What the Democratic party will look like when Silicon Valley takes over (in 9 charts)
Greg Ferenstein

Greg Ferenstein,

This is my third and final comment to my previous responses, which readers can review here and here, concerning the political climate within Silicon Valley.

I write these words not as a partisan blind to the strengths or weaknesses of the Democratic Party versus the Republican Party, but as a critic of a group of oligarchs — I offer this commentary as a rebuttal to the plutocrats of Palo Alt0 — who, as a result of their statements and actions, prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there is no correlation between their intelligence as coders and engineers and their wisdom (more like their lack thereof) involving culture, charity, religion, science and their perceived entitlement (by virtue of psychometric testing, SAT scores and IQ points) to act as the nation’s new ruling class.

I seek to say what others see because, five years after having donated $100 million to the Newark Public Schools, and in the half-decade following his colloquy with then-Mayor Cory Booker, Governor Chris Christie and Oprah Winfrey, Mark Zuckerberg — in his disrespect for the decorum of political dress, wearing jeans, an unbuttoned sport coat and a gray tee shirt — looks like the dupe of one of the greatest confidence schemes since Bernard Madoff remanded himself to the Metropolitan Correctional Facility, pled guilty to 11 federal felonies and established lifetime residency at the Federal Correctional Complex, Butner (FCC Butner) in Granville County, North Carolina.

How could this supposed genius, validated by his graduation from Phillips Exeter Academy and announced in his college application (about his fluency in French, Hebrew, Latin and ancient Greek) and endorsed on behalf of the Committee on Admissions and Financial Aid of Harvard College, be so ignorant of the graft, unionized corruption, institutionalized rot and rancid racism of a city plagued by years of gang violence, entrenched political power, police brutality and de facto segregation of the kind reminiscent of life in Mid-Century America anywhere south of the Mason-Dixon line?

How could the co-founder of Facebook not know he was such an obvious mark that, through the self-aggrandizement of a governor eyeing the White House and a mayor pursuing (and since having been elected to) the Senate, and with a television host’s potent use of a wireless microphone as a totem of her mastery of the airwaves, this combination of forces would fleece his pockets, enrich the poll numbers of two rival politicians and be nothing more than a billionaires’ duet of a cover of “Ebony and Ivory” between Miss Winfrey and Mister Zuckerberg, while the schoolchildren of Essex County, New Jersey, continue to graduate with diplomas they cannot read and employers will not honor?

Would you, sir, entrust the future of our democratic republic to any random member of the One Percent based in Silicon Valley?

By what moral right, then, does Eric Schmidt, the Chairman of Google, hold the title and deed of Christendom, to be superseded by his religion of “empowerment, innovation and creativity”?

Does he have an algorithm for ethical living that will supplant the Torah, and delete the rabbinical disputation of the commentaries contained within the Talmud?

Will he exercise eminent domain against Menlo Park Presbyterian Church, and shutter Our Lady of Peace Church, ending the sacraments and forgoing the Anointing of the Sick by redirecting congregants to the headquarters of Genentech or the laboratories of 23andMe?

Why should such an unlettered adult, in concert with a savant man-child, even dare to imagine themselves the rightful heirs of a country created by Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Washington, Randolph, Rutledge, Madison, Morris and Monroe?

I conclude by calling your attention to these remarks from the author Fran Lebowitz.

There’s also the idea in this country, it’s not wholly new, but it’s new in its kind of purity, in that you have to be really smart to be really rich. I always say to people, the reason people believe this is a) they’ve never met a really smart person, and b) they’ve never met a really rich person. I have met both, and I cannot see the crossover. You do not have to be a genius to get rich. You have to be ruthless to get rich.
One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.