Reading view

He HAS Overplayed His Hand

Friends,

When the history of the sordid and cruel megalomaniac who now occupies the Oval Office is written, it may well be that his deal with himself to set up a $1.8 billion fund for reimbursing anyone he feels was harmed by the federal government is chronicled as the final straw.

Why not Trump’s absurd tariffs, which are really import taxes passed on to consumers? Why not Trump’s needless war against Iran, which caused prices to soar and is unlikely to result in a better deal on its nuclear ambitions than the one struck by Obama? Why not his cruel ICE and Border Patrol dragnets? Why not the Epstein files or dozens of other lawless or outrageous things he’s done?

I think because almost everyone knows that the fund will be used to pay off Trump’s supporters — including the 1,500 who attacked the U.S. Capitol and then were imprisoned for it — and that paying them is a bridge too far.

This morning a federal judge barred the government from taking steps to launch the fund or process payments at least until a hearing is held in June in a pending lawsuit challenging its legality.

The order came in a case brought by a group of individuals and entities who say they have faced partisan attacks by the Trump regime but who say they expect to be excluded from accessing the fund.

It’s unusual, to say the least, that such a group would be recognized by a court as having standing to bring such a suit, because their status is entirely speculative. They merely expect to be excluded. But such is the level of cynicism about the motives and processes of Trump that even a district court judge would automatically recognize the validity of such an expectation.

It is impossible to conceive that those who have been attacked by Trump’s Justice Department — such as former FBI director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James — would be compensated by Trump’s fund. Nor would the former federal prosecutor who claims he was fired for his work on the January 6 investigation, or people arrested while protesting immigration raids.

Other lawsuits challenging the fund have been filed in the District of Columbia and in California. But the interesting thing is it’s not just lawsuits, and it’s not just Democrats. A number of prominent Republican lawmakers have publicly objected to the fund.

The fact that public money would be spent, and that the fund would be entirely under Trump’s control, also figures in.

Remarkably, 35 former federal judges on Wednesday urged the judge who closed Trump’s case with the IRS — the origin of the fund — to take another look at the terms of the deal. I can’t recall another instance of former judges petitioning a sitting judge to take another look at the terms of a settlement.

The stench of Trump’s self-dealing, compounded by the absurdity of his suing his own Justice Department for $10 billion — and the department’s responding with a “deal” that would give him $1.8 billion to reward his supporters, and future immunity from IRS audits — seems to have tipped some set of cosmic scales.

The scales of justice and also the political scales. Republican members of Congress are hearing an uproar from their constituents about this, which persuaded many to leave town without acting on Trump’s second big reconciliation bill.

I asked earlier this week if Trump has finally overplayed his hand. I believe the cumulative effects of all his wanton and harmful initiatives over the last several months are now setting in. The $1.8 billion fund will be seen as the straw that broke Trump’s legal and political back — the act of hubris that illuminated all the other acts of hubris, the very emblem of Trump’s contempt for anything and everyone beyond himself and his own self-glorification.

Share

  •  

What Does Trump Do After He Rapes and Defames You?

Friends,

Trump’s Department of Injustice Justice has opened a criminal investigation into writer E. Jean Carroll.

I’ve spoken with E. Jean about her cases against Trump and her fabulous (and, believe it or not, hilarious) book about what she’s been through — Not My Type: One Woman vs. a President, which I can’t recommend highly enough. (See the interview Heather Lofthouse and I did with E. Jean on March 14, above.)

First, some background:

In 2022, Carroll alleged that a chance encounter with Trump at Bergdorf Goodman’s Fifth Avenue store in Manhattan in the mid-1990s ended violently — that Trump slammed her against a dressing room wall, pulled down her tights, and forced himself into her.

In May 2023, a federal jury in New York unanimously found that Trump was liable for sexually abusing Carroll. The judge in that trial clarified that Trump didn’t just “sexually abuse” her. He “raped” her:

The finding of sexual abuse “does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.” Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

(When Trump sued ABC News over George Stephanopoulos’s assertion that Trump had raped Carroll, ABC chose to give in and pay Trump $16 million rather than rely on the judge’s clarification.)

The jury also found that Trump had defamed Carroll by saying she had lied about the assault. The jury awarded Carroll $5 million.

Trump appealed, but the verdict was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. A three-judge panel unanimously rejected Trump’s request for a new trial, concluding that he had “not demonstrated that the district court erred in any of the challenged rulings.”

(Last November, Trump asked the Supreme Court to overturn the ruling. It has yet to decide whether to hear the case.)

After the verdict, Trump denied he had assaulted Carroll, called her claims “a complete con job” and a “Hoax and a lie,” and said she was not his “type.”

Trump’s comments caused Carroll to charge Trump with defaming her once again. After this second trial, a unanimous jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million.

The verdict included $65 million in punitive damages. The jury found that Trump had acted with malice in defaming Carroll a second time. Her lawyers had argued that a large verdict was necessary to “make him stop” his attacks on her — which he continued at news conferences, in social media posts, and during the trial itself.

The $83.3 million verdict was upheld by a Second Circuit appeals court in a unanimous three-judge ruling, in which the judges found that Trump “never wavered or relented in his public attacks” on Carroll and that she was subjected to public harassment as a result of his statements, including death threats and threats of physical injury.

Trump has vowed to appeal this case to the Supreme Court as well.

And now Trump is using the Justice Department as another cudgel against the woman he sexually abused (the judge said “raped”).

The mainstream media is characterizing this as “the latest chapter” in Trump’s retribution campaign carried out by the Justice Department — following the department’s criminal investigations of former FBI director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and other Trump opponents.

Wrong. This investigation marks a dangerous escalation of Trump’s use of the Justice Department for personal vendettas.

In going after Carroll, Trump is no longer simply weaponizing the department against people he considers political enemies. Carroll has never been a politician; she’s never served in a president’s administration; she’s never been a prosecutor. She’s a private citizen whom a jury unanimously found Trump had sexually abused (raped), and two juries unanimously found he had defamed.

Hell, if Trump can use his Justice Department to criminally investigate private citizens who have held him civilly accountable for past brutality, there’s no logical end to his potential vindictiveness. Any of us who has tried to hold him accountable, in any way, could be next.

A criminal investigation isn’t a party invitation. It’s hugely costly to the people targeted, time-consuming, often grueling and anxiety-provoking.

The Justice Department’s trumped-up criminal investigation is looking into whether Carroll committed criminal perjury when she said in a 2022 deposition before her first civil lawsuit against Trump that she hadn’t had outside help in funding it — although some of her legal bills were paid by a nonprofit financed by Reid Hoffman (a major Democratic donor and founder of LinkedIn, who may also be the target of a criminal investigation).

But this issue was already considered, and dismissed, in Trump’s appeal of that first verdict — in which Trump’s lawyers accused Carroll of concealing financial support from Hoffman, and her lawyers argued in response that Hoffman’s financial support was irrelevant to Carroll’s legal claims and that she had nothing to do with obtaining the outside funding.

The appellate court found that she had “plausibly … forgotten about the limited outside funding counsel obtained” and that “Carroll simply was not involved in the matter of who was or was not funding her litigation costs.”

For Trump’s Justice Department to now launch a criminal investigation of Carroll on the same claim his lawyers made years ago, which was dismissed by an appellate court, is a transparent abuse of justice, harassment of a private citizen, and violation of the rule of law.

Even worse, Todd Blanche, Trump’s acting attorney general, was the lawyer who represented Trump in Trump’s appeals of Carroll’s verdicts and who made the very argument that the appellate court rejected and the Justice Department is now turning into a criminal investigation.

Although Blanche is said to have recused himself from the probe because of his prior representation of Trump in Carroll’s cases, his fingerprints are all over it. Blanche is desperate for Trump to promote him to full attorney general, and, to this end, has been even more accommodating of Trump’s thirst for revenge than his predecessor, Pam Bondi. Moreover, officials from department headquarters have been involved in the decision to investigate Carroll — officials who directly report to Blanche.

Friends, I was an attorney in the Justice Department soon after Richard Nixon had tried to turn it against his enemies and Nixon Attorney General John Mitchell had gone to jail for his role in Watergate. I was fortunate enough to work for Edward Levi, Gerald Ford’s attorney general, who sought to insulate the department from any similar abuses in the future and regain the public’s trust in our system of justice. President Ford supported Levi’s efforts. Levi’s successors, Griffin Bell and Benjamin Civiletti, continued Levi’s work to depoliticize — and professionalize — the department, with the support of Jimmy Carter.

The next president and attorney general must rededicate themselves and the Justice Department to the same principles.

Nixon’s Justice Department was bad. Trump’s is far worse, and more dangerous.

Share

  •  

How To Survive the Rest of Trump's Regime

Friends,

I sometimes share with you perspectives about what we’re up against from non-American writers and journalists. Asli Aydintasbas, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington D.C., and a former journalist, published this short essay, titled “Trump Will Overplay His Hand: Here’s How to be Ready,” on December 1, 2024, in Politico Magazine, just weeks before the start of Trump’s second regime. Eighteen months later, I still find this essay a useful guide.

***

American democracy is about to undergo a serious stress test [this was written January 1, 2025.] I know how it feels, in part because I lived through the slow and steady march of state capture as a journalist working in Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey.

Over a decade as a high-profile journalist, I covered Turkey’s descent into illiberalism, having to engage in the daily push and pull with the government. I know how self-censorship starts in small ways but then creeps into operations on a daily basis. I am familiar with the rhythms of the battle to reshape the media, state institutions and the judiciary.

Having lived through it, and having gathered some lessons in hindsight, I believe that there are strategies that can help Democrats and Trump critics not only survive the coming four years, but come out stronger. Here are six of them.

1. Don’t Panic — Autocracy Takes Time

President-elect Donald Trump’s return to power is unnerving but America will not turn into a dictatorship overnight — or in four years. Even the most determined strongmen face internal hurdles, from the bureaucracy to the media and the courts. It took Erdoğan well over a decade to fully consolidate his power. Hungary’s Viktor Orbán and Poland’s Law and Justice Party needed years to erode democratic norms and fortify their grip on state institutions. [Reminder: On April 12, 2026, Péter Magyar led his Tisza party to victory with an extraordinary 138 seats over Orbán's Fidesz party, which retained only 55 seats, and the far-right Our Homeland, with 6.]

I am not suggesting that the United States is immune to these patterns, but it’s important to remember that its decentralized system of governance — the network of state and local governments — offers enormous resilience. Federal judges serve lifetime appointments, states and governors have specific powers separate from those granted federally, there are local legislatures, and the media has the First Amendment as a shield, reinforced by over a century of legal precedents.

Sure, there are dangers, including by a Supreme Court that might grant great deference to the president. But in the end, Donald Trump really only has two years to try to execute state capture. Legal battles, congressional pushback, market forces, midterm elections in 2026 and internal Republican dissent will slow him down and restrain him. The bottom line is that the U.S. is too decentralized in its governance system for a complete takeover. The Orbanization of America is not an imminent threat.

2. Don’t Disengage — Stay Connected

After a stunning electoral loss like this, there’s a natural impulse to shut off the news, log off social media and withdraw from public life. I’ve seen this with friends in Turkey and Hungary with opposition supporters retreating in disillusionment after Erdogan’s or Orbam’s victories. Understandably, people want to turn inwards.

Dancing, travel, meditation, book clubs — it’s all fine. But eventually, in Poland, Hungary and Turkey, opponents of autocracy have returned to the fight, driven by a belief in the possibility of change. So will Americans.

Nothing is more meaningful than being part of a struggle for democracy. That’s why millions of Turks turned out to the polls and gave the opposition a historic victory in local governments across Turkey earlier this year. That’s how the Poles organized a winning coalition to vote out the conservative Law and Justice Party last year. It can happen here, too.

The answer to political defeat is not to disconnect, but to organize. You can take a couple of days or weeks off, commiserate with friends and mute Elon Musk on X — or erase the app altogether. But in the end, the best way to develop emotional resilience is greater engagement.

3. Don’t Fear the Infighting

Donald Trump’s victory has understandably triggered infighting inside the Democratic Party and it looks ugly. But fear not. These recriminations and finger-pointing are necessary to move forward. In Turkey, Hungary and Poland, it was only after the opposition parties faced their strategic and ideological misalignment with society that they were able to begin to effectively fight back.

Trump has tapped into the widespread belief that the economic order, labor-capital relations, housing and the immigration system are broken. You may think he is a hypocrite, but there is no doubt that he has convinced a large cross-section of American society that he is actually the agent of change — a spokesman for their interests as opposed to “Democratic elites.” This is exactly what strongmen like Erdoğan and Orban have achieved.

For the Democratic Party to redefine itself as a force for change, and not just as the custodian of the status quo, it needs fundamental shifts in how it relates to working people in the U.S. There is time to do so before the midterms of 2026.

4. Charismatic Leadership Is a Non-Negotiable

One lesson from Turkey and Hungary is clear: You will lose if you don’t find a captivating leader, as was the case in 2023 general elections in Turkey and in 2022 in Hungary. Coalition-building or economic messaging is necessary and good. But it is not enough. You need charisma to mobilize social dissent.

Trump was beatable in this election, but only with a more captivating candidate. For Democrats, the mistake after smartly pushing aside President Joe Biden was bypassing the primaries and handpicking a candidate. Future success for the party will hinge on identifying a candidate who can better connect with voters and channel their aspirations. It should not be too hard in a country of 350 million.

Last year’s elections in Poland and Turkey showcased how incumbents can be defeated (or not defeated, as in general elections in Turkey in 2023) depending on the opposition’s ability to unite around compelling candidates who resonate with voters. Voters seek authenticity and a connection — give it to them.

5. Skip the Protests and Identity Politics

Soon, Trump opponents will shake off the doldrums and start organizing an opposition campaign. But how they do it matters. For the longest time in Turkey, the opposition made the mistake of relying too much on holding street demonstrations and promoting secularism, Turkey’s version of identity politics, which speaks to the urban professional and middle class but not beyond. When Erdoğan finally lost his absolute predominance in Turkish politics in 2024, it was largely because of his mismanagement of the economy and the opposition’s growing competence in that area.

Trump’s appeal transcends traditional divides of race, gender and class. He has formed a new Republican coalition and to counteract this. Democrats too, must broaden their tent, even if means trying to appeal to conservatives on some issues. Opposition over the next four years must be strategic and broad-based.

Street protests and calls to defend democracy may be inspirational, but they repel conservatives and suburban America. Any grassroots action must be coupled with a clear, relatable economic message and showcase the leadership potential of Democratic mayors and governors. Identity politics alone won’t do it.

6. Have Hope

Nothing lasts forever and the U.S. is not the only part of the world that faces threats to democracy — and Americans are no different than the French, the Turks or Hungarians when it comes to the appeal of the far right. But in a country with a strong, decentralized system of government and with a long-standing tradition of free speech, the rule of law should be far more resilient than anywhere in the world.

Trump’s return to power certainly poses challenges to U.S. democracy. But he will make mistakes and overplay his hand — at home and abroad. America will survive the next four years if Democrats pick themselves up and start learning from the successes of opponents of autocracy across the globe.

Share

[Question to you: Does this essay still ring true? In what ways does it seem especially relevant today? Are there ways in which it seems either naive or overly optimistic?]

Leave a comment

  •  

Pluralistic: Hold on for dear life (28 May 2026)


Today's links

  • Hold on for dear life: Not your keys, not your wallet, entirely your problem.
  • Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
  • Object permanence: Who owns "Web 2.0"; EFF saves bloggers' sources; Non-porn porn; Redaction fails; Canadian Tories say markets, not government, will help flood victims; Forced gold-farming; Walkaway cover; Oracle eats shit in Java API case; Captain America was a Nazi spy; Who Broke the Internet? (Pt IV).
  • Upcoming appearances: London, Kansas City, LA, Menlo Park, Toronto, NYC, Edinburgh.
  • Recent appearances: Where I've been.
  • Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
  • Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
  • Colophon: All the rest.



A shirtless man bound to a chair; his head is bandaged and his torso is covered in wounds. Standing beside him, a hand on his shoulder, is a desperate, suited man brandishing a hot poker. The background is an out-of-focus giant bitcoin logo.

Hold on for dear life (permalink)

From the earliest days of technopolitics, the role of technology in resisting authoritarianism was unclear. On the one hand, there's the indisputable fact that modern cryptography, properly implemented, can deliver a degree of privacy that is proof against all technological attacks.

That is to say, if you pull out your distraction rectangle, fire up the camera, and tap the shutter button, in the ensuing eyeblink instant the image you've captured will be scrambled so thoroughly that it could never be unscrambled without the secret key unlocked by your passphrase or biometrics. Even if every hydrogen atom in the universe were converted into a computer, and even if all those computers spent all the time between now and the end of the universe trying to guess what the key was, we would run out of universe and time long before we ran out of possible keys.

