The American technocracy is strategically leveraging various tools at its disposal—including corruption, legal maneuvers, media manipulation, and sectarian conflicts—to suppress both popular and Papal opposition against the swift expansion of data centers, cryptocurrencies, and prediction markets. This article delves into the implications of these tactics and highlights significant developments within the tech industry.
Before delving into the details, a sobering prelude may unsettle some oligarchs.
Unionizing Tech Workers
…Recently, thousands of IT professionals within the University of California system have voted in favor of unionization. This move adds to the 6,000 tech workers already represented by the University and Professional Technical Employees (UPTE), bringing the total to 8,400 workers in this bargaining unit. This newly formed group now stands as the largest tech worker union in the nation.
…
Traditionally, the tech sector has remained under-organized; companies often sidestepped unionization attempts by offering attractive perks and embracing the entrepreneurial, free-market ethos of Silicon Valley. However, circumstances are evolving, and organized labor has begun to make significant strides. In 2021, hundreds of Google employees and contractors voted to establish the Alphabet Worker’s Union. While it does not yet possess complete bargaining authority, its influence is noteworthy. Other tech companies, such as Kickstarter and the tech desk of The New York Times (previously the nation’s largest tech worker union), have also seen successful unionization efforts recently. Adding to this trend, workers at Google’s DeepMind headquarters in London voted to unionize just this month.
But fear not; the technocracy has a few tricks up its sleeve to combat this emerging organized labor.
The article begins with **corruption**, as the rot in America starts from the top, and the tech elite are certainly making the most of the Trump 2.0 era.
Weakening the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
A significant feature from The New York Times outlines “How Prediction Markets and Crypto Firms Steamrolled a Watchdog Agency.”
Key highlights include:
Three firms closely linked to the Trump family’s business empire required the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s endorsement to pursue their ambitions in the rapidly growing sector of prediction markets.
…
Concerns were raised by senior officials regarding whether Crypto.com was treating smaller bettors fairly. Additionally, there were worries that a second company, Polymarket, lacked adequate fraud protections. A third, an offshoot of the crypto firm Gemini, had not yet completed the required review to operate.
Despite these issues, Caroline D. Pham—the then-acting chairman of the commission—along with her senior counsel, intervened to assist these companies in achieving their goals.
Over the last 16 months during the Trump administration, the commission has downsized its workforce, dismissed career officials, dramatically reduced enforcement of crypto regulations, and facilitated the interests of prediction markets at nearly every opportunity, found The Times.
The dismantling of the agency is particularly striking given the Trump family’s substantial connections to the crypto and prediction sectors. The Trumps have sold digital currencies, significantly enriching themselves while forging deals with prediction market operators.The transformation of the C.F.T.C. has been pushed through by leaders with links to these industries. Ms. Pham recently left the agency to join a crypto company that partners with Polymarket, and her senior counsel, Brigitte Weyls, was employed by a prediction market company she had previously aided.
Nice work if you can get it!
A relevant reminder of the importance of controlling the C.F.T.C. is provided:
Donald Trump Jr. is a paid strategic advisor for Kalshi, as well as a major investor and advisor for Polymarket.
The Trump administration is utilizing taxpayer funds to uphold their family’s investments.
This is what corruption looks like. https://t.co/naOttGx5Fa
— Melanie D’Arrigo (@DarrigoMelanie) May 24, 2026
But it’s not just federal oversight that needs managing; state legislation can also pose challenges. This is where a compromised federal commission becomes particularly useful.
Minnesota vs. Prediction Markets & the Federal Government
Recently, the state of Minnesota seemed to assume a bit too much authority, as reported by The New York Times:
A day after Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota enacted the first state law explicitly prohibiting prediction markets, the Trump administration filed a lawsuit against the state on Tuesday, aiming to prevent the law from taking effect this summer.
This legislation, which enjoyed bipartisan support among state legislators, would criminalize the hosting or advertising of prediction market sites in Minnesota.
…
While at least 14 other states have proposed legislation attempting to regulate prediction markets, Minnesota was thought to be the first to pass such an extensive measure into law. This legal dispute arises amid broader state challenges to regulate the quickly growing prediction markets in popularity.On Tuesday, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed a federal lawsuit against Minnesota, asserting that the state lacks the authority to regulate prediction markets, including popular betting websites like Kalshi and Polymarket.
“A federal agency that regulates certain markets”—that phrase rings hollow, doesn’t it?
Legal maneuvering is also effective against local dissenters.
