Foreign policy in Silicon Valley

Forbes , May 31, 1998

INFLUENTIAL New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman visited Silicon Valley recently, and he didn't like what he found. Busy with their high- tech endeavors, the businesspeople he interviewed weren't interested in the things Friedman cares about. They didn't talk about Iraq or foreign wars. They were none too respectful toward the federal government.

"Money is extracted from Silicon Valley and then wasted by Washington," a technology executive told an appalled Friedman. Hearing such sentiments, the globe-trotting columnist essentially declared Silicon Valley the home of unpatriotic, ignorant scum: "There is a disturbing complacency here toward Washington, government and even the nation. . . . Silicon Valley's tech-heads have become so obsessed with bandwidth they've forgotten balance of power. They've forgotten that without America on duty there will be no America Online."

In fact, Silicon Valley executives aren't as self-consciously antigovernment as they're generally portrayed, by friends or foes. And many are involved in community groups and volunteer work, especially in the schools. They are, however, generally apolitical -- and for good reason.

Time is short in Silicon Valley, and everywhere else. The plenitude and prosperity we take for granted depend on specialized knowledge and concentrated efforts. High-tech executives are acutely aware of what they know and of what they can ignore to make time for their work. Rich Sorkin, the chief executive of Zip2.com, an Internet software and media startup in Mountain View, Calif., says high-tech managers are wrong to neglect public policy. But even he hasn't had much time for it lately: "I've been ruthlessly prioritizing my time while I'm building a company."

That's not necessarily a bad tradeoff. Friedman, after all, would be rightly offended if computer programmers demanded that foreign affairs pundits master the ins and outs of Java code. So why expect technology executives to be geopolitical whizzes? Chris Cleveland, a former congressional staffer who now runs Genesee Development Group, a software company in Chicago, has the best take I've heard on the subject: "There's a good argument that the aim of a civil, ordered society is specifically to allow the populace to be disengaged from public life. If people are free to allocate their necessarily limited attention spans, then the vast majority will make the rational decision to focus on private pursuits. They will delegate the management of public affairs to those who are interested in such things."

In effect, Friedman and a chorus of policy junkies demand that Silicon Valley businesspeople become the high-tech equivalent of Hollywood's political bimbos: the actors and directors who spout off on issues they know next to nothing about. Their celebrity attracts cameras, but their comments are often downright stupid.

That's not because Hollywood is full of dummies. To the contrary, the entertainment business depends on intelligent specialists. But Hollywood is very distant from politics and policy. To expect Meryl Streep to provide expert testimony on pesticide regulation is to demand an illusion. Hollywood is happy to oblige. Illusions are its business.

Silicon Valley is in the reality business. Its time-strapped executives have a praiseworthy sense of humility. Proud of what they do know, they readily acknowledge their ignorance. "I'm a tough person to ask about politics. I'm sort of apolitical," says the boss of an Internet startup.

Silicon Valley's political disengagement does exact a cost. The high- tech community has a deep understanding of how dynamic, trial-and-error processes can generate progress without central direction. An engaged Silicon Valley could provide a counterweight to the static, control-oriented assumptions that govern American political debate.

Still, Silicon Valley's apolitical citizens are expressing a deep faith in the American system. They are assuming that Washington will not crush the freedom on which their endeavors depend. They are trusting the government to allow them to evolve a better future. That faith may be naive, but it is hardly unpatriotic.