What's more, this extremely robust form of scrambling and descrambling can be combined with other techniques to block tampering with the encrypted data, and to allow parties to reliably identify who scrambled the data and also to restrict who may unscramble it. These remarkable technological facts have inspired many excited debates about what they mean for our politics, most notably among a group of people who called themselves "cypherpunks":

https://web.archive.org/web/20151102012232/https://www.wired.com/1993/02/crypto-rebels/

One cypherpunk faction believed that modern cryptography could enable a kind of technological secession: by allowing ordinary people to communicate, transact and collaborate without the possibility of state interception or control, crypto could make states themselves obsolete.

But another faction pointed out that no amount of mathematics could help you if an agent of the state – or a criminal the state failed to protect you from – tortured you until you revealed the secret passphrase needed to unlock your secrets. This was (ironically) called "rubber hose cryptanalysis" (as in "Tell me your passphrase or I'll hit you with this rubber hose again"). Later, this became known as a "wrench attack" after a famous XKCD comic about $1m worth of security technology being defeated by hitting someone with a $5 wrench until they divulged the password:

https://xkcd.com/538/

Once you stipulate to the problem of wrench attacks and rubber-hose cryptanalysis, it becomes apparent that your cryptography is only as good as your physical defenses. What's more, the most effective physical defenses we have come from a strong rule of law, because even the thickest safe door benefits from the threat of prison for anyone who breaks into the safe, and the most effective tool for preventing a cop from hitting you with a rubber hose is the existence of a judge who can send that cop to prison for abusing your civil rights.

But what do you do if you already live under tyranny? The rule of law is a great defense, but cryptography alone can't bring about the rule of law. What is the role of technology in this foundational struggle?

My technopolitics faction – the faction associated with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where I've worked for a quarter-century – has an answer: the role of encryption is to provide a measure of privacy and security that is best used to organize political struggles to demand the rule of law and respect for human rights. Encryption isn't proof against rubber hoses, but it is effective against many other forms of state repression, and it can provide a technical edge for those engaged in a political struggle.

Another faction – the faction most associated with bitcoin and subsequent cryptocurrency projects – rejects the role of the state altogether, and seeks to replace states (and state-regulated institutions like courts and banks) with mathematics. Rather than asking courts to interpret contracts, we can put our trust in self-executing "smart contracts," and rather than asking banks to safeguard our financial integrity, we can use cryptographic software to ensure that money only moves when the person it belongs to tells it to.

This has many problems. Smart contracts are slow, expensive, and unreliable. The number of people who understand contracts is small, the number of people who understand the software that embodies smart contracts is likewise small, and the Venn intersection of the two is more of a sphincter. What's more, there is irreducible ambiguity in all but the simplest of contracts, which means that even a "self-executing" contract ends up relying on a human adjudicator (an "oracle") who can be bribed or intimidated into cheating:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/14/externalities/#dshr

And when it comes to transactions, crypto proves to be unwieldy, expensive and complex, so that nearly all crypto users end up directing an intermediary (like Coinbase) to hold and move their cryptographic assets for them. The upshot is that cryptocurrency mostly replaces banks – imperfect, but heavily regulated and insured – with unregulated tech platforms with murky ownership and often defective security procedures, who may or may not be insured (or even locatable) in the event of a collapse or a breach. Consequently, cryptocurrency has become a scam magnet of unprecedented and unstoppable power, and hardly a day goes by without people being ripped off in the most ghastly ways imaginable:

https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/

For bitcoin maxis and other anti-state cypherpunks, this is just a skill issue. Anyone who doesn't understand how to manage their own keys and turns to a platform to hold and move their crypto is getting what they deserve. As the maxim goes, "Not your keys, not your wallet," which is cypherpunkspeak for "caveat emptor."

That's where the wrench attacks come in. Because if you are in possession of keys that can be used to irreversibly and instantaneously steal large sums of money and move it to jurisdictions where the perpetrators are beyond any legal or physical recourse (e.g. North Korea), then there is a massive incentive for your adversaries to kidnap you and hit you with a wrench or a rubber hose.

That's precisely what's going on. People with substantial cryptocurrency holdings face grave personal danger, and the physical attacks on their person grow bolder, more violent, and more sadistic by the day:

https://github.com/jlopp/physical-bitcoin-attacks/blob/master/README.md

As crypto critic David Rosenthal writes, this problem is even worse than it seems at first blush:

https://blog.dshr.org/2026/05/wrench-attacks.html

For one thing, cryptocurrencies depend on "public ledgers" that indelibly, publicly record every transaction in the network. Cryptocurrency is nothing without these ledgers, and they have to be immutable and public to work. This is very bad news for anyone who relies on anonymity as their defense against physical attacks.

That's because "reidentification attacks" (where an anonymous person in a dataset is positively identified) get easier to perform over time. You might be represented in a database of hospital prescribing activities by a random number, and that number might be hard to associate with your real identity…at first. But with every subsequent release of data – whether in the form of an anonymized data-set or a breach – it gets easier to cross-reference the facts associated with your record with other facts from other records, such that a detailed, identifying picture of you emerges one fact at a time.

For example, if the taxi company you use suffers a breach that reveals journeys associated with every doctor's appointment at the hospital, now an attacker can pick out the home or work address of the single person who visited the hospital just before you received your prescription. The longer an "anonymized" data-set sits around in public view, the easier it gets to de-anonymize it:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-10933-3

Combine the fact that permanent ledgers make it progressively easier to identify people whom you can torture into revealing their crypto keys with the irreversible, instantaneous nature of crypto transfers and you get some very juicy targets indeed. "Not your keys, not your wallet" means it's "not anyone else's problem" when you get robbed. You can't ask the bank to interdict or reverse the transaction.

Rosenthal provides a litany of the escalating security measures crypto holders are turning to as this problem goes progressively more dangerous and terrifying. There's the guy who splits his keys up in four physical vaults at four separate locations, whose management is instructed to make him wait a minimum of seven days when he asks to retrieve them. Despite all this, he keeps his identity secret:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-05-19/crypto-conferences-up-security-after-attacks-scams

Rosenthal quotes Nicholas Weaver, who asks what kind of "internet of money" bitcoin can be if it can't be safely stored on a computer connected to the actual internet:

https://doi.org/10.1145/3208095

But an equally valid question is, what kind of escape from tyranny is it that requires you to hide your identity at all times lest you be snatched off the street and brutally tortured? What kind of "liberty" requires you to spend $860,000 armoring your two top execs' personal vehicles to protect them from gunfire and light artillery?

https://www.ft.com/content/71d7486d-89b5-48ac-8f94-857578c0a03b

It costs $6.2m/year to protect Coinbase's CEO – "more than the combined amount that JPMorgan Chase & Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Nvidia Corp. spent on their respective CEOs":

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-05-18/crypto-high-rollers-go-big-on-bodyguards-to-deter-kidnappers

Crypto true believers exhort one another to "HODL" (hold on for dear life). Selling your crypto during downturns is considered a moral failing. But now, crypto holders – especially those who manage their own keys – are literally holding on for dear life, as they are hunted by crime syndicates and state actors alike.

It's a good reminder of how badly crypto has failed on its own terms, delivering its biggest users into an existence of fear and physical peril that rivals the plight of even the most hunted dissidents in the most repressive societies. Worse: as cryptocurrency lobbyists have fused crypto with the world's largest and most corrupt governments (especially the Trump regime), crypto now has all the exposure to state coercion that made banks so unsuitable, but without the (inconstant, insufficient) protections offered by traditional banking.

And that's before we talk about the energy consumption problems, the scams enabled by crypto, and the rampant human trafficking that those scams necessitate:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-human-trafficking-victims-are-forced-to-run-pig-butchering-investment-scams

People in my technopolitical faction have a saying of our own: "'Crypto' means cryptography." Cryptography plays a hugely important role in protecting people from crime and state repression. It is no substitute for the rule of law and democracy, but it remains a key tool for securing and defending both:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/27/the-best-defense-against-rubber-hose-cryptanalysis/

Cryptocurrency, on the other hand? That's the worst of all worlds.


Hey look at this (permalink)



A shelf of leatherbound history books with a gilt-stamped series title, 'The World's Famous Events.'

Object permanence (permalink)

#20yrsago Can anyone own “Web 2.0?” https://memex.craphound.com/2006/05/26/can-anyone-own-web-2-0/

#20yrsago iRiver gives customers the choice of switching off DRM https://web.archive.org/web/20060619150812/http://www.iriver.com/mtp/

#20yrsago EFF scores win against Apple: bloggers’ sources are protected https://web.archive.org/web/20060602020337/http://blog.wired.com/27BStroke6/index.blog?entry_id=1489151

#15yrsago Anonymous pre-paid credit-cards and money-laundering https://web.archive.org/web/20110529001021/https://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/05/23/technology-lt-fea-plastic-money-laundering_8481416.html

#15yrsago More incompetence revealed on the part of France’s “three-strikes” copyright enforcer https://web.archive.org/web/20120520073256/https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/05/french-three-strikes-anti-piracy-software-riddled-with-flaws/

#15yrsago Montage: Non-pornographic scenes from pornographic movies https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVBhVDXLpaI

#15yrsago Improper court record redaction: a study https://blog.citp.princeton.edu/2011/05/25/studying-frequency-redaction-failures-pacer/

#15yrsago Texas anti-TSA-grope bill killed by threat to shut down all Texas airports https://www.texastribune.org/2011/05/24/fed-threat-shuts-down-tsa-groping-bill-in-texas/?r

#15yrsago Canadian Tories refuse to send soldiers to help flood victims because they’d compete with the private sector https://web.archive.org/web/20110527053822/https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec/ottawa-initially-refuses-request-for-more-troops-to-aid-quebec-flood-victims/article2033562/

#15yrsago Gold-farming in a Chinese forced-labor camp https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/25/china-prisoners-internet-gaming-scam

#10yrsago Edward Snowden performs radical surgery on a phone to make it “go black” https://web.archive.org/web/20160527125043/https://www.wired.com/2016/05/snowden-vice-cell-phone-hack/

#10yrsago FBI is investigating copyright trolls Prenda Law for fraud https://web.archive.org/web/20160526005012/https://popehat.com/2016/05/25/fbi-actively-investigating-prenda-law-team-for-fraud/

#10yrsago How a pharma company made billions off mass murder by faking the science on Oxycontin https://web.archive.org/web/20160524112437/http://static.latimes.com/oxycontin-part1/

#10yrsago GOP officials won’t let the FEC stop bosses from forcing employees to give to PACs https://web.archive.org/web/20160526114245/https://prospect.org/blog/checks/fec-deadlocks-over-employer-political-coercion

#10yrsago Undetectable proof-of-concept chip poisoning uses analog circuits to escalate privilege https://www.ieee-security.org/TC/SP2016/papers/0824a018.pdf

#10yrsago “Pickup artist” douche uses copyright to sue Youtube critics, fans raise $100K defense fund https://www.gofundme.com/f/h3h3defensefund

#10yrsago The best thing you will read about the revelation that Captain America was a Nazi spy https://web.archive.org/web/20160623131614/https://storify.com/rahaeli/captain-america

#10yrsago Revealed: the amazing cover for Walkaway, my first adult novel since 2009 https://reactormag.com/cover-reveal-walkaway-cory-doctorow//

#10yrsago Tor Project is working on a web-wide random number generator https://blog.torproject.org/mission-montreal-building-next-generation-onion-services/

#10yrsago Jury hands Oracle its ass, says Google doesn’t owe it a penny for Java https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/05/eff-applauds-jury-verdict-favor-fair-use-oracle-v-google

#10yrsago Arcade cabinet enthusiasts discover trove of 50+ games in ship, derelict for 30 years https://arcadeblogger.com/2016/05/06/arcade-raid-the-duke-of-lancaster-ship/

#5yrsago Monopolists are winning the repair wars https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/26/nixing-the-fix/#r2r

#1yrago Who Broke the Internet, Part IV https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/26/babyish-radical-extremists/#cancon


Upcoming appearances (permalink)

A photo of me onstage, giving a speech, pounding the podium.



A screenshot of me at my desk, doing a livecast.

Recent appearances (permalink)



A grid of my books with Will Stahle covers..

Latest books (permalink)



A cardboard book box with the Macmillan logo.

Upcoming books (permalink)

  • "The Reverse-Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book about being a better AI critic, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, June 2026 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374621568/thereversecentaursguidetolifeafterai/)
  • "Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It" (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

  • "The Post-American Internet," a geopolitical sequel of sorts to Enshittification, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2027

  • "Unauthorized Bread": a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, April 20, 2027

  • "The Memex Method," Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2027



Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing: "The Post-American Internet," a sequel to "Enshittification," about the better world the rest of us get to have now that Trump has torched America. Third draft completed. Submitted to editor.

  • "The Reverse Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book for Farrar, Straus and Giroux about being an effective AI critic. LEGAL REVIEW AND COPYEDIT COMPLETE.
  • "The Post-American Internet," a short book about internet policy in the age of Trumpism. PLANNING.

  • A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING


This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.


How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Bluesky (no ads, possible tracking and data-collection):

https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

READ CAREFULLY: By reading this, you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.

ISSN: 3066-764X

  •  

His Physical and Mental Decline Are Linked

Friends,

I do not wish Trump ill. While he hasn’t shown a shred of compassion for anyone other than himself, this doesn’t justify our lacking compassion for him.

It’s also in the interest of America and the world that he be physically and mentally able to discharge the duties of his office.

So we have reason to be concerned about Trump’s visit to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center early Tuesday for what the White House called a “routine annual dental and medical assessment.”

Trump turns 80 next month. I feel entitled to comment on the practical meaning of this milestone because I’ll also turn 80 next month (he was born 10 days before me).

Let’s just say that reaching it doesn’t mean altogether good things, unless you consider the alternative.

Even in a healthy person, small things begin to break down as one approaches 80. Everything takes just a bit more time and effort. Joints ache. Energy isn’t quite as abundant.

The 80-year-old mind isn’t as quick. The frontal lobe’s capacity to remember names goes to shit. (Yesterday, I could barely remember the name of a garage mechanic whom I’ve known for nearly half a century.)

Taken separately, such minor frailties are typically no more than a personal frustration, but they begin to mount up. In a president of the United States, they can pose a major challenge to the nation and world.

Trump frequently proclaims he’s in excellent health. “Just finished my 6 month physical at Walter Reed Military Medical Center. Everything checked out PERFECTLY,” he wrote on Truth Social early yesterday afternoon. “Thank you to the great Doctors and Staff! Heading back to the White House.”

But even “PERFECTLY” is a relative concept for someone ending his seventh decade and beginning his eighth, who’s the oldest person to assume the presidency and the second-oldest to hold the office. (Joe Biden was 82 when he left in 2025.)

Presidents aren’t legally required to release their medical records, but, given the effluvium of lies in which Trump permanently floats, we’d be excused if we didn’t entirely trust this PERFECTLY report.

Plus, there are his bruised hands, swollen ankles, bouts of drowsiness, exceedingly long blinks during official meetings (some call them “naps”), and erratic — if not off-the-charts weird — behavior.

Add in the frequency of his health “checkups.”

Tuesday’s visit to Walter Reed was Trump’s third in-person doctor’s visit in a little over a year. His first physical of this term of office was in mid-April last year. He returned in early October for a “semiannual physical.” In early January, he had what was described as a brief dental appointment. Earlier this month, another dental appointment. Followed by his return to Walter Reed on Tuesday for his third “annual” physical in 13 months.

Consider also the shifting explanations. In July, Navy Capt. Sean Barbabella, Trump’s physician, explained that bruises on Trump’s right hand were “consistent with minor soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking.” The explanation seemed plausible until the bruises spread to his left hand.

Then there’s the changing story about Trump’s scans. In December he told reporters that he’d had an MRI in October but wasn’t sure what part of his body was scanned. “It wasn’t the brain,” he said, defensively, “because I took a cognitive test and I aced it.” Barbabella then issued a memo explaining it had been a scan of his heart and abdomen, and that in both cases the advanced imaging was “perfectly normal.”

In January, Trump altered his story to say it was a CT scan rather than an MRI. Why? Trump being Trump, he doesn’t want anyone to know anything about his health that might reveal something he fears enemies and critics might see as a weakness.

“In retrospect, it’s too bad I took [the scan] because it gave them a little ammunition,” Trump said. “I would have been a lot better off if [I] didn’t, because the fact that I took it said, ‘Oh gee, is something wrong?’ Well, nothing’s wrong.”

What’s he afraid of? Probably that the American public will catch on to his rapidly diminishing capacities.