Local Government Rejects Data Center, Too Bad
Recently, the local governing body of Saline Township, Michigan, attempted to reject a monumental data center project. Fortunately, oligarchs are adept at overcoming hurdles such as this, as reported by Fortune (archived):
…An enormous AI data center—spanning 21 million square feet—marks the largest construction project ever initiated in the state and was met with nearly universal opposition from local residents. Despite the pushback, the application proceeded swiftly, from submission in late summer to groundbreaking in November.
Surprisingly, the $16 billion facility for OpenAI and Oracle’s Stargate AI infrastructure initiative, which will significantly alter the region in terms of construction, traffic, energy demands, and environmental concerns, was outright rejected by both the town’s board and its planning commission in September. However, these votes turned out to be mere obstacles: the developer quickly filed a lawsuit, the town settled, and construction commenced.
Politicians across party lines are rallying behind this project, eager to share in the anticipated economic benefits for their communities, including Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who has actively sought partnerships with tech giants to establish vast data centers since late 2024. In late October, Governor Whitmer praised the Saline Township initiative, projecting it would generate 2,500 union construction jobs, with an additional 450 permanent positions on-site and 1,500 more in the community.
Eight months prior, when Saline’s planning commission convened in their historic township hall to evaluate arguments for and against Related Digital’s proposal to rezone 575 acres of farmland for the AI center, the reasons for rejecting it seemed straightforward: the land was zoned for agriculture, much of it deemed prime farmland. The project posed potential industrial noise and environmental risks to the rural landscape and increased demands on emergency services, conflicting with the township’s longstanding master plan that prioritized development in alternate areas.
In the end, the commission voted against the proposal, and the township board followed suit with a 4–1 rejection. However, residents soon learned that within the whirlwind of AI infrastructure growth, “no” does not always mean no. Just two days later, on September 12, Saline Township was sued by Related Digital and the property owners, claiming “exclusionary zoning”—asserting that the community unreasonably barred a legitimate land use under Michigan law, hinging on the contention that Saline Township lacked any land designated for industrial use, fundamentally rendering the data center a “necessary” land use that couldn’t be wholly excluded.This lawsuit underscored the limited leverage held by the township. Even had officials contested it, their legal advisors cautioned that the project could likely advance through other means, such as collaboration with an institution like the nearby University of Michigan, which could initiate projects exempt from local zoning restrictions unlike private developments. Meanwhile, a lengthy legal tussle against well-funded developers risked considerable costs for the township without securing any concessions.
To add insult to injury, not only can citizens not halt data centers, but they also might end up funding them!
Larry Fink Informs Texans on Financing
Earlier this month, Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, met with Texas Governor Greg Abbott to discuss the funding for these unstoppable data centers:
“Mandatory investment” means they’ve already moved your money out of your control.
Larry Fink is openly discussing a plan that will utilize trillions for AI data centers and power grids, sourced from your savings and pension accounts. He refers to it as “investment.” I would describe it differently… pic.twitter.com/jkl0FsOoMb
— Catherine Austin Fitts (@austin_fit76995) May 25, 2026
Transcript:
Larry Fink: If we can encourage more Americans to think about growing alongside the United States, we will have sufficient funds for this infrastructure.
As the governor mentioned, the demand for energy is increasing daily. If we aspire to remain the leaders in technology—and particularly in AI—it will necessitate trillions in investments. If we don’t invest now, China will take the lead globally. This is not a matter of choice; it’s imperative.
This need translates into a more vibrant economy. We need the U.S. economy to grow over 2 percent and ideally reach 3 percent, especially with increasing federal deficits.
Much of this funding will not just be sourced from private investors; it will also come from individual savings accounts, pension plans, insurance companies, and beyond. Our infrastructure is in dire need of improvement globally.
And should the populace resist sacrificing their pension funds, perhaps their electricity may be redirected elsewhere.
No Energy for You, Lake Tahoe
Civic-minded citizens can learn from the experience of Lake Tahoe residents who are willingly reallocating their electricity, so that it can be utilized for essential data center operations instead, as reported by Fortune:
NV Energy, the primary electricity provider for Lake Tahoe, informed Liberty Utilities—the smaller California company serving the area—that it will cease to supply power after May 2027. The reason provided? NV Energy requires the capacity for data centers. In other words, NV Energy is informing the local utility provider that they have less than a year to find an alternative energy source.
Northern Nevada has rapidly emerged as a key data-center hub in the United States. Major companies like Google, Apple, and Microsoft are either operating or planning facilities near the Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center east of Reno. According to the Desert Research Institute, drawing on data from NV Energy’s 2024 Integrated Resource Plan, the 12 data center projects chiefly located in Northern Nevada may generate a demand for 5,900 megawatts of new energy by 2033. At a regional business conference last fall, NV Energy’s business development director characterized the influx of new industrial demands as “unprecedented,” expressing eagerness to accommodate this new load without compromising the existing customer experience.
