MAGAts are just the evolution of the Tea Party, which itself was just one huge tantrum because the country dared to... ::checks notes:: ...elect a Black guy.

Magas are the evolution of just the huge tantrums of, checks notes because there are more than one special interest group of bad actors aligned out of convenience,

Ben Smith published a fascinating exposé on the Signal chats where tech bros, billionaires and their courtiers radicalized themselves to the pro-Trump right—and "vibe shifted" media coverage with them.

The tone was jesting, but "Marc radicalized over time," Hanania recalled. Hanania said he found himself increasingly alienated from the group and the shift toward partisan pro-Trump politics, and he came to see the chat he'd established as a "vehicle for groupthink." (A friend of Andreessen's said it was Hanania, not Andreessen, who had shifted his politics.) The group continues without him.

Hanania argued with the other members "about whether it's a good idea to buy into Trump's election denial stuff. I'd say, 'That's not true and that actually matters.' I got the sense these guys didn't want to hear it," he said. "There's an idea that you don't criticize, because what really matters is defeating the left." He left the group in June of 2023.

Richard Hanania was a white supremacist ("we need more policing, incarceration, and surveillance of black people") whose views haven't drifted much since. That he is too left for these guys is a reminder of how much trouble we're in. To summarize the rest of it:


• The chatrooms started out as a sort of private debate club for billionaires, courtiers and elite media, but went right-wing and pro-Trump over time.

• They think of themselves as victims of mass censorship online by wokes and DEIs and so on. To them the chats are like "samizdat"—banned books covertly shared by everyday people in the Soviet bloc.

• The key figure is Silicon Valley investor Marc Andreeson, both in terms of him constantly posting and, Smith quotes, in terms of his "unspoken gravitational pull."

• They invited "reactionary centrist" types in but eventually ditched them. These centrist types took freedom of speech seriously enough to criticize right-wing censorship, which make the the tech bros livid. Despite their own complaints about "censorship," they see censorship as a political weapon to be used when it suits them.



The conservatives had thought the Harper's letter writers were their allies in an all-out ideological battle, and considered their position a betrayal. Andreessen "went really ballistic in a quite personal way at Thomas," a participant recalled. The group ended after Andreessen "wrote something along the lines of 'thank you everybody, I think it's time to take a Signal break,'" another said.

• Emerging victorious from this was right-wing activist Christopher Rufo, who saw the chats as an opportunty to "radicalize tech elites … for the right."

• They think (and probably are correct in thinking) that the power and groupthink of their chatrooms led to a right-wing vibe shift in mainstream media. Resulting, Smith suggests, was mainstream coverage for fringe monarchist Curtis Yarvin and against journalist Taylor Lorenz.

• Except for winks and nods on podcasts and in news stories by clued-in journalists, these chatrooms have managed to avoid significant media coverage. But they're getting fractious and leaky now because Trump's second term is already a total disaster.

Last edited by Johnny_Rotten (2025-04-29 10:06:21)