Three years ago, according to a Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll, only 28 percent of the public thought Trump insufficiently healthy to hold the nation’s highest office. Earlier this month, the same poll found that 55 percent of the public thought his health insufficient for him to serve effectively.

Behind the public’s mounting worries is a growing sense that Trump isn’t mentally all there.

Physical and mental health aren’t easily separated, especially as one reaches 80. I often can’t remember where I put my wallet and keys or why I’ve entered a room. I also have less patience than I used to. I’m less tolerant of long waiting lines, automated phone menus, and Republicans.

But if Trump can’t remember where he put, say, a top-secret memo or why he entered the Situation Room, or if he expresses bizarre impatience, it’s a potential risk to the nation and world.

Worse, Trump is exhibiting clear symptoms of dementia.

“Open the Fuckin’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell,” Trump exploded on his social media Easter morning, adding an Islamic prayer to the end of the post.

The following Tuesday he threatened that unless Iran struck a deal in 12 hours, its whole civilization would die.

When Iran shot down two U.S. airmen, aides who were getting minute-by-minute updates reportedly kept Trump out of the Situation Room because they believed his impatience wouldn’t be helpful, a senior administration official said.

Then came Trump’s rant against the pope.

“Pope Leo is WEAK on Crime, and terrible for Foreign Policy. … I like his brother Louis much better than I like him, because Louis is all MAGA. He gets it, and Leo doesn’t! … Leo should get his act together as Pope, use Common Sense, stop catering to the Radical Left, and focus on being a Great Pope, not a Politician. It’s hurting him very badly and, more importantly, it’s hurting the Catholic Church!”

During a subsequent Q&A with reporters, Trump doubled down: “I don’t think he’s doing a very good job. He likes crime, I guess. … I am not a fan of Pope Leo.”

Days later Trump posted an AI-generated portrait of himself as a kind of American Jesus. When this caused a wave of criticism and outrage (much of it from fundamentalist Christians), he insisted he was portraying himself “as a doctor, making people better.”

Rather than helping Republicans in the upcoming midterm elections by, for example, embarking on an “affordability tour” (as White House aides have urged him to do), Trump has been on a “revenge tour” against Republican members of Congress he deems insufficiently loyal — a gambit that may cost Republicans dearly in the midterms.

At yesterday’s Cabinet meeting, Trump touted the primary wins of Republicans he endorsed, including yesterday’s Texas victory of Ken Paxton over incumbent Republican Senator John Cornyn.

Paxton carries more baggage than the U.S. Postal Service — including abuse-of-office allegations from his top staff, an indictment for securities fraud, impeachment by Texas’s Republican House, and an ongoing divorce initiated by his wife, who alleges adultery — which will help the Democratic challenger, James Talarico.

Yet Trump insisted at the Cabinet meeting that “I don’t care about the midterms.” He was referring to Iranian officials who “thought they were going to outwait me” by relying on mounting political pressures to force him to give up, but he might as well have been talking about the blowback from his revenge tour.

Trump ended yesterday’s Cabinet meeting with further evidence of his mental decline in another rant against Somali-Americans. “The Somalians, what they’ve done to Minnesota, the Somalians, crooked as hell. Ilhan Omar, crooked as hell,” he said, in reference to the Democratic congresswoman from Minnesota. “They’re all crooks, and we got them, we got them. Now we’re putting the clamps on,” Trump said.

His antipathy toward Somali-Americans is growing, with his dementia. In December, weeks before ICE went on a rampage in Minneapolis, Trump claimed Somalis made Minnesota a “hellhole,” saying “the Somalians should be out of here. They’ve destroyed our country.” Of Somalia-born Omar, Trump said, “she shouldn’t be allowed to be a congresswoman, and I’m sure people are looking at that. She should be thrown the hell out of our country.” A day earlier, he called the congresswoman “garbage,” saying he didn’t want Somalis in the U.S.

Can you imagine any other president of the United States singling out a group of foreign-born Americans like this? Of course not.

The evidence continues to mount. Trump is both physically and mentally incapable of discharging the duties of president of the United States.

The sooner the 25th Amendment is invoked, or he is impeached, the safer America and the world will be.

Share

  •  

Office Hours: Has Trump Finally Overplayed His Hand?

Friends,

Trump’s war in Iran is entering its third month. Gas is $1.50 more at the pump than it was before February 28. Other prices are rising. The American economy is showing signs of the dreaded stagflation (the combination of inflation and stagnation that’s difficult to overcome). There’s a loud outcry over revelations about Trump’s self-dealing, including his $1.8 billion slush fund and permanent immunity from any IRS audits of him and his family.

Given all this, some political observers I rely on tell me Trump has finally overplayed his hand. He’s a lame duck who’s now facing the beginning of the end. His power is disappearing. Not all political observers I’ve been consulting agree.

Hence, this week’s Office Hours question: In your view, has Trump finally overplayed his hand, and, if so, what are the likely consequences for him, America, and the world?

I’ve grouped the responses I’ve received from seasoned political observers into several categories, which I’ve summarized below. I’d appreciate your thoughts.

Read more

  •  

Pluralistic: AI and a world without migrants (27 May 2026)


Today's links



A hand-tinted image of elderly people in the lounge of a nursing home. Three killer robots have been inserted into the scene.

AI and a world without migrants (permalink)

I don't care who you are, there will always be times when hell is other people. Not because other people are horrible – quite the opposite! Other people are wonderful, but boy are they ever stubborn.

From boardgames to romance, team sports to movement politics, business ideas to construction projects, there's so much important, enjoyable and essential stuff you can't do alone. But other people insist on having their own priorities and goals, and they mulishly refuse to organize their lives to suit your priorities.

Our species has put a lot of work into resolving this conundrum. Not only did we evolve a whole brain structure – the neocortex – that helps us understand others' perspectives, but we also evolved many social structures (like laws and teams and governments and families and committees and bureaucracies) to help us coordinate with others to do superhuman things (that is, things that exceed the capacity of a single human).

These structures are imperfect, but they're better than the alternative: coercion. Persuading others is not without its pitfalls, but compared to forcing others to bend to your will, "persuasion" is the hands-down favorite.

Not for everyone, though. There has always been a group of people who refused to acknowledge that other people have perfectly valid reasons for wanting to pursue their own goals rather than yours. We call most of those people "toddlers" and devote sizable social effort to helping them outgrow this belief.

But there's another group of people who carry this belief into adulthood. If they're of regular means, we call those people "bullies." However, if they're sufficiently wealthy, we call them "billionaires" (this is the same force that allows money to transmute a "hoarder" into a "collector").

Just lately though, we've come up with a new solution to the problem of hell being other people. Rather than coercing other people into arranging their affairs to suit our needs, we've devoted trillions of dollars to replacing people with pliant chatbots, in the hopes that these chatbots can be made so effective that we can just dispense with other people altogether.

Many everyday people have replaced their romantic partners with chatbots ("AI boyfriends"/"AI girlfriends"), and they've formed active communities to revel in the delights of pursuing love with someone who demands no moral consideration or compromise, glorying in a world of love without lovers:

https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1353-the-naked-emperor/episode/16215328-e1-love-bots

There's a whole community of people who have stopped listening to music created by people in favor of made-to-order slop, exulting in a world of music without musicians:

https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/937059/nobody-wants-to-tell-me-why-they-only-listen-their-own-suno-slop

These are foundationally solipsistic exercises, fantasy worlds in which you are the only real person and everyone else is a bot, an NPC, a phantom. AI has democratized solipsism, a privilege that was once the exclusive purview of billionaires, whose belief that most other people weren't fully real let them inflict the kind of mass pain on millions that is a prerequisite for amassing a truly vast fortune:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/08/18/seeing-like-a-billionaire/#npcs

No surprise then that billionaires were easy marks for AI hustlers, who promised the possibility of a world without people, where an army of "agents" could do the jobs that presently demand the contributions of unreasonable human beings who refuse to acknowledge that your priorities trump theirs.

Jeff Bezos built the world's most advanced automated warehouses, and the workers in those warehouses are seriously injured at 300% of the national rate, and they are not allowed pee breaks (nevertheless, these workers unreasonably insist on metabolizing fluids and expelling the waste). The automation and the injuries aren't unrelated facts. The inhumane treatment is caused by the automation, because when you commit hundreds of billions to automation capex, you need to work those assets to recoup the investment. In a human/machine collaboration, humans will always be the bottlenecks. To maximize return on automation, you need to drive the human peripherals that serve the machines at the absolute limit of human endurance. Jeff Bezos's machines don't just use humans, they use them up:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/27/rancid-vibe-coding/#class-war

Billionaires poured trillions into AI because they are obsessed with the fantasy of a world without people. Mark Zuckerberg would like to replace your on-platform friends with chatbots. Sure, your friends are the reason you're stuck on his platforms, but your friends are stubborn and thus suboptimal. Remember: hell is other people, so while your friends unreasonably refuse to leave Facebook with you and follow you to another platform (this is bad for you, but good for Zuck), they also refuse to organize their social media lives to "maximize your engagement" and thus the number of ads you see (which is bad for Zuck). By replacing your friends with chatbots, Zuck hopes to reinvent social media without the socializing:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/17/for-youze/#forever

Billionaires are betting that bosses (and other would-be billionaires) will spend trillions buying AI products, captured by the fantasy of a workplace without workers. They think AI could be the remedy for the ancient, nameless dread that bosses experience every time they contemplate the fact that if they don't show up for work, everything hums along fine; whereas if the workers don't show up, the whole enterprise collapses. Secretly, bosses are haunted by the fear that they're not driving the car, they're strapped into the back seat, amusing themselves with a toy steering-wheel:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/05/fisher-price-steering-wheel/#billionaire-solipsism

That's what the Hollywood strikes were about: studio bosses' fantasy of movies without actors and screenplays without screenwriters. Since the invention of the studio system itself, studio bosses have wrestled with the fact that talented people who are beloved by audiences have bargaining leverage, which they use to demand better outputs and higher wages (this is the same conundrum faced by hospital administrators confronting nurses and doctors, college administrators confronting faculty, etc):

https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/20/i-would-prefer-not-to/#i-cant-do-that-boss

This solipsistic drive is what powers investment in AI "persuasion" technologies, making billions for latter-day Cambridge Analyticas who peddle the outlandish tale of having built a mind-control ray. It's a winning sales-pitch because it plays into the fantasy of a world where customers do as they're told, organizing their lives according to your priorities, at the expense of their own wellbeing:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/07/rah-rah-rasputin/#credulous-dolts

It's not just captains of industry who are occupied with furious, all-consuming fantasies of a world without people. Dictators, autocrats and technocrats in the political world love AI because it dangles the possibility of a world without bureaucrats and public officials. If the civil service can be replaced with chatbots, then the will of the dictator can be translated directly into policy without any tedious negotiations with experts who understand how things work and have deep moral commitments to the public good:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/05/13/vibe-governance/#k-hole

A world without people is especially attractive to politicians presiding over aging, declining nations whose most ardent voters have been convinced that migrants are a threat to their nation (rather than its salvation).

Objectively speaking, the only way that a rich country with an aging workforce can remain wealthy and powerful is by wooing working-age people from elsewhere to migrate to that country. Even if every tradwife is kept in a state of continuous gestation courtesy of a fertility-obsessed natalist, there's still going to be decades during which your wealthy, aging population will need young, skilled people to do all the essential labor. From picking crops, to staffing hospitals, to building homes, to filing lawsuits, to preparing tax-returns, your quiverfull child army will be too young to take over for years to come.

Trapped in the political impossibility of a country whose productive activities are absolutely reliant on young, strong, resourceful, skilled migrants, and a xenophobic political movement that scapegoats these migrants and revels in the spectacle of ethnic cleansing, politicians see AI as a way out of their double-bind. If migrants can be replaced with AI, then you can satisfy the racist sadism of your most ardent voters without shutting down the country for lack of workers.

In other words: in feeding the fantasy of a world without people, AI serves the fantasy of a world without migrants. Unlike gastarbeiters, bracero fruit-pickers and Saudi quasi-slaves, AI makes no demands, requires no moral consideration, and does not attempt to germinate a culture, a cuisine, or a language in your sacred soil.

This grotesque fantasy has always lurked in the subtext of the automation story. The plot of Disney's Big Hero 6 boils down to: "In future-America/Japan, it will be more politically possible to have robots look after our aging parents than it will be to welcome the millions of skilled health-workers in the Pacific Rim who are eminently qualified to do the job." Big Hero 6 is the solution to the problem of building a nursing home without nurses.

The wealthy have always dreamed of transforming the proletariat into the precariat: desperate workers who do as they're told. But in the automation story of which AI is the latest chapter (and purportedly the climax), the precariat becomes the unnecessariat: workers who are surplus to requirements and can be vaporized or liquidated or warehoused or simply ignored.

In the fantasy world of total automation, the owners of AI can make the world go around without any of us, which means that we will exist solely at their sufferance, and will therefore have to act like the NPCs they half-believe we are already, organizing everything we do around their priorities.

This is the foundation of Sam Altman's obsession with a biometrically controlled universal basic income. Altman can't stop fantasizing about a world in which all the productive work is done by his software, and the state's sole purpose is to supply us – the unnecessariat – with vouchers we can only redeem for services provided by Altman's robot army. It's charter schools for everything, with Altman at the top, all wrapped up in a layer of dystopian retinal scanning:

https://www.wired.com/story/worldcoin-sam-altman-orb/

Billionaires and would-be billionaires are absolute suckers for this solipsistic bullshit, because they genuinely don't think other people are real. They love "effective altruism" because it counsels them to make as much money as possible, without regard to how many people they cheat, hurt, or kill…provided that they pledge to use these ill-gotten gains to improve the lives of 10^53 imaginary artificial people who will come into existence in 10,000 years. After all, the total benefit of even the most infinitesimal welfare gains experienced by 10^53 people vastly exceeds all the pleasures that all eight billion actual, living people are capable of experiencing:

https://www.semafor.com/article/11/21/2023/how-effective-altruism-led-to-a-crisis-at-openai

It all makes perfect sense – provided you don't believe that other people are really, truly real.


Hey look at this (permalink)



A shelf of leatherbound history books with a gilt-stamped series title, 'The World's Famous Events.'

Object permanence (permalink)

#15yrsago California prison overcrowding, in photos https://web.archive.org/web/20110525171353/https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/05/california-prison-overcrowding-photos

#15yrsago What Will Come After: the sweet melancholy of the zombie apocalypse https://memex.craphound.com/2011/05/25/what-will-come-after-the-sweet-melancholy-of-the-zombie-apocalypse/

#10yrsago If Donald Trump ever talks to a real journalist, these are the questions he should answer https://www.nationalmemo.com/21-questions-for-donald-trump

#10yrsago Norwegian Consumer Council broadcasts live, marathon reading of app Terms of Service https://web.archive.org/web/20160526145553/https://www.forbrukerradet.no/vilkar-og-personvern-minutt-for-minutt/

#10yrsago Pastejacking: using malicious javascript to insert sneaky text into pasted terminal commands https://github.com/dxa4481/Pastejacking

#10yrsago Why medieval monks filled manuscript margins with murderous rabbits https://web.archive.org/web/20160614000551/https://jonkanekojames.com/2015/05/02/why-are-there-violent-rabbits-in-the-margins-of-medieval-manuscripts/

#10yrsago Students: court orders government agencies to offer educational discount on FOIA requests https://web.archive.org/web/20160525155102/https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160521/16031934508/appeals-court-tells-government-it-must-extend-educational-institution-foia-fee-price-break-to-students.shtml

#10yrsago The euphemisms news reporters use when a sports figure injures his penis and testicles https://web.archive.org/web/20160525125452/https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/media-groin-draymond-green-steven-adams/

#10yrsago Company says facial features reveal terrorists and pedophiles 80% of the time https://web.archive.org/web/20160525130941/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2016/05/24/terrorist-or-pedophile-this-start-up-says-it-can-out-secrets-by-analyzing-faces/

#5yrsago We promised this vaccine waiver 20 years ago https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/25/the-other-shoe-drops/#quid-pro-quo


Upcoming appearances (permalink)

A photo of me onstage, giving a speech, pounding the podium.



A screenshot of me at my desk, doing a livecast.

Recent appearances (permalink)



A grid of my books with Will Stahle covers..

Latest books (permalink)



A cardboard book box with the Macmillan logo.

Upcoming books (permalink)

  • "The Reverse-Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book about being a better AI critic, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, June 2026 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374621568/thereversecentaursguidetolifeafterai/)
  • "Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It" (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

  • "The Post-American Internet," a geopolitical sequel of sorts to Enshittification, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2027

  • "Unauthorized Bread": a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, April 20, 2027

  • "The Memex Method," Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2027



Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing: "The Post-American Internet," a sequel to "Enshittification," about the better world the rest of us get to have now that Trump has torched America. Third draft completed. Submitted to editor.

