What happened
Writer Jonathan Chait argues that Donald Trump and some far-left movements share a common feature: both favor strong, top-down control over big economic choices. The piece compares political language to the actual power to pick winners and losers in the economy. It treats control of investment and regulation as the key similarity.
The article frames this as not just an idea fight. It’s about who gets to make the big calls that shape jobs, prices, and corporate power.
Who wins here
Big business and people with political access often gain when control is concentrated. When leaders make decisions alone, insiders usually get better deals. That includes contractors, campaign donors, and firms that can move fast to cash in.
Regular voters lose bargaining power. Their choices matter less when big rules are set in private.
How the play works
The main mechanism is centralized decision-making. Officials pick projects, carve out exceptions, or shield favored firms from competition. That lets winners capture profits and shape markets.
Money and access turn into influence. Donations, deals, and appointments lock in advantages that are hard for everyday people to undo.
Why it matters
These plays change who benefits from the economy. They can raise prices or cut services for regular people. They also weaken checks like oversight, audits, and public debate.
When power concentrates, the public pays in less competition, fewer jobs, and weaker consumer protections.
What to watch next
Watch for rule changes, contract awards, or fast approvals that skirt review. Track who gets government help or tax breaks and who loses out.
If insiders win again, expect more markets tilted toward the connected and fewer choices for everyone else.