Audrey Stienon
banner
astienon.bsky.social
Audrey Stienon
@astienon.bsky.social
industrial policy at the Open Markets Institute • fascinated about how we shape industries and markets to serve the public interest • book nerd & recovering globe trotter • views are my own • 🇧🇪🇺🇸
The danger is not that Trump is failing to check the power of corporate America.

The danger is that Trump is empowering corporate America in order to capture that power for himself.
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
All that to say: we need to break out of the habit of framing econ and industrial policy as if the only variable were more/less government enforcement.

The "why" behind policy matters. The "who," as in "who-is-getting-more-powerful-from-this," matters.
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
Neoliberalism helped get us here, btw.

It's telling that corporate America has become so dependent on mergers to succeed, and so fixated on the profits they bring, that they will do *anything,* even bow down to a despot, to get them approved.
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
This is how Putin disciplined the Russian oligarchs.

If you're his friend, you can break all the laws you want — but the minute you step out of line, all your crimes are crimes again.

If everyone is granted an illegal monopoly...well, then anyone can be threatened to have it taken away
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
So, he and JD will rail against the power of Big Tech when those companies are seen as aligned with Dems, or when they kick him off their platforms.

But once they invite him back, rig algorithms right-wards, pay for his ballroom, etc. ... well, free pass.

For as long as they stay aligned, that is.
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS WHAT TRUMP IS DOING.

Trump is not bringing us back to a world of non-enforcement of the law, however many mergers his admin lets through.

He is creating a world of selective enforcement. The full weight of the law if you're his enemy, and a free pass if you're his friend.
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
For decades, antitrust laws have gone unenforced.

The government, led by both parties, *chose* to permit unfair mergers and abuses of market power.

Because the goal of neoliberalism is "free" markets, i.e. no gov restriction of corporate actions. Because what is good for corporates trickles down
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
Antitrust can deny companies the mergers that could make them very very rich. Or ban unfair corporate actions. Or even break up the worst offenders.

Because antitrust makes these tactics illegal.

But it's the government's prerogative to decide whether to enforce the law, or not.
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
Antitrust is "one of the most important checks on excesses of corporate power," for sure.

But it is also, more broadly, one of the most powerful economic policies in the government's arsenal. Whether the government goal is to check excess corporate power...or not.
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
More than any other outcome — more than increasing jobs, or lowering inflation, or even ensuring any one company or industry succeeds — Trump's policy priority is to consolidate power around himself.

This is authoritarian industrial policy.
November 25, 2025 at 5:52 PM
Reposted by Audrey Stienon
This didn’t happen overnight. Citizens United opened the floodgates to unlimited spending, and 15 years later, we’re living with the consequences—more polarization, less accountability, and policymaking tilted towards the ultra-rich.

Reform is still possible: rooseveltinstitute.org/publications...
Citizens United and the Decline of US Democracy: Assessing the Decision’s Impact 15 Years Later - Roosevelt Institute
In a new analysis, Rachel Funk Fordham examines the 15-year legacy of Citizens United, assessing its impact on democracy through new evidence and political science research and offering recommendation...
rooseveltinstitute.org
November 21, 2025 at 4:27 PM