By Corinne Cowan
Saturday, July 25, 2026
The last six months have marked a shift in public
sentiment regarding artificial intelligence. A June study by Pew Research revealed that Americans predict that
AI will have more negative than positive effects on society, and young people —
future voters — are more likely to be AI skeptics. About 63 percent of
respondents believe that AI is moving “too quickly.”
For conservatives who have aligned themselves with tech
interests, popular skepticism of AI and other disruptive technology is a
warning sign. Two of the most important interest groups in the modern “New
Right” movement that won Trump the presidency in 2024 are the “tech right” and
the right-wing populists. One group is techno-optimist, and the other is
becoming increasingly tech-skeptical. In the second year of President Trump’s
second term, tensions between these factions began to emerge. Things are shifting.
Vice President JD Vance has a foot in each camp, and as
the (very early) front-runner for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination,
he’s being watched. History tells us that those who embrace new technology are
often the ones who survive, and Vance has emerged as the most pro-tech
Republican leader. But if he wishes to keep himself in the spotlight, the next
few years will be a critical test for his coalition.
At the time of the 2024 election, Vance’s selection as
Trump’s running mate solidified the alliance between tech leaders and
right-wing populists. This compromise was also a testament to Vance’s life
story. Born and raised in working-class Middletown, Ohio, Vance worked his way
up the ladder through the Marines to Yale Law School. Post-grad, he spent about
a decade in the worlds of Silicon Valley and Washington, D.C., immersed in the
political and technological elite of American society. Vance worked at Peter
Thiel’s Mithril Capital for several years before beginning his political
career. He later earned Thiel’s financial support for his 2022 Senate campaign.
Vance is the product of two worlds. If Trump’s goal was to fuse together the
interests of the tech sector and rural, industrial America, Vance was his man.
Trump’s 2024 win was aided by the financial support of
venture capitalists and entrepreneurs like Elon Musk, Marc Andreessen, and
David Sacks. Their influence extended beyond the election, as many now occupy
official or unofficial positions in the Trump administration. Today, the
President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology (PCAST) is home to
tech CEOs galore: Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison, Sergey Brin. Compare this to
Biden’s choices for the PCAST, who were mostly academics.
Many of these tech billionaires haven’t always been
aligned with the right. Under the Obama and first Trump administrations,
Silicon Valley was seen as a liberal haven dominated by a lax, bohemian culture
that balanced out Wall Street’s stiffness. Technological progress was seen as
synonymous with the social progress of the 2010s.
Only under the Biden years did many tech entrepreneurs
begin to stand behind Trump. I’ve heard different versions of the story from
different Silicon Valley insiders: They blame the shift on Biden’s skepticism
of AI, or Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Lina Khan’s antitrust actions, or
online censorship issues. Regardless of the tipping point, Silicon Valley
revealed its true colors as CEO after CEO began to associate with Trump. Elon
Musk was the most prominent supporter, but names in the association ranged from
Bill Ackman to Howard Lutnick.
When I asked the White House about business interests in
the administration, a spokesperson denied any unethical dealings.
“The only special interest guiding the Trump
administration’s decision-making is the best interest of the American people.
President Trump campaigned on cementing America’s innovative dominance in
cutting-edge technologies of the future, and he also campaigned on reshoring
manufacturing, creating jobs, and ending lopsided trade deals that have
unfairly benefitted corporations at the expense of workers. The Trump
administration is committed to delivering on both,” Liz Huston said in a
statement to National Review.
The tech right is much more libertarian than any other
faction of the New Right coalition. It is deeply skeptical of overregulation
and bureaucracy, celebrates technological progress, and encourages economic
growth.
By contrast, the populist wings of the Republican Party
champion the common man. Driven by dissatisfaction with globalism, a nativist
sentiment, and frustration with America’s elites, right-wing populists ascended
in 2016 and were a major cause of Trump’s election. Much to the chagrin of the
neoliberals and the Reagan conservatives, the Trump-era GOP is increasingly
willing to use government intervention to protect conservative interests.
Economic nationalism and tariffs are one thing, but many in the New Right also
want to try central planning in the realm of social issues, to help falling
birth rates rebound and inculcate conservative values.
On a theoretical level, a populist ideology built around
the “common man” and a techno-libertarianism that elevates the worthy will
always contain tension. Silicon Valley is oriented toward merit, disruption,
and the triumph of the powerful and intelligent. Its framework is Nietzschean —
an obsession with the “overman,” the need for superior individuals to rise
above the herd (progressive managerialism), and the creation of new values that
disrupt the status quo.
Meanwhile, populists are concerned with the livelihood of
the average American. If the techno-libertarians are the Übermensch, the
populists are Nietzsche’s “last man,” representative of a society that is
captured by stagnation and comfort and devoid of true passion. Marc Andreessen
makes the reference explicit in his 2025 essay
“The Techno-Optimist Manifesto,” which labels the last man as his “enemy.”
Vance is fully aware of these contradictions. As a member
of both worlds, he has tried to keep their interests aligned. At the 2025
American Dynamism Summit, Vance explicitly rejected what he viewed as a false
dichotomy between business and working-class interests in a speech.
“This idea that tech-forward people and the populists are
somehow inevitably going to come to a loggerheads is wrong,” Vance said.
