force against proclaimed inner and outer “enemies”. No doubt his turn towards fossil fuel and promises to cut taxes was music to their ears.
Colossal investments in the AI bubble and the deregulation of crypto was another win for the tech billionaires with potentially disastrous implications for the climate and humanity more broadly.
President Donald Trump has issued a wave of executive order since taking office on Monday. Photo: Associated Press / Alamy
At no point in history have so few people controlled so much of global communication, while also being so closely aligned with an authoritarian leader. At no point in history have oligarchs become this powerful. At the podium bedecked with the Presidential seal, Musk chose to thank his supporters with a full Roman salute, making his symbolic connections to fascism anything but subtle.
This is the age of reactionary tech oligarchy. And it is urgent for all who silently watched their ascend to unprecedented wealth and control over global communication to wake up and help fight back.
Beyond Plausible Deniability
Since taking over Twitter (since re-named X), Musk has become the caricature of a Bond villain: the evil billionaire whose thirst for power cannot be quenched. This picture, while tempting, is problematic as it underplays how deeply ingrained these politics always were for Musk, but also how his success was enabled by those who now claim to oppose him.
It simultaneously exceptionalises what is far more than an individual’s ‘radicalisation’ and prevents us from examining the broader trends in tech and capitalism — including the failure of liberal institutions to respond — which have produced the threat to democracy we are now facing.
A sinister far-right oligarch seeking to overthrow western governments from his seat in the White House is a story too strange for fiction
Scott Lucas
Of course, Musk’s personal role should not be underestimated as both his wealth and drive to impact politics and embolden extremists have played a significant role in hastening the resurgence of far-right authoritarianism.
His acquisition of Twitter was a clear political move reminiscent of Rupert Murdoch’s tried-and-tested media strategy. Rather than profit-driven, the aim was to acquire one of the most important social media platforms to shape it to his image as demonstrated by algorithmic changes to X that give his views priority.
While he successfully muddied the waters, painting himself as a libertarian and even a former liberal, it was always clear his politics were on the far and extreme right.
Elon Musk. Photo: AC NewsPhoto / Alamy
His behaviour now unashamedly caters to neo-Nazis, as when he changed his X profile to Kekius Maximus with a Pepe the Frog image. While right-wing media reported on this as simply referencing a cryptocurrency project, this clearly signalled in-group sympathy if not allegiance to, among others, the violent Unite the Right protesters who flew these symbols alongside Nazi flags.
For far too long, Musk was given the benefit of the doubt. His clear ideological signals were covered as separate, random incidents emerging from a clumsy free speech advocate. The personalisation of Musk’s politics has concealed wider trends. It forces discussion and analysis down a fruitless route exploring the psychology of individuals and intentionality behind their actions, away from politics and ideology and their impact deriving from their power.
The Tech Oligarchs
It would be a grave mistake to paint Musk as simply a ‘monster bully’ and make him responsible for what is clearly a wider trend. For a time, some viewed Zuckerberg as a liberal or apolitical pendant of Musk, despite the macho display around the possibility of a cage fight.
Trump directly threatened Zuckerberg, saying he could soon “spend the rest of his life in prison”. As late as in September 2024, a New York Times article proclaimed that Zuckerberg was “done with politics”, a statement that would age like ripe avocados.
Zuckerberg throwing his full support behind Trump as soon as it was clear he would win and announce a series of major changes to Meta’s platforms is unsurprising. As scholars have long pointed out, Zuckerberg was never a committed defender of democracy, but rather an unrelenting entrepreneur whose first project non-consensually ranked female students’ attractiveness.
Donald Trump and his associates are already cashing in handsomely from his presidency
Matt Gallagher
Meta’s new changes unapologetically align user policies with the wishes of the incoming president: from firing fact-checkers to allowing open discrimination against LGBTQ+ people.
