Jornal Do Brasilia - Naomi Klein: Democrats Must Choose Between Billionaires and Public Interest

Guardian US columnist Naomi Klein has argued that the central political conflict in the United States is shifting from traditional partisan divides to a fundamental struggle between concentrated wealth and the public interest. In a recent opinion piece, Klein contended that for Democrats to maintain their electoral momentum leading up to the 2028 presidential election, they must explicitly reject alignment with tech oligarchs and instead champion the needs of local communities.

Klein pointed to the recent political developments in Texas as a primary example of this emerging dynamic. Following her victory in the gubernatorial race, Governor-elect Gina Hinojosa announced that she had directed the state parks and wildlife department to freeze a proposal to sell 1,300 acres (525 hectares) of Boca Chica State Park to SpaceX. The request was made before Hinojosa was officially sworn into office, and the department complied with the directive.

The proposed sale would have transferred land adjacent to Starbase, Elon Musk’s rocket launch facility and company town. The area includes beaches and protected habitats for shorebirds and sea turtles, which SpaceX has identified as suitable for expansion. Hinojosa told CNN’s Jake Tapper that selling public beaches to Musk was "unacceptable" and violated the Texas constitution, which enshrines beaches as free and open to the people.

Hinojosa clarified that her opposition was not aimed at shutting down Musk or his companies entirely, but rather at ensuring that any development occurs on terms set by the state rather than by corporate power. "It cannot be just running over the people of Texas," she stated, asserting that her governorship would change this dynamic.

The announcement triggered a significant backlash from supporters of Musk on social media platform X. Critics mocked Hinojosa’s decision, characterizing the land as "empty beaches" and dismissing concerns about wildlife in favor of space exploration infrastructure. Musk and his allies predicted that SpaceX would relocate its operations to Louisiana or Florida if Texas continued to resist, suggesting that such moves would leave economic damage in their wake.

Despite the pressure, Hinojosa and Senator-elect James Talarico have framed their political campaigns around a conflict between "the many v the money." This narrative pits the majority of Texans against concentrated wealth, embodied by Musk, who has contributed significant funds to political causes. Talarico previously stated that Musk seeks not only land and water but also tax dollars and a personal United States senator.

Klein argued that the failure of Musk to secure either a governor or a senator in Texas illustrates a broader national polarization. She described a new political axis dividing ultrarich tech oligarchs, whose ambitions include merging with machines and becoming multiplanetary, from ordinary citizens concerned with basic needs such as clean air, fresh water, healthcare, and access to public lands.

According to Klein, these oligarchs often lack loyalty to the nations or states that facilitated their wealth accumulation. She cited Musk’s previous threats to leave California and Canada as evidence of this pattern. The article noted that some oligarchs may look toward Argentina, where President Javier Milei is promoting techno-libertarian policies, as an alternative base for their interests.

In contrast, Klein asserted that the general population remains attached to their local communities and the planet. She drew parallels between the Texas situation and protests in Tirana, Albania, where citizens have resisted oligarchs claiming wildlife refuges for private use. In her book "End Times Fascism," co-written with Astra Taylor, Klein characterized these conflicts as a battle between "the leavers v the stayers."

Klein identified this fault line across multiple issues in the recent election cycle. She noted ballot measures to tax the super-rich, which faced threats of relocation from billionaires who refused to pay. She also highlighted voter backlash against artificial intelligence and data centers, citing Guardian reports that voters approved nearly every datacenter moratorium on the ballot.

The article further connected these dynamics to public anger over US foreign policy in Iran and Gaza, as well as opposition to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. Klein cited Senator-elect Peggy Flanagan of Minnesota, who credited her victory to a movement against aggressive law enforcement tactics.

Klein criticized the Republican Party for aligning with tech overlords, referencing an earlier analysis by Rebecca Solnit that described the midterms as a referendum on this alignment. However, she warned that many Democrats are also complicit. She pointed to the defeat of a California ballot measure imposing a one-time 5% tax on billionaires, which she attributed to opposition from outgoing Governor Gavin Newsom and other powerful Democrats.

Additionally, Klein noted that several Senate Democrats joined Republicans in pushing legislation during the lame-duck session to dismantle environmental protections, benefiting fossil fuel companies and data centers. She described this behavior as a betrayal that could turn midterm victories into future defeats.

Klein concluded that Hinojosa’s decision to fight for public beaches over private rockets demonstrates a viable path for Democrats. By aligning with the side of "life, not machines" and "staying, not leaving," she argued, Democrats can continue to win elections by reflecting the priorities of their voters.

F. Tavares--JDB