“’We must create a global community that works for everyone … ’ Mark Zuckerberg’s letter-manifesto is packed with good intentions and ideas that are often commendable, sometimes questionable, and almost always general. It was posted online to realign Facebook’s trajectory in an era in which its original mission has been called into question by the forces opposing globalization: ‘To work for a more open and connected world.’”* So begins an article by Massimo Gaggi on Feb. 18, in the newspaper Corriere della Sera.
The Facebook founder’s letter is very long and cogent, according to this journalist, who explains how “the particular moment chosen by the young entrepreneur to update Facebook’s mission” seems strange. In fact, Gaggi wonders if such a manifesto may be the “early personal announcement of a political endeavor ... ” The suspicion arises from the question that opens the letter: “Are we building the world we all want?”
Says Gaggi: “What world? But above all, we who? The Facebook community, which it seems the letter is targeting, or the entire world? Zuckerberg’s global message is rather ambitious: Shape a global community that highlights civilization’s latest progress following the ages ‘from tribes to cities to nations.’”
Side note. Gaggi is not the only one to posit that Zuckerberg is thinking of a future in the White House. The theory has already been around for awhile, specifically from the time that the liberal world, faced with Hillary Clinton's defeat, was looking around for a new icon to promote in place of Michelle Obama, herself a possible future candidate, but it was not to that world's satisfaction, as Zuckerberg is too independent.
A scenario, that of the presidential election. The election is certain to occur in four years, but of course the world is accustomed to discussing this prospectively because it contemplates creating so many difficulties for Trump, through real and fictitious scandals, that could force the tycoon to resign or worse. And the Trumpster leaves himself open to many points of attack, given his personality, isolation and inexperience.
Zuckerberg is a strong figure, with unparalleled power to influence, thanks to his social networking creation. Needless to say, his potential presidency would be Big Brother in its most complete form, possessing the personal data and information of a community of a billion and a half people.
Mr. FB has the necessary qualifications to satisfy the powers that be: a youthful and unspoiled revolutionary image. He may presumably count on the support of the so-called millennials, a deciding factor i Clinton’s defeat. His social network offers a positive image of globalization in contrast to its “populist” adversaries. He is not a politician, which is a prerequisite to making policy. But he’s a successful businessman and much more.
His only limit is his own strength, which could scare voters. Luckily, it is still early enough to see him get in the fight. Trump is still at the wheel. His presidency, in spite of all its flaws, is at least, for now, mitigating international tensions, which have shifted inward toward the United States. His fate is rather nebulous and his concessions to the neocons are having a great effect on his already limited capacity to influence. We shall see if, how long (and in what way) it will last. It remains to be seen whether or not Zuckerberg (or even more, his sponsors) decide to cross the Rubicon.
*Editor’s note: Mark Zuckerberg’s actual words were, “Thanks for everything you do to make the world more open and connected.”