Key Takeaways
- Marc Andreessen claims universities actively discriminate against Trump supporters through DEI policies and immigration preferences, calling for a "counterattack" .
- Private WhatsApp chats reveal Andreessen's push to defund the NSF ("bureaucratic death penalty") and punish elite schools like Stanford and MIT .
- Personal grievance cited: Andreessen alleges Stanford forced his wife Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen out of her philanthropy role, costing "$5 billion in future donations" .
- Tech leaders split: Meta’s Yann LeCun and others in Andreessen’s AI policy group opposed his views, arguing immigration and university research fuel U.S. tech dominance .
- Broader elite war: Analysts frame Trump’s attacks on Harvard/Columbia as a power struggle between financial elites (VCs) and cultural elites (academics) .
The WhatsApp Messages That Ignited a Firestorm
So Marc Andreessen — big name in tech, co-founder of a16z, Trump adviser — he’s in this private WhatsApp group, right? With White House folks and tech execs. And in May, he goes off. Says universities are at “Ground Zero” for discriminating against “native born kids” — specifically Trump voters. DEI policies plus immigration? He calls it “politically lethal.” Like, they’re cutting out working-class white kids from education and jobs. And MIT, Stanford? He dismisses them as “political lobbying operations fighting American innovation.” Oof.
Thing is, he deleted most messages quick. But screenshots got out. Two group members confirmed it to The Washington Post. Andreessen’s people? They didn’t comment. Not a word .
What’s wild is how personal it got. He brought up his wife, Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen. She co-founded Stanford’s Center on Philanthropy, chaired it for years. Then in 2024, she steps down. Andreessen claims Stanford “forced her out.” And get this — he says that move will cost Stanford “$5 billion in future donations.” The couple gave millions before. Stanford’s response? Praise for Laura’s work. Zero mention of a feud .
The “Bureaucratic Death Penalty” and Why the NSF Is in Crosshairs
So Andreessen doesn’t stop at universities. He takes aim at the National Science Foundation. Calls for it to get the “bureaucratic death penalty.” Like, shut it down. Start over. Why? He claims it funds projects that enable “online censorship of American citizens.” Classic Trump-era talking point .
This isn’t just talk. Trump’s team already froze $2.2 billion in NIH/NSF grants to Harvard. Banned ’em from future grants too. Revoked tax-exempt status. Six other elite schools got similar treatment. Northwestern, Columbia — all under investigation for “antisemitism” .
Impact of Trump’s Cuts on Research Universities
The NSF isn’t some small player. It pumps billions into university labs — MIT, Stanford, places Andreessen trashed. Killing it? That’d gut U.S. scientific research. Some in Andreessen’s own group thought he went too far. Said alienating immigrants and unis hurts U.S. tech leadership .
Rural “Smart Kids” vs. Elite Universities: Andreessen’s Heartland Argument
Andreessen frames this as a fairness thing. He grew up in rural Wisconsin. Says smart kids from towns like his get overlooked. Elite unis chase “metrics or politics” — meaning DEI quotas and international students — instead of talent from middle America. On Facebook, he put it bluntly: Parents in rural areas are “fooling themselves” if they think their kid’s getting into Stanford .
His supporters echo this. One comment: “Talent exists everywhere — it’s past time we recognized it.” Another: “Merit shouldn’t have a ZIP code” .
But here’s the gap: Andreessen’s firm, a16z, backed Trump after the assassination attempt. Said it’d “protect tech start-ups from hostile Biden policies.” Yet his “pro-merit” stance? Critics note a16z hired Daniel Penny — known for killing a homeless man on a NYC subway — with zero qualifications. Smells like hypocrisy .
The Backlash Inside Silicon Valley’s Inner Circle
Not everyone in Andreessen’s orbit agreed. Far from it. His WhatsApp group included Meta’s Yann LeCun (a Kamala Harris supporter) and Fei-Fei Li (Stanford prof who worked with Biden on AI funding). Both argued attacking unis and immigrants would hurt U.S. tech. Talent comes from those very universities. Innovations? Often born in NSF-funded labs .
Even the chat moderators pushed back. Sriram Krishnan (ex-a16z, now Trump’s AI adviser) asked Andreessen for proof that DEI/environmental rules slowed growth. Andreessen’s response? Rant about discrimination. Soon after, he left the group .
The split reflects Silicon Valley’s civil war:
- Old guard: Pro-immigration, pro-research funding (LeCun, Li)
- New power brokers: Anti-“woke” unis, pro-Trump (Andreessen, David Sacks)
Elon Musk used to be Trump’s tech ally. Now? Andreessen’s filling that void .