Zuckerberg’s rhetoric has also increasingly echoed that of Trump, from claiming that corporate America has become “neutered” to attacking journalists for being part of a “cultural elite class” that “needs to get repopulated with people who people actually trust”.
Zuckerberg has made it clear what he expects in return: “We’re gonna work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world”. The ‘Tech-Trump alliance’, in other words, will likely soon leverage the geopolitical power of the US to sanction countries that try to limit tech company profits.
Other tech barons kissed Trump’s ring where their interests lay. Jeff Bezos of Amazon quickly signalled his allegiance to Trump during the campaign by forcing The Washington Post, which he owns, not to endorse Kamala Harris, thus violating any semblance of editorial independence.
At the inauguration, the new line of AI billionaires were also present, ready to applaud the removal of safeguards regarding the likely damage caused by their technologies.
Obeying in advance by US and British media means they cannot combat the march of the hard right Broligarchs
Peter Jukes
In a notable reversal, TikTok’s Shou Zi Chew also attended and lavished praise on Trump for postponing the ban of the platform. There was no shame in praising the person who had been instrumental in whipping up the original panic over the app.
While Microsoft’s CEO Satya Nadella was not at the inauguration, the company donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund and made a $80 billion pledge to invest in AI infrastructure.
Meanwhile, it came to light that Microsoft has collaborated intensively with the Israeli military in its full-scale invasion of Gaza demonstrating the political nature of reactionary tech beyond the US.
Crucially, this is not about a sudden change of heart nor simply a rational decision made by entrepreneurs who value profit above politics. These moves are ideological and match onto wider trends in the tech world which have been well documented and yet widely ignored. As Malcolm Harris explored in Palo Alto, eugenics has been central to much of the tech industry’s vision and very much in plain sight.
Tech billionaires themselves have long made their reactionary intentions clear. Peter Thiel, who co-founded PayPal with Musk and hosted the inauguration party attended by Zuckerberg, Altman, and vice-president JD Vance, was one of the first to drop the mask.
Already in 2009, Thiel made his reactionary views crystal clear: “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible”. He has since moved ever further to the extreme, calling Greta Thunberg ‘the anti-christ’ for example. Thiel was not so much a ‘bad sheep’ of tech but a mere ‘first mover’ in openly attacking democratic governance.
Reactionary Tech is Reactionary Politics
The alliance between tech billionaires and far-right authoritarians should be a cause for grave democratic concern. Crucially, it being on full display since Trump’s inauguration should be a wakeup call for journalists, politicians, and scholars who have gone along with the portrayal of tech CEOs as mere ‘innovators’ and ‘entrepreneurs’ whose aims and actions are beyond or outside politics.
As with the resurgence of the far-right, the rise of tech oligarchs is the result of a long series of mainstream failures: from sycophantic media coverage of the endless stream of unfulfilled promises to tax policies (or a lack thereof) that have allowed tech CEOs to become so rich they can literally spend hundreds of millions influencing politics domestically and abroad. From antitrust policies (or a lack thereof) that have allowed tech giants to obtain near-monopoly status to media policies that for too long have ignored the internet and failed to fund public service alternatives to the tech giants that now threaten democracy.
The liberal rhetoric of saving democracy through fact-checking and media literacy was always a pipe dream. No amount of literacy training can counter the resurgence of oligarchic and authoritarian rule.
ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE
Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.
We’re not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.
The faith put in the ‘altruism’ of tech billionaires was equally naive and demonstrated the unwillingness to face up to financial power. Core to the issue has been an inability and unwillingness of liberal elites, institutions and states to act as a bulwark against the reactionary onslaught as they promised. The rise of techno-fascism has been enabled in the pursuit of profit and growth benefitting the very few at the expense of most.
Time will tell whether it is too late to stop the slide towards authoritarianism and the catastrophes that will befall most. As democratic institutions appear weaker than ever, the climate emergency shows no sign of abetting or being addressed, there is no choice but to take decisive and radical action if we are to turn the tide against the dystopian reactionary tech oligarchy.