&w=3840&q=100)
Tales of influence, ambition: 3 books about tech, politics and big business
Germany's big businesses profited thanks to their collaboration, and after the war most executives escaped blame, keeping much of the plundered wealth even after millions died
UNIT X: How the Pentagon and Silicon Valley Are Transforming the Future of War, OWNED: How Tech Billionaires on the Right Bought the Loudest Voices on the Left, PROFITS & PERSECUTION: German Big Business in the Nazi Economy and the Holocaust
NYT
By Max Chafkin UNIT X: How the Pentagon and Silicon Valley Are Transforming the Future of War
Author: Raj M Shah and Christopher Kirchhoff
Publisher: Scribner
Pages: 319
How did Donald Trump win over the technology industry? How did the country's most future-minded companies — managed and staffed by immigrants, and led by CEOs who had embraced corporate diversity policies — come to embrace a nationalistic, transactional view of power and a president whose scattershot trade war threatens their hugely profitable businesses? Put simply: What happened to Silicon Valley?
A tempting answer is Elon Musk. But three recent books suggest that Musk's right-wing turn is probably more symptom than cause, the latest manifestation of reactionary forces that have simmered, mostly unnoticed, within the tech industry.
Blessedly, Musk is not the main character in Unit X, a chronicle of efforts by the authors — Shah, an entrepreneur, and Kirchhoff, a tech adviser — to persuade Silicon Valley companies to make surveillance and weapons systems for the government.
The book reveals how a left-leaning industry became enthusiastic about the military-industrial complex. When rank-and-file Google employees put up an early resistance to weapons work, Amazon and Microsoft saw an opportunity to double down on military contracts. Some tech leaders at companies like Palantir and Anduril were always on board.
Shah and Kirchhoff were hired to run the Pentagon's Defense Innovation Unit (Unit X for short) shortly after its creation under Barack Obama in 2015. Their goal was to make inexpensive consumer technologies, like tablets and productivity software, easily available to the military.
But, as Unit X shows, it's not a huge leap to go from using AI to analyse drone footage to using AI systems in weapons. Anduril, backed by another Palantir co-founder, Peter Thiel, and staffed by several of Thiel's close allies, recently announced that it had agreed to take over an Army contract worth up to $22 billion. Given the company's close ties with the new administration, it seems almost certain there will be more money to come.
Tech industry reporters tend to view the power of Silicon Valley billionaires as a byproduct of their addictive apps. In Owned, Higgins, a tech journalist, makes a compelling case that more attention should be paid to the campaign to influence their critics. He focuses on two targets of Musk and Thiel's patronage, the journalists Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi.
Greenwald and Taibbi were seen as leftists early in their careers. Their evolution, Higgins argues, was spurred on by money from conservative sources. Greenwald is paid to produce videos on Rumble, the anti-woke video platform that counts Thiel and Vice President JD Vance as investors; Taibbi's move to the right coincided with his becoming, in Higgins's account, essentially an in-house journalist at Elon Musk's X. (Neither man's work is monolithic. Greenwald has been critical of the Trump administration's immigration policies; Taibbi fell out with Musk over his management of X.)
When Jeff Bezos revamped The Washington Post's opinion page and Mark Zuckerberg began tossing out Facebook fact checkers, it was hard to say whether these moves suggested that Bezos and Zuckerberg had finally revealed their true selves, or whether they had changed tack because it seemed inadvisable to do otherwise. (It's worth remembering that last summer, while running for president, Trump threatened to throw Zuckerberg in prison for life and his company is on trial for alleged antitrust violations.)
Either possibility is grim, as are the parallels one can find in Profits & Persecution by Hayes, a Holocaust scholar. Studying the relationship between the Nazi state and about 100 of the largest German companies, Hayes convincingly shows that German businessmen were sceptical of the Nazis, but tended to approach Hitler's rise with an eye to the bottom line, seeking to preserve their financial advantages within the regime and, in doing so, slowly acquiescing to its most insidious demands.