  • "The Reverse Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book for Farrar, Straus and Giroux about being an effective AI critic. LEGAL REVIEW AND COPYEDIT COMPLETE.
  • "The Post-American Internet," a short book about internet policy in the age of Trumpism. PLANNING.

  • A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING


This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.


How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Bluesky (no ads, possible tracking and data-collection):

https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

READ CAREFULLY: By reading this, you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.

ISSN: 3066-764X

  •  

The Logic of Taxing Great Wealth

Friends,

The 2026 Billionaire Tax Act initiative recently submitted enough signatures to be put on the California ballot for the November 2026 elections. Its goal is to raise revenue by imposing a one-time 5 percent wealth tax on California billionaires to offset large cuts to California’s Medicaid caused by the Trump regime and Congress when, in July 2025, they cut federal taxes mainly on the wealthiest.

The reason for targeting California billionaires for new revenue is their wealth has grown faster than anyone else’s in recent years and they currently pay low taxes relative to their large wealth gains. Many borrow against their wealth for living expenses (banks are delighted to lend to them), enabling them to claim little or no taxable income.

As a result, taxing billionaires can both raise substantial revenue and restore tax progressivity at the very top. California is in the vanguard of what the nation must do. I believe they will do it when Democrats are back in control, and when they enact campaign finance reforms so no member of Congress is necessarily dependent on the super-wealthy for the bulk of their campaign contributions.

The following oped appeared in today’s New York Times. It was written by two of my colleagues at Berkeley, Professors Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman (who is also at the Paris School of Economics). I have reproduced it in its entirety, with permission, and have highlighted paragraphs I believe to be particularly important.

They make the case for the billionaire wealth tax in California, and indirectly for a billionaire wealth tax nationwide. They also answer the arguments against the tax, such as that California billionaires may leave the state in expectation that such wealth taxes would be renewed, possibly reducing future income tax revenue to the state and reducing its economic dynamism as the engine of tech innovation.

With wealth inequality now surging beyond anything ever witnessed in America, the dictum attributed to Justice Louis D. Brandeis has become dramatically relevant: “America faces a choice: We can have great wealth in the hands of a few, or we can have a democracy, but we cannot have both.” A wealth tax is a necessary precondition for everything else.

***

The billionaire class in California includes roughly 250 households, a mere 0.001 percent of the state’s families. Yet its wealth now amounts to more than half of California’s entire annual economic output.

This means that if these billionaires spent all of their wealth, they could buy more than half of the goods and services produced in a year in the entire state.

This extraordinary wealth does not translate into extraordinary tax contributions.

From 2019 to 2025, California billionaires’ wealth grew an average of over 15 percent per year, while they paid, on average, just 0.26 percent of their wealth annually in state income taxes. Their income tax payments accounted for only 2.4 percent of California’s income tax revenue.

For the very richest individuals, the effective burden was even lower. The four wealthiest Californians — former Google co-founder Sergey Brin, Nvidia’s Jensen Huang, former Google CEO Larry Page, and Facebook’s (Meta’s) Mark Zuckerberg — paid an average of just 0.07 percent of their wealth annually in California income tax over that period, according to our analysis of Securities and Exchange Commission records on stock sales and executive compensation from their companies.

California’s tax system fails to effectively tax ultrahigh-net-worth individuals. The same is true of the United States’ tax system and those of other countries.

The problem is that billionaires’ fortunes are largely held in assets (mainly stocks) that rise in value over time. This rise in value is not taxed unless the assets are sold. Under current law, when billionaires don’t sell their stock, wealth accumulates while taxes on their gains are deferred indefinitely and sometimes avoided entirely.

To understand how California’s billionaires have become so unfathomably rich, it’s helpful to think of their fortunes as icebergs. Some earnings are easy to see — and tax. From 2019 to 2025, Mr. Zuckerberg reported more than $7.1 billion in income from Meta: $181 million in compensation, $1.4 billion in dividends and $5.6 billion in gains from selling stock.

Despite making so much money, Mr. Zuckerberg was taxed a combined state and federal rate of just 27 percent on that income. That’s not much higher than the average California household’s effective tax rate of about 20 percent.Mr. Zuckerberg’s tax rate was relatively low in large part because most of his income was in the form of capital gains — what he made from selling stock that had risen in value. Capital gains are taxed federally at a lower rate than ordinary income.

Most of Zuckerberg’s wealth is hidden from income taxes. Since 2019, Meta has made hundreds of billions of dollars in profit. As Meta’s chief executive, Mr. Zuckerberg has invested much of that money back into the company, of which he owns about 13 percent. These profits have been taxed at a relatively low 17 percent, Meta’s effective corporate income tax rate. Their reinvestment has boosted the company’s value and, therefore, the value of its shares. This caused Mr. Zuckerberg’s wealth to rise by tens of billions of dollars.

The same is true of the wealth Mr. Zuckerberg accumulated as Meta grew and investors became more bullish about the company. This dynamic increased the value of his shares by an additional $142 billion. Unless Mr. Zuckerberg sells his shares, all of this growth remains untaxed.

But he can put his gains to use without selling them, borrowing tax-free against his holdings at low interest rates, as he did in 2023, when he pledged $3.1 billion worth of his Meta shares as collateral for a loan.

California’s other top billionaires have similarly structured fortunes. Without a wealth tax, these tech barons will continue to hoard the rewards of the state’s economic growth while its cities cut services and its workers lose health care.

Google’s founders, Mr. Brin and Mr. Page, are the state’s richest individuals, with more than $600 billion in wealth between the two of them — up from $345 billion last September. They have come out against the wealth tax initiative while making moves to leave the state. They benefit from the status quo.

Mr. Brin has funded the political campaign against the measure and has funded signature collection for two competing ballot initiatives that could undercut the wealth tax, spending at least $57 million to fight it.

They stepped down from day-to-day management at the end of 2019. That year and in 2020 and 2023, each got from Alphabet, Google’s parent company, only $1 per year in executive compensation.

They didn’t sell stock, and they didn’t receive dividends or any other compensation relating to Alphabet, so they paid no income tax on their wealth related to the company. But their stock wealth rose by $133 billion, driven in part by the reinvestment of their share of company profits, which amounted to $20 billion in those three years. Scenarios like this show why some of the very wealthiest people in America are among the least taxed.

This arrangement violates basic principles of fairness, deprives the government of revenue it needs for public services and fuels wealth concentration.

Overwhelming wealth becomes power — power to influence the direction of corporate behemoths, power to sway society through donations and media ownership, power to steer politics through unlimited campaign contributions to super PACs.

Elon Musk’s recent adventures in the executive branch, after spending hundreds of millions of dollars to help elect Donald Trump, demonstrate how quickly concentrated wealth can transmute into political control.

We don’t imagine that a one-time 5 percent tax on the wealth of California billionaires, as proposed in the 2026 Billionaire Tax Act, would fix all these problems. But it could raise nearly $100 billion in revenue for California. This amount would make up for the funding the federal government is taking away from the state over the next five years. It would also be tiny relative to billionaires’ recent wealth gains.

In the past three years alone, the total wealth of California’s billionaires grew by a staggering 144 percent, to over $2 trillion.

Taking such a small bite out of billionaires’ exponentially growing tech wealth wouldn’t doom Silicon Valley because the value of California’s concentrated tech talent dwarfs the proposed wealth tax. Nvidia’s chief executive, Mr. Huang, who would be one of the biggest payers of the tax, said he would be “perfectly fine” with it.

Other myths about the proposal need to be dispelled. It would tax only billionaires. It has been carefully written to respect the California and U.S. Constitutions. It contains provisions designed to prevent taxation beyond 5 percent of the fair market value of anyone’s shares and to avoid hitting start-ups hard. Billionaire entrepreneurs, with sizable illiquid stakes in newly founded private companies, would be able to defer payments until they began to cash out.

It is too late for superrich Californians to flee the state to avoid the tax. If approved in November, the tax would apply to billionaires who were residents of California as of Jan. 1, 2026. Some affected taxpayers might have left between the ballot initiative’s introduction, in late October 2025, and the end of the year. But it is improbable that any significant number of billionaires fully cut ties with California in that short period.

Critics of the ballot measure have voiced concerns that even a small number of billionaires leaving the state would lead to lower state tax revenues overall. Their math doesn’t add up. California’s billionaires currently pay such a low tax rate that even if all of them left the state, it would take 25 years for the loss of their tax payments under the current set of rules to surpass the amount the state would raise if the one-time tax succeeds this fall.

In 2025, California collected $4.1 billion in income tax from its billionaires. We estimate that California would collect about 25 times that much revenue — about $103 billion — from the proposed wealth tax.

While billionaires who no longer run their businesses day to day may choose to eventually leave California, uprooting an established business that relies on the pool of California’s tech talent and tech ecosystem would be much harder: While Mr. Page and Mr. Brin may leave for Florida or Nevada, there are no discussions of Google leaving Mountain View.

California’s tech sector produces billionaires faster than any other state’s. Its superrich — who have benefited from the state’s infrastructure, universities and networks of people and businesses — have accumulated enormous fortunes almost tax-free. The proposed billionaire tax would finally make them contribute in modest proportion to their gains.

In November, California’s voters should show the nation the way forward.

Share

  •  

Pluralistic: The AI bubble isn't like the internet bubble (26 May 2026)


Today's links



The head and shoulder of a supine bearded man in a chambray shirt. He is tied down with ropes around his shoulders. Four tiny figures with suits and grotesque plutocratic heads are prying his mouth open by yanking at his hair and beard. Once of the men is shoving an evil robot into his mouth.

The AI bubble isn't like the internet bubble (permalink)

One of the surprise breakout software products of the early web was Lotus Notes, a kind of primitive precursor to all-in-one office productivity suites like GDocs, Office365, etc. It was so important that its creator, Ray Ozzie, was promoted to Microsoft's Chief Software Architect, succeeding Bill Gates himself:

https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/podcast/knowledge-at-wharton-podcast/the-man-who-would-change-microsoft-ray-ozzies-vision-for-connected-software/

People who remember Notes tend to deride it for its clunky user interface and demi-functional administrative tools. But what made Notes so central to Microsoft wasn't its polish – it was the fact that Notes represented a brokered peace between IT managers, who wanted mainframe-like control over everything their users could do with business equipment, and the users themselves – workers who kept smuggling internet-based tools into the enterprise network on the very sensible grounds that they had a job to do, and these were the best tools to do it.

The arrival of internet-based tools – especially ones that ran in browsers – represented a major challenge to IT departments, who had been long accustomed to dictating terms to their users. If the IT manager and the compliance department decided that the best way to manage disclosure and leak risks was to block all email attachments for outside users, then that was that: no one could send those attachments.

But after the internet arrived on the corporate desktop, employees who needed to get documents to supply chain partners and customers could treat these IT policies as damage and route around them. Just fire up your Hotmail or Yahoo mail window, or hop on MSN Messenger or ICQ or AIM, or drop the file on an anonymous FTP server and send the link to your counterparty. Job done!

IT managers hated this, and to be fair to them, they weren't (always) wrong. These outside tools came from a variety of untrustworthy sources, including malicious sites that pushed virus-infected versions to their users. Also, by evading firewall rules with these tools, users made it impossible to achieve the compliance goals that IT had been charged with enforcing, and it was IT's asses on the line if the company got in trouble as a result.

Foundationally, IT was being asked to do two irreconcilable things: they were supposed to be enabling workers to get their jobs done, and they were supposed to be stopping those workers from doing things that could harm the business. This can't be done, because the only way to eliminate the possibility that a worker will take an action that harms the business is to gag that worker and lock them in a dungeon. Workers need flexibility and freedom to achieve business goals, and that flexibility and freedom means that those workers might (deliberately or accidentally) thwart the business's goals.

What's more, workers will always run into situations that were not anticipated by policy, and if they are denied any agency or initiative, they will fail to get their jobs done. In work, the exception is the rule, hence the importance of "process knowledge" (all the implicit knowledge shared among workers across the firm and its suppliers and customers, which cannot be captured or recorded):

https://pluralistic.net/2025/09/08/process-knowledge/#dance-monkey-dance

Indeed, there's a form of labor action called a "work to rule," in which workers only do the things dictated by their rulebooks, without taking any of the routine additional measures dictated by process knowledge. Merely by following every rule to the letter, workers can grind a shop to a halt:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work-to-rule

Since the dawn of personal computers, workers and IT departments have come into conflict, as workers literally smuggled technology into the business that could do things the IT department had (often arbitrarily and capriciously) prohibited. When Visicalc emerged as the killer app for the Apple ][+, workers snuck these computers into work and used them to sort spreadsheets in ways that IT had declined to permit. They didn't do this to cheat or steal from the company – the whole point was to do a better job.

So it was with the early web: workers discovered a myriad of new capabilities in the free-to-use world of web-based tools and realized how these tools would make them much more effective at their jobs. The fact that IT wouldn't let them do these things was just more evidence that IT – and the managers who set IT's agenda – didn't understand the business as well as workers.

It didn't help that IT managers' first line of defense was the high-tech version of abstinence-only education: "You only think you need your work computers to do this, but really, you don't, so stop trying":

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2009/jun/16/computer-security-abstinence

Abstinence-only education never works, but where "you only think you need this" failed, Lotus Notes succeeded. Lotus Notes provided a whole suite of tools that largely (if imperfectly) replaced the universe of free tools that workers were using to evade their IT departments' edicts, so they could get their jobs done. At the same time, Lotus Notes provided a set of management tools that let IT fine-tune how these tools worked, giving them (some) of the controls they needed to achieve their compliance goals.

Like all brokered peace settlements, Lotus Notes left both sides feeling like they'd made a compromise they could live with, giving up some of their goals, but keeping the things that really mattered to them.

It's impossible to overstate how important Lotus Notes and similar products were, because workers demanded the right to use the web on their work computers, and they made those demands so forcefully that managers had to completely re-do their IT policies, lest those workers treat them as damage and route around them. Back then, the tech press was full of stories about these conflicts, as workers insisted that the new technology that was sweeping the nation was so foundational and transformative that they had to be allowed to use it.

What we never saw back then were stories about how managers had to monitor workers to ensure that they were using the web as much as possible. No one had to force workers to find ways to integrate the web into their workflows.

In other words, the story of the web at work was the opposite of the story of AI at work. Today, you can't turn around without reading a story about bosses who are threatening to fire workers if they don't increase their AI usage:

https://www.businessinsider.com/boss-track-ai-use-career-2025-8

Virtually every major company now has a program to force workers into using AI:

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/05/ai-use-work-employee-monitoring-tech-surveillance.html

It's conceivable that over the past quarter-century, bosses have become technophiles while workers have fallen prey to superstitious technophobia, but it hardly seems likely. Historically, workers have always been enthusiastic about tools that let them do a better job – indeed, it's a truism that labor-led automation produces improvements in quality, while capital-driven automation increases throughput (often at the expense of quality).

Workers aren't the only typical early adopters who find AI lacking. As a group, teenagers and young adults hate AI:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/09/style/gen-z-ai-gallup-study.html

That's not what it was like during the early web days. Back then, young people entering the workforce were passionate devotees of the web, to the point where the business press routinely ran articles asking how today's workplaces were going to adapt to the demands of these webbed-up workers.

https://www.nber.org/digest/apr03/internet-changes-labor-market

AI boosters insist that the deficits we see in AI – its lack of profitability, its primitive and error-riddled outputs – are no different from the shakedown problems of the early web (and we know how the web turned out!). But this is a profoundly flawed comparison: the early web and AI are very different from one another.

For one thing, the early web may have lost money, but it had great unit economics. Every new web user brought the web closer to profitability, as did every new use of the web, and every new generation of web technology. By contrast, AI has – in the memorable phrasing of Ed Zitron – "dogshit unit economics." Every new AI user makes AI less profitable, as does every new use for AI, and each generation of AI loses more money than the last. AI is the money-losingest endeavor in human history:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/09/27/econopocalypse/#subprime-intelligence

In other words, the early web was a technology that grew more profitable every day, which workers and young people had to force on their bosses – and AI is a technology that grows less profitable every day, and bosses have to force it on workers and young people.

Now, it's true that some workers don't have to be forced to use AI. Workers who enjoy a high degree of autonomy (that is to say, workers who are positioned to ignore workplace coercion) can adopt AI in ways that they feel suited to, just as those early web users and Visicalc smugglers did. They can fulfill the maxim that labor-driven automation improves quality, while resisting capital's insistence that automation be used to increase throughput at quality's expense.