That speech was one year ago. As long as AI remains a
central point of disruption in American life, ideological tensions will remain.
In 2026, data centers emerged as a top point of
contention. Seven in ten Americans oppose the construction of data centers in
their local area, a May poll from Gallup shows. Democrats’ opposition leads over
Republicans’, but right-wing disapproval still registers at 63 percent. When
New York passed a statewide moratorium on large data centers this month, some on the right lauded the move.
Trump’s rise to power in 2016 hinged on support from
working-class Americans who were frustrated by free trade agreements and the
loss of manufacturing jobs. Proponents of data centers argue that their
construction is a positive step toward the reindustrialization that these
supporters desire.
“If you look at the areas of where data centers are being
built, they’re often in areas of former industrial capacity,” Joshua Levine,
director of Technology and Statecraft at the Foundation for American
Innovation, said in an interview. “These are all constituencies that people
oftentimes point to as being left behind by the China shock.” Levine’s views do not necessarily represent
those of other FAI staff members.
But when you consider the New Right’s affinity for
cultural renewal and communitarianism, the issue becomes more complicated.
Anti-globalists and protectionists will often blame free trade agreements for
hollowing out America. Their argument is essentially that these economic
interests can provide for citizens materially but that conservatives
should be more cautious about the ways in which unfettered free-market
capitalism deprives Americans spiritually. If cultural preservation and
GDP are different metrics of human flourishing, the populist right is inclined
to observe the former, while the tech bros are fixated on the latter.
Regardless of the actual threat that data centers pose to local communities’
livelihoods, there’s a perception that they will disrupt the American way of
life.
Back in the White House, negotiations are ongoing. The
administration’s tech policy is skeptical of regulation, which a July report from the
Office of Science and Tech Policy confirmed. This is an area where Vance’s
background undoubtedly has influence, yet it also displays his pro-worker
vision of America. Part of this is motivated by Vance’s populist influence, and
part by his Catholic faith.
Vance is a recent convert, and here again, this year has
shown Vance to be caught in the middle between factions. Another one of the
coalitions in the New Right are the “post-liberals,” mainly Catholics who want
to de-emphasize freedom and revive traditional social structures. Catholic
academics like Patrick Deneen have helped to shape Vance’s thought.
If anything, the Trump administration’s public feud with
Pope Leo XIV this year is illustrative of the conflict between a nationalist,
America-first movement and a transnational authority. It’s reminiscent of the
administration’s skepticism with other institutions like the United Nations and
NATO. This time, Vance has remained loyal to his boss. It’s unclear what moves
he may make if his coalitions come into conflict again. If the Vatican
continues to draw the Trump administration’s ire, it could spell trouble for
his base.
Divergence between different groups within the MAGA
coalition could make or break the next few years of the conservative movement.
To bridge the gap, Vance and his tech friends have tried to paint themselves as
an elite willing to advance the interests of the working class. Vance’s ally
Chris Buskirk, who founded the right-wing firm 1789 Capital, has aimed reach
the average voter through a method he calls “aristopopulism,” the Washington
Post reported last year.
Popularized by Deneen in 2023, aristopopulism is a
concept in which a virtuous elite guides the interests of the working class.
Accordingly, Buskirk and Vance co-founded the Rockbridge Network in 2019, which
aims to unite the financiers and the base of MAGA. The Rockbridge Network
epitomizes the way in which business interests have been guiding American
policy in the last few years. As Rousseau described the role of the
“legislator” in The Social Contract, Vance and his allies serve to
“enlighten” the interest of the common people with their wisdom.
The idea of an elite network that leads the people toward
a common good is nothing new. Like much of the New Right, the aristopopulists
draw on ancient and modern political thought, from Aristotle to Machiavelli.
Vance’s link between a tech aristocracy and the working-class populists is
reminiscent of the political thought of his mentor Peter Thiel.
Thiel’s essay “The Straussian Moment” was published in
the early 2000s and draws from the work of German-American philosopher Leo Strauss. For Strauss, a political society will always be
hostile to certain truths — the trial of Socrates proved the natural tension
between politics and philosophy. Thus, it’s implied, closed-door operations by
the wise and enlightened are necessary. Thiel cites Strauss’s conviction that
esotericism and espionage must be used to steer society in the correct
direction.
Around the same time Thiel’s essay was published, he
founded Palantir. The data analytics and intelligence company, which is
oriented toward American interests, has become another point of populist
skepticism over surveillance.
For what it’s worth, I think this “aristopopulistic”
approach to politics is probably the correct one. Populism can rally Americans
and turn energy into action, but it rarely results in intelligent policy. The
problem with Buskirk and the rest of the tech guys is that he was open about
his political involvement. The MAGA base is defined by its opposition to just
about every status quo in American politics. Once tech interests become a new
status quo, what’s to stop the base from revolting?
The 2026 midterms will shine a light on public opinion
that’s needed to understand Vance’s coalition. If he wants to remain central to
the conservative movement, he needs to be able to negotiate. Compromise has
been made before — the tech interests received favorable deregulation, and in
return the MAGA base secured restrictions on high-skilled immigration.
Compromise will need to happen again, especially if public opinion on
technology turns even worse.
No comments:
Post a Comment