There are few things in American life not named Donald Trump that are more hated than data centers.
Data center protests are surging. Editorials about resisting them and why regulation is needed before any more are built are popping up throughout the media. Here is another example.
Polling has found that support for data centers is cratering. This is also true in Maine, and in response, the legislature has passed a law restricting them and is waiting for Gov. Janet Mills’ approval. She has not signed it into law yet.
Mills is currently not very popular, not much more popular than data centers. The Nazi Tattoo R-Word Using Graham Plattner is killing her in the primaries. If you don’t want R-Word Using Tattoo Guy as the senator, which I fully understand, then perhaps it would be better to sign it without the amendment you wanted, because right now, people are suspicious of money in politics and are sensitive to how it affects them.
This is not to say Mills is bought and paid for, but the tech industry is currently second only to Big Pharma for political contributions. So it looks bad.
This would not be a problem for Mills if we didn’t have a money in politics problem, but indeed, we do. And it has worked out terribly for the entire country.
Billionaires, especially from Silicon Valley, have become oligarchs. They have control of the Republican Party, the Supreme Court, Congress, and, of course, the White House. They have become to Americans more than just symbols of greed, they are viewed as a threat to our very way of life.
Americans also hate the tech version of billionaires for their influence on American politics. They often seem little concerned about how technology like AI could affect other human beings, including sounding like they view people losing their livelihoods as helping companies solve their human problem. So they push on politicians not to regulate their technology, and this has turned out quite badly so far for most of us.
The other example of how money damages politics is in our foreign policy: Israel and AIPAC. It behooves me to say given the nastiness of anti-Semitism, that they are Jewish is not the problem; that they are both so far right-wing, that is the problem.
AIPAC is notorious for meddling in politics. Any politician who is not 100 percent behind Israel (read: Bibi) becomes a target. They pour millions of dollars into primaries (including Democratic) and general elections, often affecting the outcome. This is despite a wide majority of American Jewish people not supporting AIPAC’s influence.
AIPAC is not having a great PR moment. Israel has proven itself to be a rogue nation, committing war crimes. The tiresome argument of what is genocide and what is just sparkling mass murder notwithstanding, Israel has been monstrous in how it has responded to the Oct. 7 attack. This is not just the regular army, Israeli settlers in the West Bank have been nothing more than a band of armed thugs, terrorizing Palestinians.
This is not something any Democrat should be associated with, and many Dem politicians are outright turning down AIPAC money, but the temptation of all that AIPAC money is hard to let go of. Which leads to stuff like these kind of wish-washy responses to breaking tie with AIPAC and, well, nightmares like Senator John Fetterman.
But just imagine how much better things would be without money in politics. This is not to say all of our problems would be solved, but getting the temptation of big donations from SuperPACs out of the equation would go a long way towards fixing them.
The last word goes to Pink Floyd.