They can act as centaurs (workers assisted by technology), not as reverse-centaurs (workers who are recruited to serve as peripherals for machines). As with all technology questions, what the technology does is nowhere near as important as who the tech does it for and who the tech does it to:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/09/11/vulgar-thatcherism/#there-is-an-alternative

And there's another group of workers who adopt AI voluntarily: workers who see that AI can do a lot of work that they view as dull and unimportant for them. These workers might be right – there are plenty of bullshit jobs out there:

https://memex.craphound.com/2018/06/20/david-graebers-bullshit-jobs-why-does-the-economy-sustain-jobs-that-no-one-values/

But it's also possible that they're wrong, and they're substituting AI for something that really should be done by a person.

But on the plus side, at least no one has to force them to adopt AI.


Hey look at this (permalink)



A shelf of leatherbound history books with a gilt-stamped series title, 'The World's Famous Events.'

Object permanence (permalink)

#25yrsago Website graveyard https://web.archive.org/web/20010516224100/http://www.disobey.com/ghostsites/

#20yrsago Canadian students ask govt to save them from copyright https://web.archive.org/web/20060629014007/https://action.web.ca/home/cfs/en_alerts.shtml?x=88910&AA_EX_Session=d56bebd39174d9839ec3ee5fa6fe93a4

#20yrsago Lifespan of best-sellers falls 6/7ths in 40 years https://web.archive.org/web/20060601231943/https://www.lulu.com/static/pr/05_19_06.php

#15yrsago Sarkozy’s false-flag E-G8 attracts withering scorn https://web.archive.org/web/20121109010803/https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/05/france-attempts-to-civilize-the-internet-internet-fights-back/

#15yrsago Tool reveals ISP traffic-shaping https://web.archive.org/web/20120514151210/https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/05/new-shaperprobe-tool-detects-isp-traffic-shaping/

#15yrsago Falun Gong sues Cisco over complicity in China’s “Golden Shield” – allege torture, murder https://web.archive.org/web/20110524065718/http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20065219-93.html

#15yrsago Scenes from Los Angeles’s teacher-librarian witch-hunt https://mizzmurphy.blogspot.com/2011/05/message-received.html

#15yrsago Denmark bans Marmite https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2011/may/24/uk-should-ban-sandi-toksvig

#10yrsago As mobile carriers ramp up bribery program, Internet coalition says no to “zero rating” https://web.archive.org/web/20160524233609/https://motherboard.vice.com/read/medium-mozilla-and-kickstarter-signed-a-letter-against-zero-rating

#10yrsago Philippines’ new “dictator” will give a hero’s burial to Ferdinand Marcos https://web.archive.org/web/20160526135257/http://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/world/philippine-dictator-marcos-to-get-heros-burial-duterte/ar-BBtnPJH

#10yrsago Judge handcuffs public defender for speaking out in court https://web.archive.org/web/20160525151444/http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/las-vegas-judge-handcuffs-public-defender-courtroom

#10yrsago Sanders donors flock to Tim Canova’s campaign against DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz https://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/23/politics/debbie-wasserman-schultz-primary-opponent-fundraising/index.html

#10yrsago Algorithmic risk-assessment: hiding racism behind “empirical” black boxes https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing

#10yrsago Plagiarism detection app vs Russia’s elites: 1-2 fake PhDs discovered every day https://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/05/the_thriving_russian_black_market_in_dissertations_and_the_crusaders_fighting.html

#10yrsago Technology’s “culture of compliance” must be beaten back in the name of justice https://bb9.berlinbiennale.de/all-problems-can-be-illuminated-not-all-problems-can-be-solved/

#10yrsago Grass in the park at the center of San Francisco gentrification debate is now for rent https://sfist.com/2016/05/23/rec_parks_pilot_program_allows_you/

#10yrsago Lawsuit: Texas’s largest jail is full of people who are locked up for being poor https://web.archive.org/web/20160524134738/https://thinkprogress.org/economy/2016/05/23/3781076/texas-bail-lawsuit/

#10yrsago After the precariat, the unnecessariat: the humans who are superfluous to corporations https://morecrows.wordpress.com/2016/05/10/unnecessariat/

#5yrsago Watomatic, for lower Whatsapp switching costs https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/24/how-about-nah/#comcom


Upcoming appearances (permalink)

A photo of me onstage, giving a speech, pounding the podium.



A screenshot of me at my desk, doing a livecast.

Recent appearances (permalink)



A grid of my books with Will Stahle covers..

Latest books (permalink)



A cardboard book box with the Macmillan logo.

Upcoming books (permalink)

  • "The Reverse-Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book about being a better AI critic, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, June 2026 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374621568/thereversecentaursguidetolifeafterai/)
  • "Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It" (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

  • "The Post-American Internet," a geopolitical sequel of sorts to Enshittification, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2027

  • "Unauthorized Bread": a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, April 20, 2027

  • "The Memex Method," Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2027



Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing: "The Post-American Internet," a sequel to "Enshittification," about the better world the rest of us get to have now that Trump has torched America. Third draft completed. Submitted to editor.

  • "The Reverse Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book for Farrar, Straus and Giroux about being an effective AI critic. LEGAL REVIEW AND COPYEDIT COMPLETE.
  • "The Post-American Internet," a short book about internet policy in the age of Trumpism. PLANNING.

  • A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING


This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.


How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Bluesky (no ads, possible tracking and data-collection):

https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

READ CAREFULLY: By reading this, you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.

ISSN: 3066-764X

  •  

Full-Frontal Neofascism

Friends,

He’s no longer even trying to hide it. He makes a deal with himself for a $1.8 billion slush fund to reward loyalists willing to defy the law and commit violence on his behalf, and for a pardon of himself and his family for any illegal self-dealing and financial wrongs “FOREVER” (it’s in all caps in the document).

Then, when the deal is widely criticized, he posts:

“I gave up a lot of money in allowing the just announced Anti-Weaponization Fund to go forward. I could have settled my case, including the illegal release of my Tax Returns and the equally illegal BREAK IN of Mar-a-Lago, for an absolute fortune. Instead, I am helping others who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration, receive, at long last, JUSTICE! President DJT.”

Does he really believe he could have settled his case for an absolute fortune — the case that he brought against himself — the case a federal judge doubted was even a “case” because he was on both sides of it?

Last week, a disclosure form showed that Trump’s investment portfolio executed more than 3,600 trades in the first three months of this year alone, many involving companies that he has favored with access or policies.

America is slouching toward the 250th anniversary of our revolution against arbitrary power with a president who shamelessly exercises it. Never before have we witnessed this degree of self-dealing, bribe taking, usurpation of congressional authority, and open defiance of federal courts.

It’s an unconstitutional slippery slope. If Trump can get away with creating for himself a $1.8 billion slush fund that Congress never approved and courts cannot oversee, and wantonly trade the shares of companies his policies are favoring, what’s to stop him from creating a $10 billion or $10 trillion self-dealing slush fund?

If he can get away with preemptively pardoning himself and his family for any and all future financial wrongdoing, what’s to stop him from pardoning himself and his family for any future criminal acts?

These are only a part of the slippery slope we’re on. If he can abduct a foreign president without Congress’s permission, what’s to stop him from abducting anyone? If he can order the U.S. military to kill a foreign head of state without even Congress declaring a war, what’s to stop him from ordering the military to kill anyone?

If he can target political enemies for criminal prosecution, what’s to stop him from jailing or murdering his opponents?

If he can unilaterally decide that someone on a boat in the high seas is an “enemy combatant” and summarily kill them, what’s to stop him from calling anyone he dislikes an enemy combatant and having them killed?

If he can put his name on buildings all over Washington and take a wrecking ball to the East Wing of the White House, what’s to stop him from taking a wrecking ball to the entire edifice and putting up a Trump tower?

He feels unstoppable because there’s no one around him to tell him no. Instead, he’s surrounded by sycophants who tell him yes. He gets blind loyalty from his lapdogs — his vice president, his Cabinet, and most Republicans in Congress — who work for him rather than for the American people.

He feels indomitable because his billionaire backers — Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Larry and David Ellison, Mark Zuckerberg, and Rupert Murdoch, among others — have stuffed his PAC with their money and silenced criticism of him on their media platforms, in order to garner his favors. Meanwhile, his followers feast on his white Christian nationalism and regard him as godlike.

He feels invincible because he was reelected president even though he was impeached twice and has been found guilty of 34 felony counts, and the Supreme Court has shielded him from further criminal prosecution for “official” acts (which he takes to mean any actions while he’s president). Congress is barely an obstacle because, as he demonstrated as recently as last week, he has a chokehold over the Republican Party. He even says he “doesn’t need Congress.”

He feels invulnerable because he’ll never directly face voters again, and therefore will never lose — nor, he assumes, ever be held accountable for anything.

My friends, this is full-frontal neofascism. I suggest we respond in these ways:

On July 4, the 250th anniversary of the nation’s independence, we wear black armbands to acknowledge the near death of our democracy and the rule of law under Trump.

In the weeks and months leading up to the midterm election on November 3, 2026, we commit to getting the largest voter turnout in American history, to take back Congress and stop the neofascist in the White House. Not just a blue wave but a blue tsunami.

On Election Day 2028, we elect a president whose character and temperament are consistent with the founding ideals of the United States — someone both humble and honorable, who’s committed to strengthening democracy and the rule of law, who will revive the self-governing institutions that Trump has shat on and refocus the nation on our vast unfinished agenda of inclusion, rather than exclusion.

Beyond these, we will do whatever we can to learn from this catastrophe and help America learn. We will teach our children and grandchildren the truth of what has happened and how close we’ve come to losing our democracy. And we will educate future generations on what we owe one another as citizens of this great land.

To accomplish all this we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

Share

  •  

Pluralistic: No honor among (ad-tech) thieves (25 May 2026)


Today's links

  • No honor among (ad-tech) thieves: Including "and" and "the."
  • Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
  • Object permanence: Budweiser nunchuks; GOP vote-suppressor voted illegally; Airbnb enshittifies; Oculus enshittifies; Nintendo copyfrauds its fans; Meritocracy to eugenics pipeline; Ultima Online crisis management; SNES cartridge urinal; JJ Abrams x Axanar, "Sex Criminals"; Beating school filters for fun; Orphan works; Japanese ATM heist; How the Sacklers rigged the game.
  • Upcoming appearances: London, Kansas City, LA, Menlo Park, Toronto, NYC, Edinburgh.
  • Recent appearances: Where I've been.
  • Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
  • Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
  • Colophon: All the rest.



A painting of three lemons on a white background. Each has been altered to add a horrific eye staring out of it. From behind two of the lemons loom carny barkers, gesticulating wildly and waving canes.

No honor among (ad-tech) thieves (permalink)

It shouldn't come as a surprise to learn that a company that uses dishonest tactics to spy on you for profit will also use dishonest tactics to sell the resulting surveillance data.

The only reason this wouldn't be obvious is if you've fallen into the trap of thinking "if you're not paying for the product, you're the product." Companies that cheat when the opportunity arises will cheat everyone: customers, users, regulators, suppliers and employees. You're the product if the company can get away with making you the product:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/#liar-liar

The digital surveillance swindle is a con from top to bottom: it's not just that they spy on you, it's also that they lie to you about how and why and where they spy on you and what happens to the data they swindle out of you. They're not just cheats, in other words – they're also liars.

Of course they're liars! If their terms of service were honest, they'd say something like, "By being desperate enough to use this product, you 'agree' that we're allowed to come over to your house and punch your grandmother, wear your underwear, make long-distance calls and eat all the food in your fridge."

So they lie like crazy. But they don't just lie to us: they lie to the people they sell our surveillance data to as well. Of course they do! Those people are the ones giving them the money! By tricking the people paying for the product, these surveillance swindlers can get them to pay more!

This is the basis of Tim Hwang's essential 2020 book Subprime Attention Crisis:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/10/05/florida-man/#wannamakers-ghost

Core to Hwang's thesis is that these ads aren't just dangerous, they're also ineffective. The danger of these ads is the erosion of privacy and the mobilization of private data for state repression and fraud, but not particularly for persuasion. The idea that ad-tech companies have realized the ancient dream of building a mind-control ray via the novel technique of "hacking your dopamine loop" is a story that the ad-tech swindlers cooked up to help them sell ads:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/09/30/dont-believe-the-criti-hype/#ordinary-mediocrities

Critics who repeat these outlandish claims are helping these companies sell ads to credulous advertisers, who are getting robbed to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. This is the process that Lee Vinsel calls "criti-hype," which is when you "take the sensational claims of boosters and entrepreneurs, flip them, and start talking about 'risks'":

https://peoples-things.ghost.io/youre-doing-it-wrong-notes-on-criticism-and-technology-hype/

Criti-hype is satisfying because the hype itself is so fantastically overblown. These companies claim they're going to save/destroy/conquer the world, transform the very nature of humanity, etc, and so critics who repeat those claims (brackets derogatory) can style themselves as defenders of the world and humanity itself.

This is also a very profitable style of criticism: there's a huge commercial market for people who claim to be defending the world from conquest by evil dopamine-hacking sorcerers and/or superintelligent paperclip-maximizers that can chatbot you into killing yourself and/or voting for Trump (brackets derogatory).

The opposite of criti-hype is materialistic criticism, grounded in independently verifiable claims about how these scams work. To be a good tech critic, you need to start by assuming that a company that lies to its users about what it's doing is perfectly capable of lying to its customers and investors about what it's doing (that is, "even if you're paying for the product, you're still the product").

That's demonstrably, verifiably true of the commercial surveillance industry. Commercial spies lie to their customers like crazy, and always have. Think of the department store magnate John Wannamaker's famous quip that "half my advertising dollars are wasted, I just don't know which half." Man, did someone ever do a sell-job on old Wannamaker: imagine believing that only half of your advertising dollars are wasted. Today, thanks to creepy ad-tech analytics, we know that the true figure is around 99%.

Hwang's book documents lots more ad-tech fraud that's every bit as audacious as the Wannamaker-era con-jobs. For example, there's the fact that when Procter and Gamble zeroed out its $200m/year surveillance advertising program, they saw a zero percent drop in sales because (to a first approximation) all $200m of that annual spend was disappearing down the fraud-hole.

There's been plenty more examples since, rivaling previous eras for audacity and outlandishness. In 2023, Mozilla Labs investigated the ways that modern cars spy on their drivers and concluded that, when it came to privacy, cars were "the worst product category" they had ever evaluated, and recommended that you not buy any of the cars currently offered for sale:

https://www.mozillafoundation.org/en/privacynotincluded/articles/its-official-cars-are-the-worst-product-category-we-have-ever-reviewed-for-privacy/

Mozilla's report investigated two things: which data your car was collecting and selling about you (lots) and what data your car company claimed it had collected about you and was offering for sale (way, way more).

For example, Nissan and Kia claimed that they had data about your sex life, a thing that cannot be reasonably inferred from the sensors in your car (unless you have a highly specific sex life). Six car companies claimed they had your genetic data (again, not a thing that any of the sensors in your car can know about).

What's more, all of these scams have only gotten worse in the intervening three years:

https://cleantechnica.com/2026/05/22/mozilla-foundation-condemns-data-collection-by-cars/

These companies are spying on you, and lying to you about how much they respect your privacy, and lying to their commercial customers about all the fiendish ways they've cooked up for invading your privacy.

Everyone in the ad-tech sector is lying to everyone else in the ad-tech sector, in other words. It's your basic hive of scum and villainy. Back in 2023, Cox Media – part of the sprawling media conglomerate that includes Cox Cable – told advertisers that they had a new product called "Active Listening" that recorded and transcribed all the conversations you have around your smart speakers, smart TVs, smart watches and phones:

https://www.404media.co/heres-the-pitch-deck-for-active-listening-ad-targeting/

It was a lie. There are plenty of ways that these devices spy on you, of course. Your smart TV is a cesspool of surveillance and data-exfiltration, but that data doesn't include your conversations:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/12/03/painful-burning-dribble/#law-of-intended-consequences

Same for your smart speaker, which not only gathers tons of information about you for sale and targeting, but also leaks your voice data all the time, whenever you utter any of its "trigger words," which include over 1,000 phrases that sound like its trigger words:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/07/02/big-river/#triggered

Cox, in other words, was running the same equal-opportunity scam that your auto-maker runs: deceiving you about how little data they were stealing from you, and deceiving their customers about how much data they were gathering on you.

That said, there was something remarkable and unique about Cox's fraud: because they were ripping off other (better-connected) fraudsters, their lies triggered an investigation by Donald Trump's FTC, who never met a scammer they wouldn't defend (from another scammer):

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/05/marketer-that-claimed-it-could-tap-devices-for-ad-targeting-will-pay-880k-settlement/

Still, there are limits to this "honor among thieves" business. The settlement Trump's FTC extracted from Cox for lying to other liars is less than $1m – basically, change that Cox can find down the back of its sofa:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/05/marketer-that-claimed-it-could-tap-devices-for-ad-targeting-will-pay-880k-settlement/

Still, the Cox settlement is a great criti-hype object lesson, a reminder that these creepy, lying companies lie to everyone, including their customers, which means that even if you're paying for the product, you're still the product.