However, Liberty’s 49,000 California clients might already be incurring higher costs. Liberty Utilities derives about 25% of its electricity through its own solar facilities in Nevada, while the remaining 75% depends on NV Energy, which will no longer be available to the region by next year.
“It feels as if we don’t even exist,” expressed Danielle Hughes, a North Lake Tahoe resident, CEO of the nonprofit Tahoe Spark, and a supervisor within California’s Energy Commission’s Efficiency Division.
It certainly feels as if we don’t exist, doesn’t it?
So how did this potentially disruptive lower class achieve such a disengaged state?
Media Manipulation as the Key Factor
Recent articles highlight just how much the American information landscape has been distorted.
The first piece comes from FAIR:
Each month, Press Gazette—a London-based magazine for the journalism sector—publishes a ranking of the top 50 news websites in the U.S. by monthly visits, drawing from data provided by the marketing firm Similarweb. FAIR aggregated Press Gazette’s findings over a 12-month period, from December 2024 to November 2025, to ascertain the total U.S. visits to major news sites: 45.6 billion.
Notably, over half of these visits—approximately 25.5 billion—were directed to news websites owned by just seven families or corporate entities.
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) May 25, 2026
While direct ownership of online media outlets serves as a crude manipulation tool, leveraging algorithms presents a more subtle approach. According to Vulture (archived):
Joe Lim estimates that 90% of what is viewed online is actually covert advertising, and he ought to know. After managing a company called Floodify that once ran 65,000 artificial social media accounts to create visibility for clients, he recounts that on an average day, Floodify would publish 50,000 videos across TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and X—all designed to pass as the organic output of typical users.
…
The essence of this marketing strategy is that it’s meant to go unnoticed. However, recent developments have begun to unveil the machinery behind it. In March, Jesse Coren and Andrew Spelman—co-founders of the digital music-promotion firm Chaotic Good Projects—casually discussed onstage how they utilize fake accounts to simulate enthusiasm for artists across the music industry, from major pop acts to obscure indie performers, during a live interview with a Billboard reporter at South by Southwest. Spelman termed this technique “trend simulation,” with his motto being, “Everything on the internet is fake.”
…
The same tactics that Coren and Spelman boasted about are now deployed to manipulate public opinion across multiple domains—music, politics, consumer products, and celebrity gossip alike. While dubious marketing strategies and propaganda are not new, the scale of this manipulation has quietly captured public discourse. On social platforms, public sentiment is both shaped and gauged simultaneously, with every notion—from a trending song to a viral controversy—able to be artificially created by unseen forces with hidden intentions. We have essentially locked ourselves in a deeper version of Plato’s cave, where what seems like collective agreement among the masses is frequently just illusions created by marketers, political operatives, or anyone with a few hundred dollars and something to sell.
With the populace blissfully unaware, tech magnates are now taking their influence up another notch.
Lobbying the Pope
Politico provides insights into the tech elite’s earnest efforts to sway Pope Leo’s inaugural encyclical:
Representatives from Meta, Google, and Amazon formed part of a small assembly in Rome to deliberate on child protection in the era of artificial intelligence. Their encounter with the Pope was brief, but the subsequent meeting at the French embassy to the Holy See extended for hours. There, Paolo Ruffini, the Vatican’s chief communication official, engaged in discussions with the tech representatives concerning a pressing question facing Leo’s nascent papacy: How should one of the world’s most venerable moral authorities evaluate the cutting-edge technologies being hastily developed in Silicon Valley?
The April 29 meeting marked the latest in a series aimed at lobbying efforts by the tech industry as they shift gears in anticipation of Leo’s first encyclical, based on insights gathered from interviews with seven individuals involved in these discussions. An official papal document is expected to outline the Catholic Church’s stance regarding artificial intelligence.
How did this endeavor pan out?
Pope Leo XIV Cautions Against a New Tower of Babel
The encyclical, titled “MAGNIFICA HUMANITAS,” was released today.
Opening lines read:
Humanity, created by God in all its grandeur, is currently faced with a determining choice: either to construct a new Tower of Babel or to forge a city where divine and human coexist in harmony. Each generation inherits the duty of shaping its own epoch, steering history towards a realm where every individual’s dignity is honored, justice is upheld, and fraternity is actualized. Nonetheless, every era also risks creating a harsher and more unjust world.
For those who prefer brevity, Pope Leo referenced some well-known scripture that might strike a chord with Silicon Valley insiders, specifically the works of J.R.R. Tolkien:
In his inaugural encyclical, Pope Leo XIV cites J.R.R. Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.”
