Joe, thanks so much for writing this. There’s a clarity and composure in your work that cuts through the noise, and this piece is no exception.
Your section on how both parties have been structurally compromised by Big Tech patronage really stood out. The detail on the revolving door between Silicon Valley and government was especially sharp, Jay Carney and David Plouffe as case studies really illustrate how power preserves itself across supposedly opposing camps. This is an interesting takeaway writing from London, as here traditional "professional services firms" still dominate the privileges bestowed to those who maneuver between the private and public sector.
Your focus on macro-political patronage overlaps in really interesting ways with a piece I recently wrote, which zooms in on how this same techno-feudalism seeps into white-collar workplaces: not just through surveillance, but through algorithmic management, performative labour, and the quiet erasure of autonomy. Where your essay shows the boardroom strategy, mine explores what that feels like on the ground floor, how the modern office becomes a kind of smiley digital factory.
Together, I think both essays sketch a fuller picture, one from the view of power and political systems, and the other from inside the performance of “professionalism” under techno-feudal norms.
Would appreciate your thoughts on how we push the conversation beyond diagnosis. What forms of resistance (personal, structural, digital) feel both urgent and realistic to you?
Wow, your comment has a lot of depth. Thank you for the compliment!
I read your article--writing style is solid! Your take sounds correct: macro-level, boardroom style commentary on my end; frontline office impacts related to the acceleration of labor productivity management on your end. I agree the picture isn't complete without both views. AI has the potential to be like throwing gasoline on the fire. The displacement of white-collar workers who perform productivity management is another dimension that feels like it's coming. Surveillance capitalism has arrived.
To your question about moving beyond diagnosis... I don't think in terms of resistance. I think in terms of gathering, educating, and unifying voices around concrete structural changes that move society to better operating principles. The path to get there feels "old school" to me. You begin with things that don't scale, but must offer the correct product-market fit for cultural and political change. When the concept is ready, it must scale for growth to move beyond existing paradigms. Everything looks urgent, but most efforts aren't realistic enough to bear long-term fruit. I have convened a working group to test one pathway that leads to advocating for a better operating system. You are welcome to follow the conversation from a distance (London) and participate as tools allow. Thanks for reading and connecting today!
It’s this kind of deep engagement that’s made me really grow to appreciate what Substack makes possible. It’s not just a place to read or browse, but somewhere to actually hold conversation, sharpen ideas, and, dare I say it, feel a bit more human in the process.
When I first started writing, I had only a loose sense of what techno-feudalism really was or how it functioned in practice. But it’s become this lens I now can’t unsee, one that keeps revealing itself in places I’d previously written off as ordinary. And works like yours provide the tools to have this understanding.
I completely agree with your view on “resistance”, that the real work is in gathering and convening, in building communities that can name what’s happening and then offer more humane alternatives. It feels slow, yes, but also like the only credible way forward. So I really respect that you’re already pulling people into conversation to do that work. The other side (the pro-feudalists, if we can call them that) are doing the same, and often quite successfully!!!!!!
I came across "The American Tribune" recently, and honestly, it made my blood boil. I’m writing from the UK, and even from this distance it was shocking how brazenly these ideas are being circulated: rebranding feudalism with a smile and a stars-and-stripes aesthetic. I had to write a response, just to get the frustration out of my system. It's called "Downton Abbey is Not a Governance Model", and it looks at the way historical nostalgia gets twisted to justify control. Might be of interest:
Anyway, enough of my ranting. Thank you again (genuinely) for creating space for these conversations and sharing your work so generously. I’ll keep following along and am happy to follow the conversations you are convening from a distance!
"Where do you stand on corporate political patronage?" - I would think my positions are reasonably well known on this issue. Business and Government should be separate. When the founders pushed for "separation of church and state", they missed an opportunity to also push for "separation of business and state".
Smaller government is very desirable. Less government means less government assistance to large corporations. Less government assistance leads to less motivation to meddle in politics.
Regardless of our utopian desires, the current situation is what we must deal with. How can we deal with it better than to write articles such as these to bring the concerns to the consciousness of the population (voters)? Keep writing!
Good insights. Less government can be a pathway, but if nothing checks corporate size, then markets corrupt themselves with insufficient regulation (rule keepers). Imagine a game with no refs… fouls go off the charts!
Separation of business and state is tricky, but we need to invent the tools to make that manageable.
And yes, doing more than writing is absolutely KEY. I have never been a utopian—always a pragmatist!
There is an organization kickoff later this month. It will take time to build the test-launch of a coherent movement.
Yes, I've always thought one of the primary roles that government should play is to keep businesses "honest". It's a delicate balance though, I detest regulation, but in pondering it, what I detest is regulation that suppresses small businesses, while I desire regulation to counter monopolies and abuses from mega corporations.
Ah, we were so naïve in our youth. We didn't realize dopamine would become an economic power.
Joe, thanks so much for writing this. There’s a clarity and composure in your work that cuts through the noise, and this piece is no exception.