Hey look at this (permalink)



A shelf of leatherbound history books with a gilt-stamped series title, 'The World's Famous Events.'

Object permanence (permalink)

#25yrsago Best email disclaimer award https://web.archive.org/web/20010526174903/http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/35/19057.html

#25yrsago Kaycee hoax FAQ https://web.archive.org/web/20010629212706/https://rootnode.org/article.php?sid=26

#25yrsago Crisis management in Ultima Online https://web.archive.org/web/20010605015828/http://www.newyorker.com/FACT/

#25yrsago E3 is all softcore porn now https://web.archive.org/web/20010702122044/https://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/05/22/e3_2001/print.html

#25yrsago Canadian payphone infinite long distance glitch https://web.archive.org/web/20010608183145/https://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,43967,00.html

#20yrsago Kids make a sport out of outsmarting school web-filters https://web.archive.org/web/20060821224237/http://news.com.com/Kids+outsmart+Web+filters/2009-1041-6062548.html

#20yrsago Orphan works legislation https://web.archive.org/web/20060531135239/http://www.copybites.com/2006/05/chairman_lamar_.html

#20yrsago U. Florida cops ask fiction writer for fingerprints, DNA https://memex.craphound.com/2006/05/22/u-florida-cops-ask-fiction-writer-for-fingerprints-dna/

#20yrsago HDMI, the Manchurian DRM – a Broadcast Flag dormant until 2010 https://web.archive.org/web/20060523193853/https://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060521-6880.html

#15yrsago The Filter Bubble: how personalization changes society https://memex.craphound.com/2011/05/22/the-filter-bubble-how-personalization-changes-society/

#15yrsago Last decade’s English libel legal sharks poised to make a new fortune on stupid privacy lawsuits and superinjuctions https://memex.craphound.com/2011/05/22/last-decades-english-libel-legal-sharks-poised-to-make-a-new-fortune-on-stupid-privacy-lawsuits-and-superinjuctions/

#15yrsago RIAA boss takes home $3 mil+ https://lefsetz.com/wordpress/2011/05/21/another-member-of-the-overpaid/

#15yrsago Vindictive game company invites employees to pan reviewer’s novel after bad review https://maroonersrock.com/2011/05/conduit-2-developer-calls-for-internal-retaliation-against-author-of-negative-joystiq-review/

#15yrsago France lobbies G8 for Internet control and censorship https://www.laquadrature.net/en/2011/05/20/frances-g8-focuses-on-control-and-restrictions-to-online-freedoms/

#15yrsago Budweiser nunchuks: American Ninja https://web.archive.org/web/20110701153712/http://www.todayandtomorrow.net/2011/05/19/american-ninja/

#15yrsago GOP legislative aide works on punitive voter ID bill, boasts of illegally voting in another district https://web.archive.org/web/20110522014606/http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/elections/article_ede5d49e-8272-11e0-a6e0-001cc4c03286.html

#15yrsago Raising a kid without disclosing their sex https://web.archive.org/web/20110523180952/http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/babiespregnancy/babies/article/995112–parents-keep-child-s-gender-secret

#15yrsago Byron Sonne: Canadian security geek jailed for taunting G20 security theatre https://web.archive.org/web/20110518195236/http://www.torontolife.com/daily/informer/from-print-edition-informer/2011/05/03/how-byron-sonne’s-obsessions-with-the-g20-security-apparatus-cost-him-everything/

#15yrsago HOWTO make a SNES cartridge urinal https://blog.pricecharting.com/2011/05/how-to-build-video-game-urinal.html

#15yrsago German police raid German Pirate Party’s servers two days before election https://web.archive.org/web/20120516010632/https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/05/german-police-seize-pirate-party-servers-looking-at-anons-toolkit/

#10yrsago JJ Abrams urges Paramount to drop its lawsuit over fan Star Trek movie https://web.archive.org/web/20160522121940/https://deadline.com/2016/05/star-trek-axanar-lawsuit-ending-jj-abrams-paramount-1201760721/

#10yrsago Pat Buchanan on the Republican Party’s historical opposition to free trade deals https://web.archive.org/web/20160521162845/http://www.theamericanconservative.com/buchanan/free-trade-vs-the-republican-party/

#10yrsago United offered men-only “executive” flights until 1970 https://viewfromthewing.com/united-airlines-men-only-executive-service/

#10yrsago Elderly man kills wife because they couldn’t afford her medicine https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/20/us/florida-man-says-he-killed-sick-wife-because-he-couldnt-afford-her-medicine-sheriffs-say.html?_r=0

#10yrsago Sex Criminals: Robin Hood bank robbers who can stop time when they orgasm https://memex.craphound.com/2016/05/21/sex-criminals-robin-hood-bank-robbers-who-can-stop-time-when-they-orgasm/

#10yrsago Airbnb stealth-updates terms of service, says it’s not an insurer and requires binding arbitration https://memex.craphound.com/2016/05/20/airbnb-stealth-updates-terms-of-service-says-its-not-an-insurer-and-requires-binding-arbitration/

#10yrsago Oculus breaks promise, uses DRM to kill app that let you switch VR systems https://web.archive.org/web/20160520161939/https://motherboard.vice.com/read/new-oculus-drm-cross-platform

#10yrsago Nintendo claims ownership over fans’ Minecraft/Mario mashups https://web.archive.org/web/20160521193334/http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/nintendo-issues-copyright-claims-on-mario-themed-minecraft-videos/

#10yrsago Paypal refuses to deliver online purchases to UK addresses containing “Isis” https://b2fxxx.blogspot.com/2016/05/the-tyranny-of-algorithm-yet-again.html

#10yrsago 30 students debate mass surveillance on Capitol Hill https://web.archive.org/web/20160521000031/https://theintercept.com/2016/05/20/high-school-debaters-bring-surveillance-encryption-arguments-to-capitol-hill/

#10yrsago What the NSA’s assault on whistleblowers taught Snowden https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/22/how-pentagon-punished-nsa-whistleblowers

#10yrsago Massive, coordinated ATM heist in Japan nets $12.7 million (¥‎1.4 billion) https://web.archive.org/web/20160523102154/http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20160522/p2g/00m/0dm/044000c

#5yrsago How the Sacklers rigged the game https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/23/a-bankrupt-process/#sacklers

#5yrsago Consent theater https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/20/consent-theater/

#5yrsago Debunking the arguments for vaccine apartheid https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/21/wait-your-turn/#vaccine-apartheid

#5yrsago How the filibuster dies https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/22/not-with-a-bang/#theory-of-change

#1yrago Strange Bedfellows and Long Knives https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/21/et-tu-sloppy-steve/#fractured-fairytales

#1yrago The meritocracy to eugenics pipeline https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/20/big-cornflakes-energy/#caliper-pilled


Upcoming appearances (permalink)

A photo of me onstage, giving a speech, pounding the podium.



A screenshot of me at my desk, doing a livecast.

Recent appearances (permalink)



A grid of my books with Will Stahle covers..

Latest books (permalink)



A cardboard book box with the Macmillan logo.

Upcoming books (permalink)

  • "The Reverse-Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book about being a better AI critic, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, June 2026 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374621568/thereversecentaursguidetolifeafterai/)
  • "Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It" (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

  • "The Post-American Internet," a geopolitical sequel of sorts to Enshittification, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2027

  • "Unauthorized Bread": a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, April 20, 2027

  • "The Memex Method," Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2027



Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing: "The Post-American Internet," a sequel to "Enshittification," about the better world the rest of us get to have now that Trump has torched America. Third draft completed. Submitted to editor.

  • "The Reverse Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book for Farrar, Straus and Giroux about being an effective AI critic. LEGAL REVIEW AND COPYEDIT COMPLETE.
  • "The Post-American Internet," a short book about internet policy in the age of Trumpism. PLANNING.

  • A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING


This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.


How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Bluesky (no ads, possible tracking and data-collection):

https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

READ CAREFULLY: By reading this, you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.

ISSN: 3066-764X

  •  

Remembering Robbie

Robbie Peacock in 1964

Friends,

Robbie was the kindest person I ever knew.

I met him in our dormitory the day we entered college in 1964. He saw me struggling to carry my big luggage crates up the two flights of stairs to my dorm room and, without saying a word, grabbed one and hauled it to the second floor.

“Thank you!” I stammered when we reached the landing.

“Don’t mention it,” he said with a broad smile, and then offered his hand. “I’m Robbie.”

“Bob,” I said, shaking his hand.

“Good to meet you, Bob!”

He must have noticed I was exhausted by the effort, and lonely to boot. “It’s close to dinner time,” he said. “Wanna walk over to the dining hall?”

“Sure!”

That was the start of our friendship.

Robbie was intuitively and naturally kind. He combined a remarkable warmheartedness with a degree of compassion I had never known before. And it wasn’t only toward me. Every young man in our dorm, and many in our class, came to admire and depend on Robbie.

Robbie went missing in action in Vietnam on October 12, 1972. His body has never been recovered.

I think of Robbie on Memorial Day, as I do of others who died while serving in the United States Armed Forces.

I was strongly opposed to the Vietnam War. I demonstrated and marched against it. I was too short to be drafted, but I detested the cruel absurdity of that war, the lies with which it was sold to the American people, the utter waste of it. In the end, more than 58,000 Americans and millions of Vietnamese lost their lives in it. Many more were grievously wounded.

But when I think of Robbie, I also remember his sense of duty. Duty was inseparable from his kindness. Whatever the situation, Robbie was eager to help.

What do we owe one another as members of the same society? To me, that question lies at the heart of this Memorial Day.

Our current president apparently believes we owe each other nothing. To him, everything is a transaction — a deal in which each of us is in it for as much money and power as we can get.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump denigrated Senator John McCain, whose plane was shot down over Hanoi in 1967.

McCain became a prisoner of war. The North Vietnamese offered him early release because McCain’s father was commander of all U.S. forces in Vietnam at the time. But the young McCain refused the offer in order to uphold the Code of Conduct, which stipulated that prisoners of war should be released in the order they were captured. As a result, he remained in North Vietnam for nearly five additional years, during which time he was put into solitary confinement and tortured.

“He’s not a war hero,” Trump said of McCain during the 2016 presidential campaign. Then he altered his comment: “He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured, OK?”

Trump avoided serving in Vietnam by claiming he had a bone spur in his heel. As Michael Cohen, Trump’s “fixer,” told members of the House Oversight Committee in 2019:

“Trump claimed [his medical deferment] was because of a bone spur, but when I asked for medical records, he gave me none and said there was no surgery. He told me not to answer the specific questions by reporters but rather offer simply the fact that he received a medical deferment. He finished the conversation with the following comment: ‘You think I’m stupid, I wasn’t going to Vietnam.’”

Trump and his family business are now planning a $1.5 billion golf complex outside Hanoi and a Trump skyscraper in Ho Chi Minh City — the Trump family’s first projects in Vietnam. The two projects are part of a global moneymaking enterprise that no family of a sitting American president has ever before attempted.

Robbie was never in it for himself. He did what he did because he felt he had an obligation to do it, a duty to the nation he loved. It’s why I remember and honor Robbie today.

Give the gift of Robert Reich's Substack

  •  

Sunday caption contest: Slushies

Friends,

Please submit your caption in the Comments section and, as before, please use the Comments section only for captions.

Winners will be announced next Sunday. For consideration, please post your caption by Monday at 9 pm PT, 12 midnight ET.

Leave a comment

Last week’s winners:

“Is that a goose step or the Can Can?”

(Congratulations, Laurence Hoffman.)

“Looks like the only thing Trump got from the summit was a dance partner for the ballroom.”

(Congratulations, Carol Nylen.)

Runners-up:

“Same old song and dance, ‘Let’s grift again like we did last summer’” 🎶

(Congratulations, JHO.)

“It wasn’t a trade negotiation; it was a total Xi-clipse of the American ego.”

(Congratulations, John F. M. O’Sullivan O’Shea.)

“Hard to top ‘Putin on the Ritz.’”

(Congratulations, JBHoltz.)

“I miss Colbert already.”

(Congratulations, Ralph McElvany.)

“Which one’s the puppet?”

(Congratulations, Donna Maurillo.)

“Dancing from one crisis to the next!”

(Congratulations, Adam Laurie.)

“Welcome to The Trump Show — where every crisis is fake news, someone else’s fault, or a distraction from the Epstein files.”

(Congratulations, Russwin Francisco.)

“I thought you said this was a Can-Can show! These clowns Can’t-Can’t.”

(Congratulations LYSA FRANKFORT-KIMEL.)

“This is one instance where the show SHOULDN’T go on!”

(Congratulations, Theresa Mayhew.)

“I want my money back…”

(Congratulations, Cindy Johnson.)

Share

  •  

Sunday thought: The problem ISN'T that we're "divided and polarized"

Friends,

I keep hearing that one of America’s biggest problems is we’re “divided and polarized.” For example, New York Times columnist David French: “We’ve known for a long time that America is deeply polarized, and we’ve known the problem is only getting worse.”

This is bullsh*t. The problem is not that we’re divided and polarized.

The problem is that a significant portion of America is buying Trump’s violent, hateful, lawless crap. Some of those buying it are white supremacists. Others are conservative fundamentalist Christians. Others are xenophobic nationalists.

I feel compassion for those who’ve been seduced into supporting Trump after being brutalized and mistreated for years by employers, big corporations, Wall Street, and America’s oligarchs. As I warned 32 years ago, widening inequalities of wealth, income, and opportunity would eventually persuade some on the losing side to support a demagogue.

But an explanation for why some of Trump’s followers have bought into his neofascism isn’t a justification for them to do so. And it’s certainly no reason for us to put aside our differences and compromise with them.

As you undoubtedly know, Trump has created a violent police state inside America. He is conducting an illegal war abroad. He has usurped the powers of Congress and defied court orders. He is taking bribes. He’s criminally prosecuting his enemies and pardoning his criminal supporters (he has even set up a slush fund to compensate them). He has gotten his Justice Department to immunize him and his family from any future tax audits. He is silencing critics. He is fomenting racism and bigotry.

None of us should fall for the false equivalency between this, and opposition to it. The contest today is not between “right” and “left,” as the two sides have traditionally been understood in America. It’s not even between “Republicans” and “Democrats,” as we’ve defined the two major parties over most of the past century.

No, the contest today is between democracy and authoritarianism. It’s between tolerance and bigotry. Between a multiracial, secular, inclusive society and one that believes in white Christian nationalism. Between the rule of law and neofascism.

The two sides in this contest do not merit equal weight. If we are going to have a decent society, the nation must come down on the former side.

As long as Trump has followers who support his bigotry, racism, corruption, and violence, the nation will remain divided and polarized. That is necessary and proper.

We shouldn’t “reach out, or “meet halfway,” or “find middle ground,” or “split the difference,” or any other of today’s hackneyed expressions for putting aside what divides us and agreeing.

Generations of Americans fought and died for the ideals of democracy, freedom, social justice, the rule of law, and equal opportunity. We have never fully achieved them, but they remain our ideals. Tomorrow we celebrate Memorial Day to honor those ideals and the memories of those who died for them.

There cannot be, must not be, any compromise with neofascism.

Share

Share

  •  

Sex Counseling My Grandmother

My grandmother Minnie as a young woman, circa 1911

Friends,

Thinking you might need a break from the ongoing horrors of Trump and his regime, I’m going to tell you about an incident involving my grandmother Minnie.

Minnie was weird and wonderful, neurotic and nonsensical, fragile and funny.

When she was 97 and had been a widow for as long as anyone could remember, an elderly gentleman who was almost her age asked Minnie out to dinner.

This threw her into a panic.

She phoned me, her oldest grandson. I was then in my late 30s, married and with two little children. The last thing I expected was to be giving dating advice to my grandmother.

“What am I supposed to do?” she asked in a voice even more tremulous than usual.

I encouraged her to accept. “If you like him, of course go out to dinner with him.”

“But I haven’t been on a date in 75 years!” she exclaimed. “I don’t know what people do on dates now!”

I tried to calm her. “Look, he probably hasn’t been on a date in years, either. Just be natural. Be yourself.”

After a long pause, she said okay, she’d accept. The date was to occur in two weeks.

The next week, my grandmother phoned again. Now she was worried about the details.

“Are we supposed to split the check?” she asked.

I suggested she let him pay; he had asked her out. But if she had any doubts, she could offer to split the check, and let him be the one to say he’d pay.

“How long should the dinner go?”

I said that if the restaurant weren’t too crowded, she and the gentleman could continue talking for a while after dessert.

