Before the turn of the millennium, the old adage on Wall Street was “it’s not what you know, it’s who you know.” This same sentiment has been exhibited and exemplified across nearly all industries, and within both the private and public sectors, whether through corporate nepotism and genetic lineage, or even more sinister means such as blackmail and power-driven coercion.
As new technological advances began to become a major part of the American economy and culture, prominent figures within the CIA decided that the “information revolution” necessitated that the Agency “forge new partnerships with the private sector,” specifically what would later become the biggest names in Silicon Valley. The end result of this pivot, the CIA’s very own venture capital arm In-Q-tel, would later back a constellation of what are now powerful technology companies, while some of the wealthiest Silicon Valley CEOs would work to supercharge, in different yet complementary ways, the public-private fusion of US intelligence and tech companies critical to the global economy. As one US intelligence adviser told FOX Business regarding In-Q-tel, “If you want to keep up with Silicon Valley, you need to become part of Silicon Valley.”
While not the direct focus of this piece, the spin off of the US intelligence community into the world of venture capital, with other nation’s intelligence agencies later following their example, is but a signpost for the post-Y2K entanglement of the private and public sectors, and perhaps more importantly, the understanding of how the modern perception of the masses is no longer best influenced by capital control alone, but by controlling particular people themselves, creating powerful networks and markets of influence backed by human capital itself.
In the world of soft money, freely printed fiat, and exponential monetary debasement, the role of the venture capital firm has gone from seeking meager yield from the revenues of so-called Unicorns, to influencing the people behind the companies themselves, shaping entrepreneurs into perhaps unwitting but nevertheless useful agents of larger global agendas.
Data is the most sold commodity in the world, and the modern private sector –– led in no small part by the US’ Silicon Valley –– has seemingly become more about acquiring user data to sell rather than direct profits from business themselves. Social media, dominated by the likes of Facebook, X/Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram and YouTube, has become the new frontier of venture capital, despite generally zero direct revenue inflow coming from the websites or app users themselves. These private-in-name-only companies (PINOCs) often feed on large government paychecks, including through subsidies of modern advertising budgets spent to purchase views from their large user-bases, or through initial seed-funding and technological development from former government employees. While spending most of the day hiding behind oft-unread user agreements that restrict user content –– often speech –– or sell user data –– whether for commercial or national security applications, these PINOCs grow fat off of government contracts, amassing formidable, too-big-to-fail status as platforms within the “free” marketplace of ideas.
While the focus of this piece isn’t simply the notion that Big Tech has largely and successfully sought control over users and their data, but rather a less discussed public sector coup from organizations within Wall Street and Silicon Valley that have slowly bought influence over the mover and shakers of the modern economy, as the digitalization of money leads to the globalization of markets. The oncoming maturation from the synthesis of the economy and the internet into an internet-based economy is no accident, and those in control of the services, issuers and providers of the means for such an economy have been quietly groomed for at least three decades by many of the same faces and firms behind the first dot com bubble. These days, power isn’t derived from “what you know,” or even “who you know,” but from who you own.