Your section on how both parties have been structurally compromised by Big Tech patronage really stood out. The detail on the revolving door between Silicon Valley and government was especially sharp, Jay Carney and David Plouffe as case studies really illustrate how power preserves itself across supposedly opposing camps. This is an interesting takeaway writing from London, as here traditional "professional services firms" still dominate the privileges bestowed to those who maneuver between the private and public sector.
Your focus on macro-political patronage overlaps in really interesting ways with a piece I recently wrote, which zooms in on how this same techno-feudalism seeps into white-collar workplaces: not just through surveillance, but through algorithmic management, performative labour, and the quiet erasure of autonomy. Where your essay shows the boardroom strategy, mine explores what that feels like on the ground floor, how the modern office becomes a kind of smiley digital factory.
Together, I think both essays sketch a fuller picture, one from the view of power and political systems, and the other from inside the performance of “professionalism” under techno-feudal norms.
Would appreciate your thoughts on how we push the conversation beyond diagnosis. What forms of resistance (personal, structural, digital) feel both urgent and realistic to you?
If you're interested, here is the piece I wrote: https://noisyghost.substack.com/p/techno-feudalism-at-work-the-factory
Wow, your comment has a lot of depth. Thank you for the compliment!
I read your article--writing style is solid! Your take sounds correct: macro-level, boardroom style commentary on my end; frontline office impacts related to the acceleration of labor productivity management on your end. I agree the picture isn't complete without both views. AI has the potential to be like throwing gasoline on the fire. The displacement of white-collar workers who perform productivity management is another dimension that feels like it's coming. Surveillance capitalism has arrived.
To your question about moving beyond diagnosis... I don't think in terms of resistance. I think in terms of gathering, educating, and unifying voices around concrete structural changes that move society to better operating principles. The path to get there feels "old school" to me. You begin with things that don't scale, but must offer the correct product-market fit for cultural and political change. When the concept is ready, it must scale for growth to move beyond existing paradigms. Everything looks urgent, but most efforts aren't realistic enough to bear long-term fruit. I have convened a working group to test one pathway that leads to advocating for a better operating system. You are welcome to follow the conversation from a distance (London) and participate as tools allow. Thanks for reading and connecting today!
It’s this kind of deep engagement that’s made me really grow to appreciate what Substack makes possible. It’s not just a place to read or browse, but somewhere to actually hold conversation, sharpen ideas, and, dare I say it, feel a bit more human in the process.
When I first started writing, I had only a loose sense of what techno-feudalism really was or how it functioned in practice. But it’s become this lens I now can’t unsee, one that keeps revealing itself in places I’d previously written off as ordinary. And works like yours provide the tools to have this understanding.
I completely agree with your view on “resistance”, that the real work is in gathering and convening, in building communities that can name what’s happening and then offer more humane alternatives. It feels slow, yes, but also like the only credible way forward. So I really respect that you’re already pulling people into conversation to do that work. The other side (the pro-feudalists, if we can call them that) are doing the same, and often quite successfully!!!!!!
I came across "The American Tribune" recently, and honestly, it made my blood boil. I’m writing from the UK, and even from this distance it was shocking how brazenly these ideas are being circulated: rebranding feudalism with a smile and a stars-and-stripes aesthetic. I had to write a response, just to get the frustration out of my system. It's called "Downton Abbey is Not a Governance Model", and it looks at the way historical nostalgia gets twisted to justify control. Might be of interest:
https://noisyghost.substack.com/p/a-note-to-the-man-who-misses-the
Anyway, enough of my ranting. Thank you again (genuinely) for creating space for these conversations and sharing your work so generously. I’ll keep following along and am happy to follow the conversations you are convening from a distance!
"Where do you stand on corporate political patronage?" - I would think my positions are reasonably well known on this issue. Business and Government should be separate. When the founders pushed for "separation of church and state", they missed an opportunity to also push for "separation of business and state".
Smaller government is very desirable. Less government means less government assistance to large corporations. Less government assistance leads to less motivation to meddle in politics.
Regardless of our utopian desires, the current situation is what we must deal with. How can we deal with it better than to write articles such as these to bring the concerns to the consciousness of the population (voters)? Keep writing!
Good insights. Less government can be a pathway, but if nothing checks corporate size, then markets corrupt themselves with insufficient regulation (rule keepers). Imagine a game with no refs… fouls go off the charts!
Separation of business and state is tricky, but we need to invent the tools to make that manageable.
And yes, doing more than writing is absolutely KEY. I have never been a utopian—always a pragmatist!
There is an organization kickoff later this month. It will take time to build the test-launch of a coherent movement.
Yes, I've always thought one of the primary roles that government should play is to keep businesses "honest". It's a delicate balance though, I detest regulation, but in pondering it, what I detest is regulation that suppresses small businesses, while I desire regulation to counter monopolies and abuses from mega corporations.
Bingo!