“It is not our jurisdiction to control all the tides of the world, but to do what we can for those years in which we are placed, uprooting the evils in the fields that… pic.twitter.com/qPOPwqd1Dk
— Courtney Mares (@catholicourtney) May 25, 2026
Furthermore, the conclusion of the encyclical states:
Our world is filled with attempts to seize control of markets and spheres of influence, often veiled in reassuring rhetoric and appealing ideologies. Yet, our hearts seek a pathway that is wise and compassionate…
Concerning the promises of transhumanism and some posthumanist ideologies, which advocate for an upgraded and almost disembodied humanity, we discern a craving of concern for a fuller existence, less burdened by limitations and suffering. Nevertheless, the concept of the Incarnation offers an alternative pathway. While old and new ideologies alike urge humanity to transcend limitations through technological advancements, and to elevate itself over others, the mystery of the Son of God coming into our human experience promises something fundamentally different. The living God enters our history to liberate us from all forms of enslavement.
This perhaps elucidates why Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel had forewarned Vice-President J.D. Vance about Pope Leo last autumn.
Jack Whelan on Catholic Substack offers some reflections:
Most individuals, even Catholics, tend to overlook papal encyclicals. Such documents often serve as efforts to preach to the choir, rarely changing the perspectives of those who don’t already resonate with the messages. Humanae Vitae, which condemned artificial birth control, was largely disregarded by many Catholics or drove them away from the church. Similarly, encyclicals addressing the environment or the economy often elicit little attention. It’s uncommon for priests to reference them from the pulpit. Nonetheless, did anyone in industries aligned with such encyclicals truly reflect on the messages? Hence, why should we expect Silicon Valley to take heed after “Magnifica Humanitas?”
The ongoing challenge is not merely to persuade figures like Altmans and Musks, who we should assume to be steadfast in their views. Rather, the goal should be to ignite opposition—not just against them, but against all initiatives where substantial resources and energy are being expended in this frantic rush towards a modern-day Tower of Babel.
The problem is not technology itself; it’s the accelerating obsession driving it. Whatever the motivation for this obsession, it’s unhealthy and unproductive, leading us to a destination where no rational person wants to venture. Therefore, a contrasting force must arise—not to halt progress but to redirect it towards more thoughtful and humanistic objectives.
The Tower of Babel serves as an archetype. As with all archetypes, it hints at a profound metaphysical truth regarding cosmic law, especially concerning human arrogance and its repercussions. Ultimately, hubris never leads to favorable outcomes. This is a universal truth.
But why do these powerful tech figures feel entitled to dictate to the spiritual leader of 1.4 billion Catholics?
Shh, We’re Creating God
According to author Karen Hao, there exists a “Dark Reality” in the AI race to “create God,” as detailed in a piece by the Times (UK) (archived):
Hao gained unprecedented access to OpenAI’s offices in 2019, eventually interviewing numerous former employees and associates of Sam Altman to chronicle the organization’s shift from an ideological non-profit, focused on “saving humanity,” to a powerhouse of financial investment and controversy…
Speaking with insiders, she learned how what started as a place for sharing ideas evolved under Altman’s singular drive to achieve AGI before its competitors—including not just other corporations like Google, but also countries such as China.The scientists and researchers at OpenAI are undoubtedly among the industry’s leading talents. However, according to Hao, their ambition for AGI took on a quasi-religious fervor, dubbing it “the ideological pursuit of the machine god.”
…
In its quest for AGI, OpenAI opted to massively scale its large language models (LLMs), meaning “feeding ever more data into them and training them on supercomputers larger than any ever developed in human history.” This immense processing power comes with a heavy price tag, forcing OpenAI to initiate a profit-driven arm to generate necessary funds.“We’ve witnessed the collapse of the entire AI field and industry toward a singular strategy that is intellectually lazy and socially detrimental,” Hao contends.
“The adverse consequences of AI stem from this scaling approach.”
The vast, resource-intensive data centers emerging globally—raising local energy costs—are direct results of AI companies increasingly pushing their LLMs to ingest more data. Meanwhile, organizations scouring the internet for scraps of information to train these systems threaten our privacy and intellectual property.
The implications of these trends are profound, and the journey ahead appears fraught with challenges and uncertainty.
In conclusion, as the technocracy continues to expand its influence, the emerging dynamics among tech workers, regulatory agencies, and societal attitudes toward technology will shape the future. Awareness and proactive engagement regarding these developments are crucial in navigating the complexities of our rapidly evolving technological landscape.