“What should I wear? I haven’t worn anything fancy in decades!” I could hear her anxiety growing.

I told her she could wear anything she felt comfortable in. This was just a first date, and I was sure it would be informal.

“What if he asks me out again?”

“Don’t worry about that now. Just have a good time.”

“What happens if he wants to, to .…” She paused. I waited for her to continue, but there was only silence.

“Don’t be embarrassed, grandma,” I said, softly. “You want to know what you should do if he wants to kiss you when he brings you home?”

She whispered, “Yes.” And then, even more quietly: “I hear all kinds of things. What if he wants to go … further?”

How wonderful. I was now giving sex advice to my 97-year-old grandmother.

“Well, a kiss isn’t normally done on a first date,” I said as gently as I could. “But if you really enjoyed being with him, and if a kiss feels natural, sure, go ahead and let him kiss you. Nothing more.”

“Oh!” she blurted out in exasperation, “I don’t know why I have to do this!”

“Look, grandma, no one is making you do this,” I said. “But if I were you, I’d think of it as a special occasion. You might try feeling flattered that he wants to have dinner with you.”

She thanked me and quickly got off the phone.

As the day approached, I expected to hear from her again, but she didn’t phone.

Nor did she phone the next day.

Nor even on the day of the date. Nor the day after.

Two days later, bursting with curiosity, I phoned her.

“So, grandma, how did it go?”

What go?” she asked.

“Your date! How did it turn out?”

“Oh, there was no date,” she said, as matter-of-factly as if she were referring to a canceled appointment with a hairdresser.

“What happened?” I asked.

“He died,” she said.

“He died?”

“His son called me three days ago to tell me he passed away. He was 95, after all.”

“I’m so sorry,” I said.

“Don’t be,” she said. “I’m relieved.”

Share

  •  

Trump's Gush of Slush | The Coffee Klatch for Saturday, May 23, 2026. A bit late this morning!

Friends,

Sorry for being a bit late this morning.

Today Michael and I take a deep dive into Trump’s corruption — beginning with CBS’s merger deal with Skydance that was conditioned, in part, on its canceling Stephen Colbert’s show (which is why I’m wearing a T-shirt I got when I appeared on Colbert’s “The Late Show”).

We then examine whether Jeff Bezos — the fourth-richest person in the world — is a knave or a fool for going on network television claiming that the richest 1 percent of Americans pay 40 percent of all taxes (a Trump-like lie).

And, as long as we’re talking about rogues and corruption, we look at Trump’s Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s $1.8 billion Trump slush fund and immunity from all future IRS audits — and its political fallout.

All that and more on today’s Coffee Klatch. So pull up a chair, grab a cuppa, and join in the discussion.

(Heather will be back next Saturday.)

Share

💾

  •  

You Won't Believe Who CBS Is Replacing Colbert With

TOPSHOT-US-POLITICS-MEDIA-COLBERT-TRUMPTOPSHOT - People hold signs supporting Stephen Colbert outside the Ed Sullivan Theater ahead of the taping of the final episode of the "The Late Show" after 32 years on air, in New York, on May 21, 2026. "The Late Show" frontman Stephen Colbert will host the final edition of the 33-year-old US cultural institution on May 21, after it was cancelled by CBS as the network courted President Donald Trump. The show, which Colbert has hosted since 2015, was axed after he mocked the broadcaster for a $16 million settlement with Trump for allegedly "maliciously" editing an interview with his Democratic election rival Kamala Harris. (Photo by CHARLY TRIBALLEAU / AFP via Getty Images)
]

Friends,

I watched Stephen Colbert’s last “The Late Show” episode last night with a mixture of laughter, sadness, and anger — anger at the cowardly and craven executives of CBS and its new corporate owner, Skydance. And at Skydance’s robber-baron Trump suck-ups Larry and David Ellison.

CBS says they canceled Colbert for financial reasons, which is utter bullshit (they made gobs of money from selling the show to affiliates). They canceled because they wanted to sell the network to Skydance and worried that Trump would block the deal unless they got rid of Colbert, who Trump despised because Colbert has been a courageous Trump critic.

Colbert hosted more than 1,800 episodes of “The Late Show” after taking over the mantle from David Letterman. This week Letterman called CBS’s decision to cancel Colbert a “huge mistake.”

To add insult to this corrupt injury, CBS is putting Byron Allen into Colbert’s 11:35 p.m. time slot.

Never heard of Byron Allen? Well, besides being a self-described comic, Allen is also a billionaire media mogul who owns The Weather Channel, BuzzFeed, and HuffPost.

Allen promises that his late-night humor on CBS won’t be “political” — that is, he won’t skewer Trump. He won’t even mention Trump. Allen claims that “people are totally good with not doing political humor. They just want to watch. For me, I don’t care who you vote for and I’m not trying to push an agenda. You’re going to vote for who you want to vote for. Just show up if you want to laugh.” For Allen, it’s just about making money: “This is business show, not show business. You have got to make the numbers work.”

CBS executives claim the deal will provide “immediate profitability” for the network.*

Well, duh. That’s because CBS won’t be paying Allen. Allen will ignominiously be paying CBS for Colbert’s time slot; CBS will “lease” Colbert’s time slot to Allen, and Allen will pocket whatever advertising revenue the show brings in.

Going from Colbert’s trenchant satire of America’s first dictator to billionaire media mogul Byron Allen’s jejune rental agreement is a stunning comedown. It’s also a perfect manifestation of an era in our nation’s history when greed and power have merged into a huge force that’s collaborating with authoritarianism. (For further evidence, look at Jeff Bezos’s insistence that his Washington Post not editorialize against Trump.)

Allen’s rental agreement is also an example of how the media is rapidly shifting from a public-centered model of broadcasting to a privatized, anyone-rich-enough model.

That public-centered model was hardly ideal. I’m old enough to remember when, in 1961, then FCC commissioner Newt Minow castigated TV broadcasters for prioritizing profits over public service. Minow said that if the media executives watched an entire broadcast day without distractions, they’d observe a “vast wasteland” filled with game shows, mindless violence, formulaic westerns, and endless commercials.

Newt Minow would be turning in his grave if he saw his vast wasteland turn into an arm of neofascist capitalism.

I strongly suggest you boycott Byron Allen’s show. Hell, boycott CBS.

Share

Leave a comment

  •  

Corruptonomics

Friends,

Here’s a memo to Democrats as they begin campaigning in earnest for control of the House and Senate in the midterm elections. (Please send to any candidates you care about.)

***

TO: Democratic candidates in the 2026 midterm elections

RE: Connect Trump’s lousy economy to his corrupt regime.

The purpose of this memo is to help you shape your midterm message around the crisis of affordability and Trump Republican corruption. I urge you to present these two issues as aspects of the same underlying problem: The economy is lousy for most Americans because Trump Republicans are enabling super-rich oligarchs to siphon off most of its gains while exerting increasing control over it. Their — and Trump’s — self-dealing is undermining trust and confidence in the U.S. economic system.

1. Republicans in the House and Senate have put oligarchs in charge of America.

House and Senate Republicans have allowed Trump’s war and his tariffs to drive up prices and Trump’s corruption to undermine faith in the economy. They’ve allowed Trump to gild his White House in gold leaf, plan a giant Arc de Trump, throw lavish parties, and build a Billionaire’s Ballroom — at a time when most Americans can’t afford gas or groceries.

They raided Medicaid to pay for Trump’s giant tax cut, whose benefits are going mostly to the rich. Legislative efforts advanced by House Republicans and signed into law have targeted up to $2 trillion in federal health care cuts, forcing millions of Americans off Medicaid rolls to pay for these tax reductions.

They refused to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies. This is causing average premiums to more than double and has already pushed 1.2 million people off coverage because they can’t afford it. Coverage losses are mounting as many who initially selected a plan or who were automatically reenrolled have to drop coverage.

Big Tech oligarchs — centi-billionaires Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, Ellison, and other robber barons — paid for Trump’s 2024 election, his inauguration, and his ballroom and are major donors to Senate and House Republicans. They’ve shown up at Trump’s inauguration, White House dinners, and official visits to China.

In return, these oligarchs have been allowed to monopolize and drive up the prices we pay and silence Trump critics. Bezos’s Amazon, for example, won’t allow any seller on the site to post lower prices on any other site, and Bezos won’t allow his Washington Post editorial page to criticize Trump. Larry and David Ellison have bought CBS and sanitized “60 Minutes” of Trump criticism and effectively canceled Stephen Colbert. After buying X (formerly Twitter), Musk turned it into a pro-Trump voice box.

The AI oligarchs have bribed Trump and congressional Republicans to allow unfettered and unregulated growth of AI and its data centers, threatening millions of jobs and posing potential dangers to human life itself.

The crypto oligarchs have bribed Trump and congressional Republicans to allow them to create the world’s largest Ponzi scheme — which is enriching Trump and his family while providing a means for criminals to hide insider trades, child trafficking, and drug deals.

The Big Oil and aerospace oligarchs have bribed congressional Republicans to allow Trump to go to war in Iran, resulting in massive profits for Big Oil — while the rest of us pay $1.50 more per gallon of gas — and giant profits for giant military contractors.

This war spending has also contributed to higher inflation, which the rest of us pay for in higher mortgage rates and higher rates on car loans and education loans. The average 30-year fixed mortgage rate has surged to over 6.6 percent, reaching its highest level in nearly nine months, driven by rising Treasury yields, higher oil prices, and broader economic inflation concerns stemming from the war in Iran. The major beneficiaries of these higher rates — who pocket the higher payments we have to make — are the biggest banks and super-rich who make the loans.

Oligarchs have also bribed Trump and congressional Republicans to (1) get no-bid contracts, (2) deregulate Wall Street, (3) roll back environmental safeguards and worker safety, and (4) get massive subsidies for their corporations — all of which have made them even richer while making life for the rest of us more dangerous and more costly.

2. Republicans have created crony capitalism on steroids.

The system is an extreme form of crony capitalism. Congressional Republicans have rubber-stamped Trump’s corruption or pretended not to notice it, while average Americans get shafted and billionaires do better than ever. Corporate profits have never been higher. But wages aren’t keeping up with prices, which means most people are getting poorer, and the confidence of average consumers has never been lower.

Trump and his family’s corruption are leading the pack, setting an example for the rest of the American oligarchy.

Congressional Republicans have been silent in the face of bribes paid to Trump and his family. They didn’t raise a word about Jeff Bezos’s outright bribe to Melania Trump of $40 million for her film rights and $35 million to promote it, for a total of $75 million, when the best-case scenario is that Bezos’s Amazon earns $10 million on it.

But that’s just one example of the bribes coming Trump’s way. Qatar gifted Trump a Boeing 747 luxury jet valued at $400 million. Days before Trump’s second inauguration, the United Arab Emirates’ “Spy Sheikh” secretly bought 49 percent of the Trump family’s crypto firm. Months later, the administration handed over America’s most sensitive AI chip technology to the United Arab Emirates despite national security concerns. The Trump cryptocurrency business has rolled out a stablecoin called (USD1) pegged to the U.S. dollar. The stablecoin was utilized in a subsequent $2 billion investment into the cryptocurrency exchange Binance by MGX, an Abu Dhabi government fund. And so on.

Congressional Republicans have been silent as Trump has executed thousands of stock trades, many in individual stocks affected by his regime’s policies. And congressional Republicans won’t pass legislation to stop the regime from profiting off its policies. They’ve been silent as Trump praises and boosts corporations (as he did Apple on March 11) on the same day he invests in them and won’t hold Trump or the regime to any ethical standards.

Congressional Republicans have been silent in the face of the Trump family’s looting of America. In his first year of his second term of office, Trump increased his net worth by almost $4 billion to $7.8 billion by the end of 2025, according to TIME. Forbes estimated that in 2025, Eric Trump became 10 times richer, ending up worth some $400 million, and Donald Trump Jr. became six times richer, ending up worth some $300 million. Even Barron Trump, while still in college, reportedly ended up worth some $150 million in 2025.

Congressional Republicans have also been silent about Trump’s “agreement” with the Justice Department to create a $1.8 billion slush fund and immunity to all future IRS audits of Trump and his family. The agreement was based on Trump’s withdrawal of his absurd $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS for damages (after a contractor leaked Trump’s tax information during his first term), when the federal judge to which the case was assigned indicated she’d throw it out because Trump can’t be in charge of both sides of the lawsuit.

So Trump’s own Justice Department then offered him — not as an official legal “settlement” but as a kind of consolation prize — a $1.8 billion slush fund, enabling him to compensate anyone he feels has been unfairly convicted. Likely beneficiaries would include fat-cat contributors to the Republican Party, as well as those who attacked the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. The Justice Department has also offered Trump and his family immunity from any IRS audit ever again — allowing him and his family to permanently bury any and all illegal bribes they’ve received.

This is outright robbery from the citizens of the United States. Billions of dollars that Trump and his family have pocketed — from foreign governments, billionaires, and corporate supplicants — are now untraceable, unaccounted for, and hidden for good.

Republican members of Congress are reportedly unhappy with this agreement, presumably because their constituents are furious about it. But they won’t take any action or even say anything about it for fear of angering Trump; their silence about it is deafening.

3. The larger Republican scam is to replace our economy with bribes.

The Republicans’ increasingly corrupt political system — rife with crony capitalism, corporate welfare, and payoffs to the powerful — inevitably produces a corrupt economy. That’s because politics determines the rules by which an economy functions — and if those rules are products of corruption, the economy is corrupted.

In such an economy, investors can no longer rely on a system of stable rules and reliable laws. Everything depends on bribes and personal deals made by the biggest Republican loyalists and grifters, oligarchs and plutocrats, billionaire and multi-billionaires, and monopolists.

This inevitably leads to economic sclerosis and decline, as political and economic deal-making become personal transactions. Greed and payoffs replace trust. It’s happened before, after America’s first Gilded Age (see the Great Crash of 1929, leading to the Great Depression).

4. A lesson: Péter Magyar’s victory over Viktor Orbán relied on connecting the economic problems of ordinary Hungarians with Orban’s corruption.

Finally, recall that the key to Péter Magyar’s remarkable defeat of Viktor Orbán’s entrenched regime was Magyar’s ability to connect the economic problems faced by ordinary Hungarians to Orbán’s corruption.

Magyar showed how Hungary’s soaring cost of living and crumbling public services were linked to the illicit enrichment of Hungary’s ruling elite. He exposed how state resources were siphoned into a “mafia state” and showed that Hungary’s crumbling healthcare system, dilapidated schools, and failing infrastructure were a consequence. The inner circle of Orbán-aligned oligarchs had amassed immense fortunes while ordinary Hungarians suffered from high inflation, stagnant growth, and an erosion of their purchasing power.

Magyar’s anti-corruption message resonated because he presented elite graft not merely as a moral or governance issue, but as the root cause of Hungary’s cost-of-living crisis and declining standards of living.

Democrats should do the same. The parallels between what happened under Orbán and what’s happened under Trump and the Republicans are almost exact.

5. The Republican Party is responsible for the corruption. Democrats must respond with a plan to revive the economy and end the corruption.

The Democrats’ record on corruption is not perfect, to be sure, but Republicans are now in charge of the entire government — and we have never before witnessed corruption on this scale. The twin issues of an economy that’s unaffordable for most Americans and a system overwhelmed with corruption are closely linked, and Trump and his Republican Congress are largely responsible.

Most Americans are beginning to catch on, but Democrats need to hammer this home — and propose ways to lower prices while fighting the corruption.

Democrats should propose: (1) more vigorous anti-monopoly enforcement, including busting up giant corporations, (2) prohibiting insider trading by all elected officials and their families, (3) getting big money out of politics (see here), (4) raising taxes on the super-wealthy, including a wealth tax, and (5) using the proceeds to improve the lives of average working Americans through Medicare for all, universal childcare, paid leave, and free public higher education.

Share

  •  

Pluralistic: Shopping isn't politics (21 May 2026)


Today's links

  • Shopping isn't politics: The personal isn't political.
  • Hey look at this: Delights to delectate.
  • Object permanence: Neither arphid nor RFID; Gor novel sex slave cult; Violent economist sex criminals; Vade et caca in pilleum et ipse traheatur super aures tuo; "We Stand on Guard"; Healthy FLOSS; Lawsuits 2.0; CDC v zombie apocalypse; Gandhi's speeches; Apple v games about Palestine; Second Life chuds v Bernie; UK was never a "white" country; Dead, broke; Who Broke the Internet? (III)
  • Upcoming appearances: Hay-on-Wye, London, Kansas City, LA, Menlo Park, Toronto, NYC, Edinburgh.
  • Recent appearances: Where I've been.
  • Latest books: You keep readin' em, I'll keep writin' 'em.
  • Upcoming books: Like I said, I'll keep writin' 'em.
  • Colophon: All the rest.



