Andreessen Horowitz, one of Silicon Valley’s most influential venture capital firms, recently published a “techno-optimist manifesto” on its website. In the manifesto, the firm declares itself to be a material philosophy rather than a political one, stating that it is not necessarily left-wing or right-wing but focused on living amid material abundance. However, the author of this article argues that techno-optimism is inherently a political ideology that advocates for a hands-off approach from governments and favors unregulated financial gains from venture capital investment.
The article also highlights a recent blog post by Ben Horowitz, one of the firm’s co-founders, in which he announces that the company will be getting involved in politics by supporting candidates who align with their vision and values. The company states that it is non-partisan but supports candidates who advocate for an optimistic technology-enabled future. The author sees this as a new coat of paint on the typical corporate behavior of supporting candidates who will benefit their investment portfolio.
Furthermore, the article points out the hypocrisy in Andreessen’s manifesto and Horowitz’s blog post. While Andreessen criticizes regulatory capture as an enemy, Horowitz argues for appropriate regulations for certain technologies. The author suggests that this selective approach to regulation demonstrates that the firm is primarily interested in protecting its own investments rather than advocating for the broader interests of society.
The article concludes by stating that techno-optimism has been the dominant ideology in Silicon Valley for the past three decades, but it has not necessarily led to positive outcomes for everyone. The author suggests that Andreessen Horowitz would be better off cleaning up its investment portfolio and supporting tech companies that prioritize the well-being of people and the planet. By doing so, they may find that the ideology of techno-optimism becomes more appealing and credible.