Stanford and MIT Hit Back — Quietly
MIT’s response to Andreessen’s jab? A polite email: “MIT is merit-based and affordable, driven by innovation... committed to excellence.” Translation: We’re everything you claim to want .
Stanford dodged direct shots at Andreessen. Just praised Laura’s “instrumental” work. Noted she’ll teach at their biz school this fall. Smart. Avoids burning bridges with a donor who gave $30M+ to Stanford hospitals .
But behind closed doors? Tension’s brewing. Andreessen’s firm, a16z, manages money for MIT pension funds. Awkward. And Stanford’s the pipeline for Silicon Valley — Google, Instagram, LinkedIn founders all came from there. Biting that hand? Risky .
The “Group Chat Phenomenon”: Where Elites Plot in Secret
Andreessen knows these private chats are dodgy. He’s on record calling them the “memetic upstream of mainstream opinion.” Translation: Tech elites workshop extreme ideas there before going public. No fear of “online mobs.” Sriram Krishnan (the WhatsApp admin) said as much: 2020’s culture wars made people scared to speak openly .
One chat — “Chatham House” — had 300+ elites. Marc Andreessen ran it. Per Semafor, far-right figures like Chris Rufo (who killed DEI programs in Florida) joined. Rufo saw it as “power building”: marrying tech money to conservative cultural warriors. Goals? Defund universities. Push anti-immigration policies. Punish “liberal” schools .
Key Players in Anti-University Coalition
- Finance Elites: VC partners (Andreessen, Keith Rabois)
- Tech Elites: Execs from Palantir, Scale AI
- Cultural Elites: Chris Rufo, Ben Shapiro, Larry Summers
This isn’t grassroots anger. It’s a coordinated elite war .
How Universities Became “Fields of Power” — and Why Elites Want In
Sociologist Charlie Eaton frames universities as “financialized fields of power.” What’s that mean? Simple: They’re battlegrounds where rich families, corporations, and ideologues clash.
- Elite families buy admission for kids (see: Varsity Blues scandal).
- Corporations recruit grads for “associational power” — aka old-boy networks.
- Alumni score trustee seats to sway hiring/research.
- Donors (like Andreessen) leverage cash for influence .
Andreessen himself admitted he and Ben Horowitz have “friends on boards or running universities.” They’re inside players .
So why attack the system? Eaton suggests four reasons:
- Right-wing elites feel excluded by campus “wokeness.”
- Diversity pushes threaten their status.
- They hate research on inequality (shows their privilege).
- They want to privatize education — profit from the rubble .
Trump’s just their hammer.
The Irony of Techno-Optimism vs. Anti-University Crusades
Weirdest part? Andreessen’s a self-described “techno-optimist.” His manifesto cheers technology as “the glory of human ambition.” Says it solves everything: poverty, pandemics, darkness. Calls markets “generative, not exploitative” .
But then he trashes the engines of that tech: universities and the NSF. Stanford birthed Google. MIT birthed AI. 98% of tech’s value, per economist William Nordhaus, goes to society — not inventors. Yet Andreessen wants to gut their funding .
Even his immigration stance flips. His firm once lobbied for “high-skilled immigration.” Now? He claims it “disadvantages native-born Americans.” Despite data showing immigrants found 55% of U.S. startups .
Critics on Hacker News called this out: If he really wanted fairness, he’d back free public college. Not revenge on Stanford .
FAQ: Andreessen, DEI, and the University Wars
Q: What exactly did Marc Andreessen say about DEI?
He called DEI + immigration “politically lethal,” arguing they combine to “systematically cut most of the children of the Trump voter base out of... higher education and corporate America” .
Q: Is Andreessen still advising Trump?
The White House claims he’s not an “official adviser.” But he’s shaping hiring/policy, per The Washington Post. His firm endorsed Trump post-assassination attempt .
Q: What’s the “bureaucratic death penalty”?
Andreessen’s term for abolishing the NSF. He accuses it of funding “online censorship” projects .
Q: Why target Stanford specifically?
Personal grudge: He says Stanford “forced out” his wife, Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen, from her philanthropy role. The school denies this .
Q: Are other tech billionaires backing this?
Yes. David Sacks (Trump’s crypto czar), Elon Musk (pre-2023), and VCs like Keith Rabois support defunding “woke” universities .
Q: How are universities fighting back?
Quietly. MIT affirmed its “merit-based” mission. Harvard sued over grant freezes. But many fear Trump’s retaliation .
Comments
Post a Comment