A grocery store egg refrigerator, lined with stacks of egg cartons. The middle stack has been replaced with the capitol dome.

Shopping isn't politics (permalink)

I've written before about the futility of "voting with your wallet." Billionaires love it when you try to vote with your wallet, because while billionaires only represent 0.00004% of the population, their wallets are 100,000 times larger than average, which means that when we vote with wallets, a billionaire's vote counts 100,000 times more than yours:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/09/13/consumption-choices/

The idea of voting with your wallet is fundamentally antiprogressive, and not only because wallet-voting favors the wealthy. The ideological basis for voting with your wallet is the belief that politics are slow and unresponsive, while markets dynamically optimize for human wellbeing. By voting with your wallet, you are supposedly injecting information about your preferences and dispreferences into a vast, distributed computer we call "the market," which uses "demand signals" to decide how we live our lives.

This belief is incompatible with the idea of politics – that is, the idea that our lives can be shaped by representative democracy, deliberation, and/or solidarity. It's a nihilistic view that insists that the only nice things we can have are the things that "the market" chooses for us. If "the market" doesn't decide to swap out fossil fuels for cleantech, then that's that – any attempt to draw down our carbon emissions through regulation will only "distort the market." If you're roasting in a drought, drowning in a flood, or being incinerated by a wildfire, your only move is to go shopping and hope that by buying a Tesla, you will emit a "demand signal" that "tips the market equilibrium" to "not killing you and everyone you love."

Shopping isn't politics. Politics are politics, and shopping is shopping.

This isn't to say shopping can't improve your life! I am a materialist, and having nice things is nice. If there's a lovely independent coffee shop in your neighborhood where the baristas are treated well and the coffee is delicious and the vibes are impeccable, then by all means, get your coffee there. If you love the staff and selections at your neighborhood indie bookstore, then you should buy your books there. If you love the discourse on Mastodon or Bluesky and find yourself feeling sick and angry when you use Twitter or Facebook, then ditch the legacy social media and take up residence in the Fediverse and/or Atmosphere.

But don't kid yourself that this is politics. No matter how indie your coffee, books and social media, your consumption choices will not have a material impact on Starbucks, Amazon or Twitter. Going vegan won't make the meat industry treat animals better. Taking the bus won't induce improvements to your town's public transit network.

Having nice things is nice, and the more nice things you have – good food, good health, good books, good coffee, good social media and good transit – the more space and energy you'll have to devote to politics.

But what about boycotts? Surely the Montgomery bus boycott, the anti-Apartheid boycott, the California grape boycott and the BDS movement were politics, right?

They sure were. But they weren't shopping. The Montgomery bus boycott lasted 382 days, during which time organizers worked with bus riders, cab drivers, the UAW and community groups to provide material and legal support and alternatives like car pools, all while communicating about their specific demands. After 382 days, the courts ruled in their favor, their demands were met, and Montgomery's buses desegregated:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montgomery_bus_boycott

That wasn't "shopping." The bus boycott didn't consist of a bunch of individual choices to walk to work, repeatedly made by a city full of Black people and their allies. The shopping part was the least important part of the whole matter, and the meaningful part of the shopping was never individual. If the boycott was nothing more than shopping, it would have broken as soon as individual people found themselves unable to convince their bosses to tolerate their late, sweaty arrival at work, day after day. The boycott worked because it was politics.

And because the boycott was politics, it left behind a movement: the boycott brought people into solidarity with each other, and when they comprehensively defeated their political adversary – National City Lines – they went on to form the backbone of the civil rights movement, going from strength to strength.

Of course, shopping is part of a boycott. It's the individual part that each participant in the boycott undertakes. But without the collective, organized part, shopping is no way to effect change.

Is voting politics? Well, sure, but voting is to politics as shopping is to boycotts. For several decades now, most voters have been asked to chose the lesser of two evils (and now they're asked to choose the significantly lesser of two evils). Voting can change things, when there's something good to vote for, or something very bad to vote against, and when lots of people show up at the polls.

But to make voting effective, you have to do politics. You have to get involved in the primary races that select the candidate. You have to go to candidates' meetings and ask tough questions. You have to ring doorbells for your chosen candidate, volunteer to take your neighbors to the polls and volunteer to defend the polls from chuds and ICE fascists. The part of voting that takes place in the booth is the least important part of politics.

It's obvious why we might prefer to substitute voting or shopping for politics: they're activities you do alone. You don't have to find anyone else to do them with you. You don't have to convince anyone else to do them with you. You don't have to argue about them or justify them. They are zipless fucks, a source of satisfaction without connection, compromise or complication.

Of course, that's also why voting and shopping make a poor substitute for politics. All the retail therapy in the world can't lift your spirits the way that solidarity and community will. Doing politics creates solidaristic ties with the people around you, who might help you if you lose your job and can't buy groceries, or break your leg and can't get to the grocery store, or if ICE fascists try to kidnap you while you're out shopping.

Solidarity gets you through times of no money way better than money gets you through times of no solidarity – just ask the psycho billionaires who wanted Doug Rushkoff to invent a system of bomb-collars that would keep their post-apocalyptic mercenaries from whacking them and stealing their bunkers:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/09/13/collapse-porn/#collapse-porn

Last weekend, I walked through a crowd of tens of thousands of coked-up fascists in central London on my way to meet up with 250,000 comrades marching for an end to genocide in Palestine and a new British social compact based on mutual aid, pluralism, and care. Walking through those flag-draped chuds was incredibly demoralizing:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2026/05/cokeheads-and-christians-a-day-at-tommy-robinsons-rally

But when I got off the tube at South Kensington and found there were so many of us we were backed up all the way from the every street entrance to the bottom of the escalators, my morale surged. Hours later, when we all reached Pall Mall together, I was ready to take on the world. That's what politics does for you: it makes you feel like you belong to a polity and that together, you can really change the world.

Politics runs on solidarity, but shopping destroys it. Individual consumption choices don't change the world, but if you've been convinced that the only way to change the world is by voting with your wallet then when the world stays terrible, you can only conclude that your friends and neighbors have ruined by things by voting (shopping) wrong.

In politics, we build bonds of mutual regard and understanding that we use to navigate our differences. But when you vote with your wallet, all that's left is the endless policing of your allies' consumption choices, endless scolding for their failure to leave Twitter, or give up meat, or eschew chatbots. Shopping for change ends up replacing politics with petty snooping and endless sniping and attempts to bully or shame people into consuming different things.

If "the personal is political," then every political disappointment in your life is down to your friends' personal defects. If you let yourself get tricked into organizing your life around "living your politics" – that is, giving up on nice things in the hope that this will make politics change, and then getting mad at people who consume different things from you – then you will end up sucked into the stupidest fights imaginable with the people you need to get along with in order to do politics.

Once again, this isn't to say that you shouldn't choose to have nice things. Buy stuff you like, shop at places you like. And when circumstances allow all of us to start making consumption choices in unison – as when Comrades Trump and Putin stage an orgy of demand-destruction for fossil fuels, catapulting the world into the Gretacene – then by all means, take the win. That is one of the rare instances in which we can do political change with consumption!

https://pluralistic.net/2026/05/04/hope-in-the-dark/#hormuzed-into-the-gretacene

And there definitely are times where a single individual can intervene in the system in a powerful way that really fucks up the worst actors in our society:

https://www.theverge.com/tech/931532/bambu-agpl-pawel-jarczak-open-source-threat-dmca-github

These usually involve using technology to "move fast and break things," which is fine, actually! It's fine to move fast and break things belonging to Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg or some other monster. Indeed, it's practically a moral imperative:

https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/30/zucksauce/#gandersauce

But even in those highly leveraged, highly individualized opportunities to make a dent in the universe, you'll make a bigger dent, and have more fun, if you do it as politics, with a big group of people, in bonds of solidarity.


Hey look at this (permalink)



A shelf of leatherbound history books with a gilt-stamped series title, 'The World's Famous Events.'

Object permanence (permalink)

#25yrsago Software-based antennas https://web.archive.org/web/20010518225333/http://www.etenna.com/

#25yrsago Aimster loses trademark to AOL https://web.archive.org/web/20010523001415/http://msnbc.com/news/575492.asp?cp1=1

#25yrsago House to ban online anonymity https://web.archive.org/web/20010526220254/https://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,43938,00.html

#20yrsago Lawsuits of Web 2.0 https://web.archive.org/web/20060528001734/http://www.fuckedsuit.com/

#20yrsago Is one month’s piracy worth more than France’s GDP? https://decordove.com/one-month-of-torrents-is-worth-more-than-the-gdp-of-france-riaa-rant.php

#20yrsago Audio from Bruce Sterling’s “Neither Arphid nor RFID” rant https://web.archive.org/web/20060614140414/https://dev1.manme.org.uk/~luke/Sterling_SPACE_160506.mp3

#20yrsago Cops raid “sex slave cult” based on science fiction novels http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4996410.stm

#15yrsago Legal rebuttal: “vade et caca in pilleum et ipse traheatur super aures tuo” https://newyorkpersonalinjuryattorneyblog.com/2011/05/joseph-rakofsky-i-have-an-answer-for-you.html

#15yrsago List of economists involved in violent sex crimes, for Ben Stein https://blog.xkcd.com/2011/05/18/answering-ben-steins-question/

#15yrsago MAFIAA wants warrantless searches of CD and DVD factories https://web.archive.org/web/20110520232527/https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/05/riaa-warrantless-seizures/

#15yrsago CDC explains how to prepare for a zombie apocalypse https://web.archive.org/web/20110519201602/http://emergency.cdc.gov/socialmedia/zombies_blog.asp

#10yrsago 129 of Gandhi’s speeches on India and self-rule https://archive.org/details/HindSwaraj?and[]=subject%3A"Post+Prayer+Speech"

#10yrsago A backer message as Earth leaves beta and goes 1.0 https://web.archive.org/web/20160521054706/http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v533/n7603/full/533432a.html

#10yrsago EFF files Chelsea Manning appeal on hacking conviction https://www.eff.org/press/releases/eff-asks-court-reverse-chelsea-mannings-conviction-violating-federal-anti-hacking-law

#10yrsago Apple rejects game about Palestine because political messages disqualify games from consideration https://web.archive.org/web/20160520111154/https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/05/apple-says-game-about-palestinian-child-isnt-a-game/

#10yrsago Nerdcore rapper Sammus’s amazing OSCON keynote https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELczJ07XPnw

#10yrsago Everything is a Remix on “The Force Awakens” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKvsc6a03Es

#10yrsago Angry dudes are downranking woman-oriented TV shows on review sites https://web.archive.org/web/20160519014153/https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/men-are-sabotaging-the-online-reviews-of-tv-shows-aimed-at-women/

#10yrsago Second Life’s Trump army lays siege to Bernie Sanders’s virtual HQ with swastika cannons https://web.archive.org/web/20160428093534/https://motherboard.vice.com/read/second-life-donald-trump-bernie-sanders

#10yrsago Xenophobic UK politician ranting about “political correctness” gets a public spanking from an historian https://web.archive.org/web/20160520224731/http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/ukip-councillor-attempts-to-blast-bbc-for-historical-inaccuracy-gets-destroyed-by-actual-historian–ZyZAasU2fb

#10yrsago A look at digital habits of 13 year olds shows desire for privacy, face-to-face time https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/parenting4digitalfuture/2016/04/18/the-class-living-and-learning-in-the-digital-age/

#10yrsago Big Vitamin bankrolls naturopaths’ attempts to go legit and get public money https://web.archive.org/web/20160520123659/https://www.statnews.com/2016/05/17/naturopaths-go-mainstream/

#10yrsago We Stand on Guard: in 100 years, America seizes Canada for its water https://memex.craphound.com/2016/05/18/we-stand-on-guard-in-100-years-america-seizes-canada-for-its-water/

#5yrsago Apple's complicity in Chinese state oppressionhttps://pluralistic.net/2021/05/18/unhealthy-balance-sheet/#think-manorialism

#5yrsago Community Health Services sued its way through the pandemic https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/18/unhealthy-balance-sheet/#health-usury

#5yrsago What Would Open Source Look Like If It Were Healthy https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/18/unhealthy-balance-sheet/#user-personas

#5yrsago Dead, broke https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/19/zombie-debt/#damnation

#1yrago Who Broke the Internet? Part III https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/19/khan-thought/#they-were-warned


Upcoming appearances (permalink)

A photo of me onstage, giving a speech, pounding the podium.



A screenshot of me at my desk, doing a livecast.

Recent appearances (permalink)



A grid of my books with Will Stahle covers..

Latest books (permalink)



A cardboard book box with the Macmillan logo.

Upcoming books (permalink)

  • "The Reverse-Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book about being a better AI critic, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, June 2026 (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374621568/thereversecentaursguidetolifeafterai/)
  • "Enshittification, Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About It" (the graphic novel), Firstsecond, 2026

  • "The Post-American Internet," a geopolitical sequel of sorts to Enshittification, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2027

  • "Unauthorized Bread": a middle-grades graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, April 20, 2027

  • "The Memex Method," Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2027



Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing: "The Post-American Internet," a sequel to "Enshittification," about the better world the rest of us get to have now that Trump has torched America. Third draft completed. Submitted to editor.

  • "The Reverse Centaur's Guide to AI," a short book for Farrar, Straus and Giroux about being an effective AI critic. LEGAL REVIEW AND COPYEDIT COMPLETE.
  • "The Post-American Internet," a short book about internet policy in the age of Trumpism. PLANNING.

  • A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING


This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.


How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Bluesky (no ads, possible tracking and data-collection):

https://bsky.app/profile/doctorow.pluralistic.net

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

READ CAREFULLY: By reading this, you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies ("BOGUS AGREEMENTS") that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.

ISSN: 3066-764X

  •  

PTSD Nation?

Friends,

I was born just after the end of World War II. The first half of the 20th century marked a particularly difficult, violent era.

But the 21st century so far has been, well, one trauma after another.

It started with 9/11, followed by the grim wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Then the Wall Street crisis of 2008 and subsequent Great Recession. The COVID pandemic of 2020 and its own economic crisis. The attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Then, beginning in 2024, Trump’s full-scale attack on democratic institutions, followed by his war on Iran and soaring prices. Soon to come: Artificial Intelligence invading all aspects of our lives.

At the same time, we’ve been experiencing widening inequalities of income, wealth, and opportunity, along with a growing climate crisis.

When a nation’s people experience these sorts of stresses, they begin expecting stress. They gird themselves for the next crisis. They shut down their capacity to be shocked or appalled.

Trump’s lies swirl around us in the daily flow of hyper-digital noise. His attacks on democracy and his abject cruelty have by now become expected features of politics. The corruption, too, has come to be normalized, along with the public cynicism that accompanies it.

According to a survey from the American Psychological Association, 76 percent of Americans are concerned about the future of the nation. This is now the leading cause of stress, above the economy or work or money. Anxiety has moved from being a psychological disorder to becoming part of a seemingly natural order. We no longer see the degree of stress we’re under as exceptional because we’re enveloped in it.

Trump is not the only cause of stress. In fact, anxieties that have grown over the last four decades may explain why so many Americans voted for him in the first place — a so-called “strongman” who assured them he would take care of their troubles (he obviously didn’t; he added to the troubles).

Job tenures have become shorter and incomes more volatile. That’s because economic disruption has moved from the periphery of our economy to its center.

Marriages are postponed and births are falling because the future is too uncertain to make lifelong commitments.

Counselors, therapists, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies now focus on problems that are consequences of chronic anxiety — heart ailments, chronic headaches, ulcers and bowel issues — rather than traditional ailments.

We are becoming a PTSD nation. We are no longer shocked by the shocking circumstances we find ourselves in, but we are frightened by them all the same. We are seemingly numb to painful realities all around us that nonetheless keep us up at night.

I can’t help wonder: Have we silently relinquished a major reason we joined together in the first place, more than two centuries ago — to ensure domestic tranquility?

Have we unwittingly entered a Faustian bargain? We are paying an exorbitant price for aspects of our system we’ve been told are indubitably good or over which we have no control: the constant stream of new “stuff.” So-called “economic efficiencies,” economic growth, and technological disruption. Digital access 24 hours a day, wherever you are. Social media. An exciting (and exhausting) “what-has-he-done-now?” politics that substitutes for entertainment.

Maybe the tradeoff isn’t worth it.

In addition to ridding ourselves of Trump, we’ll also need to turn down the noise. Seek more peace, quiet, and stability in our lives.

Do we really need AI? Do we have to work this hard? Is all this stuff really necessary? Can’t this rich nation afford to give everyone at least a universal basic income? Can’t we just elect quiet, humble, capable leaders?

(Or am I turning into a cranky old man?)

Share

  •  
❌