The Battle to Pass a Billionaire Tax

It wasn’t so long ago that Silicon Valley was, to use its own language, a major node in the Democratic Party’s network. The Valley’s origins were in developing electronic equipment for corporations and the military, but with the dawning of the age of the personal computer, half a century ago, it began to adopt the vernacular of anti-organizational hippie culture. It seemed entirely appropriate that a canonical text of the early internet, “A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace,” was written by a Grateful Dead lyricist, John Perry Barlow. For a time, the PC, the internet, and social-media networks all seemed to be vehicles for personal liberation and grassroots political empowerment. The first two Democratic Presidents during the Valley’s apotheosis, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, presented themselves as technology-friendly futurists, and the Valley supported their campaigns and helped staff their Administrations.

Snapinsta

Things have changed. The Valley has, for many people who live there, gone from a white-collar paradise to a locus of high-stress workaholism and unaffordability. Its formerly liberal-seeming titans put on suits and ties and dutifully lined up on the dais at Donald Trump’s second Inauguration. Elon Musk, the man who introduced Americans to electric vehicles, spent the early months of 2025 as an agent of destruction within the federal government. Earlier this year, he became the first person with a net worth of more than a trillion dollars. In August, Mark Zuckerberg, of Meta, signed off on a settlement with forty-seven states and the federal government totalling as much as seventeen billion dollars, in a case about the harms that his social networks are inflicting on children and teen-agers. Across the country, candidates from both parties are campaigning against the construction of data centers powering the artificial-intelligence boom—which is another source of national anxiety about Big Tech.

The Humanism Driving the Anti-A.I. Movement

In the past year, data centers have emerged as a central issue in both American politics and the gyre of discourse swirling around American politics. On blogs and podcasts, the commentariat has marvelled at the emergence of an elusive bipartisan consensus. And well they should: the most recent polling shows that an astounding seventy-one per cent of the population opposes data-center construction in their areas.

Equally astonishing, if not yet equally remarked upon, is the consensus about A.I. itself. Sixty-nine per cent of Americans are “concerned” about the technology’s role in society, according to a study that used data from NORC at the University of Chicago. A poll conducted by NBC last spring found that A.I. is less popular than such societal darlings as ICE, Donald Trump, and J. D. Vance.

The vibes, less pollable but perhaps no less palpable, are noxious. Students boo speakers who extol A.I. in commencement addresses, and consumers deride celebrities and brands that embrace the technology. For months after the film studio A24 announced a “research partnership” with Google’s DeepMind, aggrieved commenters took to the company’s Instagram to lambaste “AI24” for its treachery. “We don’t have to accept this future,” an anonymous graffitist scribbled across a subway station ad for the dystopian Friend A.I. device, as documented in a photo in the Times.

What to Read if You Loved “East of Eden”

Of the sixteen novels that John Steinbeck published before his death, in 1968, “East of Eden” was his favorite. “I think everything else I have written has been, in a sense, practice for this,” he said of the multigenerational epic, which follows two families in the author’s agrarian home town of Salinas, California. Published in 1952, the book is narrated by a fictionalized version of Steinbeck, who recounts the travails of the wealthy but miserable Trasks and the hardscrabble but lively Hamiltons, from the late nineteenth century to the First World War.

“East of Eden” is back on the cultural radar because of a buzzy new adaptation, on Netflix, that centers on Cathy Ames (played by Florence Pugh), an iron-willed woman who marries the hapless Adam Trask, gives birth to twins, and abandons them all as soon as she’s physically able, to join—and eventually run—a brothel. (When Adam asks her what he’s to do with two infants, she tells him to throw them down a well.) Suffice it to say, Cathy is the main reason to tune in.

I hope it’s not too blasphemous to declare that I preferred the miniseries to the book, despite finding the adaptation rather uneven. The show’s creator, Zoe Kazan, makes Cathy sympathetic, her villainy a product of the gendered violence of her era—something Steinbeck didn’t bother to do, as he considered her a born sociopath. I also loved Kazan’s elaboration on the character of Lee, Adam’s cerebral servant, who ends up raising Adam’s children while grappling with his inability to truly belong anywhere as a Chinese American in the early-twentieth-century United States.

But the novel is not without its advantages. Its chief edge over the series is its sense of historical sweep, conveyed via the book’s aging narrator, who seeks to impart how things used to be: how miraculous refrigerators initially felt, or how absurdly difficult it was to start the earliest automobiles. (My favorite chapter involves the narrator’s mother, Olive Hamilton, taking her first flight. She “did not believe” in aviation, he says—the Wright brothers had taken their inaugural ride less than two decades prior—but Olive gets on an airplane in spite of her terror, so as not to let her children down.) I didn’t always respond to the narrator’s tone of folksy garrulousness, but his love of his native soil—its seasons, its scents—gives the story a warmth that didn’t quite make the leap from page to screen. And, like all beloved multigenerational tales, the novel is wonderfully immersive—this one particularly so because it weaves in Steinbeck’s own family history.