His book is both horrifying and riveting, in part because the rationalisations offered by business leaders will sound eerily familiar. Of course, these impulses helped prop up a government that destroyed the free-market capitalism it once sought to protect.
Germany's big businesses profited thanks to their collaboration, and after the war most executives escaped blame, keeping much of the plundered wealth even after millions died. In many respects, Hayes makes clear, they won the war, even when Germany lost.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Mint
39 minutes ago
- Mint
Donald Trump weighs invoking Insurrection Act in Los Angeles, warns protesters of ‘heavy force' ahead of military parade
US President Donald Trump has said he may invoke the Insurrection Act, a rarely used law that allows for active-duty military deployment on US soil, amid ongoing protests in Los Angeles over mass immigration arrests. 'If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it. We'll see,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Tuesday. "Last night was terrible, and the night before that was terrible.' The law, rooted in legislation from 1807, allows the President to bypass the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the military from engaging in domestic law enforcement. The Pentagon has confirmed that 700 US Marines are being deployed to Los Angeles, joining 2,000 National Guard troops mobilised over the weekend. The move comes despite direct opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats. 'We stated very publicly that it's 60 days because we want to ensure that those rioters, looters and thugs... know that we're not going anywhere,' said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during a House hearing. Bryn Woollacott MacDonnell, acting comptroller, estimated the deployment will cost $134 million, primarily for travel, housing, and food. Trump has used increasingly aggressive language to describe the protesters and the situation in California. 'IF THEY SPIT, WE WILL HIT, and I promise you they will be hit harder than they have ever been hit before,' the president wrote in a Monday night post on Truth Social. 'If I didn't 'SEND IN THE TROOPS' to Los Angeles the last three nights, that once beautiful and great City would be burning to the ground right now.' He also warned that any protesters at Saturday's military parade in Washington would be met with 'heavy force.' Governor Newsom condemned Trump's actions as politically motivated and authoritarian. 'US Marines shouldn't be deployed on American soil facing their own countrymen to fulfill the deranged fantasy of a dictatorial President. This is un-American,' Newsom posted on X. He added that California is capable of maintaining order and accused Trump of deliberately escalating tensions for political gain. Demonstrations erupted Friday after more than 40 people were arrested by immigration agents across Los Angeles. Activists gathered near a federal detention center demanding their release. Though mostly peaceful, some clashes have occurred. In downtown LA's Little Tokyo on Monday night, protesters shot fireworks at officers, who responded with tear gas. Trump has labeled the demonstrators as 'professional agitators and insurrectionists.' As political tensions flared, House Speaker Mike Johnson echoed Trump's rhetoric, lashing out at California's governor. 'He [Newsom] ought to be tarred and feathered,' Johnson said during a press event. Trump, meanwhile, has publicly called for Newsom's arrest, further intensifying the constitutional showdown between state and federal authorities. Invoking the Insurrection Act is considered one of the most extreme domestic powers available to a US President. Whether Trump will ultimately invoke it remains unclear, but his repeated threats and recent military deployments suggest the option is on the table as unrest continues.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Pentagon reveals how much Donald Trump's troop deployment to Los Angeles for 60 days could cost
The Pentagon estimates that the deployment of National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles will cost $134 million. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth defended the move amidst Democratic objections. Protests continue due to Trump's immigration policies. Trump has ordered troops to assist law enforcement, but local officials say they are not needed. California has sued the administration. President Donald Trump on Tuesday was asked if he would use the Insurrection Act as a response to the protests in Los Angeles over his administration's immigration crackdown. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Trump to revoke Insurrection Act? Amid the massive protests in Los Angeles, the Pentagon said Tuesday it expects its 60-day deployment the California National Guard and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles to cost at least $134 million. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday defended the deployment of National Guardsmen and Marines to Los Angeles amid objections from Democrats about their domestic deployment. Protests continue in Los Angeles and other cities across the country in response to Trump's immigration Donald Trump's decision to deploy troops to Los Angeles amid mass deportation protests will likely cost $134 million, the Pentagon's budget chief told lawmakers. The cost covers expenses such as travel, lodging, and meal expenses, according to Bryn Woollacott MacDonnell, the acting chief financial officer at the Department of Defense."We've been clear from the start—this is a 60-day mission because we want to send a message to the rioters, looters, and thugs attacking law enforcement that we're not backing down," Hegseth said during testimony before the House Appropriations Defense Pentagon comptroller Bryn MacDonnell, testifying at a House budget hearing on Tuesday alongside Hegseth, said the estimate covers costs such as travel, housing and food, as per Politico. Pentagon Comptroller Bryn Woollacott MacDonnell said the money will be pulled from the troops' existing operations and maintenance lawmakers sought answers from Hegseth about the deployments, and raised concerns about sending active-duty U.S. troops to a mission that they said would be better performed by law enforcement officers."This is a deeply unfair position to put our Marines in. Their service should be honored. It should not be exploited," said Representative Betty McCollum, a Democrat from Minnesota, on a House Appropriations has ordered 4,000 National Guard members and 700 Marines to Los Angeles to assist law enforcement with the protests, although California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass have said they are not needed. California has sued the Trump administration over the use of troops, arguing it violates state President defended his decision to send Another 2,000 National Guard troops along with 700 Marines to Los Angeles, escalating a military presence local officials and Gov. Gavin Newsom don't want and the police chief says creates logistical challenges for safely handling protests. Additional protests against immigration raids are expected to continue in other cities Donald Trump on Tuesday was asked if he would use the Insurrection Act as a response to the protests in Los Angeles over his administration's immigration crackdown."If there's an insurrection, we would certainly invoke it. We will see," Trump responded."There were areas of Los Angeles last night where you could call it an insurrection," he later added. He again claimed, without evidence, that the protesters are "paid insurrectionists."(With agency inputs)


India Gazette
2 hours ago
- India Gazette
Meeting with US Vice President Vance was remarkable: Congress MP Shashi Tharoor
New Delhi [India], June 10 (ANI): Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, who led the all-party parliamentary delegation to the US, said that their meeting with US Vice President JD Vance was 'remarkable.' Speaking to reporters, Tharoor stated that the two sides had 'a good conversation' and the Indian delegation felt they 'could not have had a better meeting.' The delegation met Vance during their visit to the US last week. On the delegation's meeting with Vance, he said, 'JD Vance, I must say, it was a remarkable meeting. He gave us a good 20-25 minutes. It was a busy day. They just had a one-and-a-half-hour phone call with the Chinese president, he said, and they were about to go into a meeting with the German Chancellor. So, we were right in between. But we had a very good conversation.' 'I can't say how good it was without revealing details that would not be appropriate to reveal. But again, we felt we could not have had a better meeting. We were able to make every single one of the points we wanted to make. I spoke for the delegation, and we got back exactly the kind of feedback we would have wanted. So I think we left very happy,' he added. He made these remarks after returning to India after the delegation concluded their visit to the US, Guyana, Panama, Colombia, and Brazil. Shashi Tharoor led the all-party delegation which includes Shambhavi Chaudhary (Lok Janshakti Party), Sarfaraz Ahmed (Jharkhand Mukti Morcha), GM Harish Balayogi (Telugu Desam Party), Shashank Mani Tripathi, Tejasvi Surya (BJP), and Bhubaneswar Kalita (all from the BJP), Mallikarjun Devda (Shiv Sena), former Indian Ambassador to the US Taranjit Singh Sandhu, and Shiv Sena MP Milind Deora. The delegation was one of the seven all-party delegations formed by the central government. It was tasked with visiting several nations as part of the global outreach program, conveying India's stance of zero-tolerance against terrorism and discussing Operation Sindoor. India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7 as a decisive military response to the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack by Pakistan-sponsored terrorists, which claimed 26 lives and injured several others. The Indian Armed Forces targeted terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir, resulting in the deaths of over 100 terrorists affiliated with groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and Hizbul Mujahideen. The Indian Armed Forces responded effectively to subsequent Pakistani aggression and pounded its airbases. India and Pakistan agreed for a cessation of hostilities on May 10. (ANI)