www-us.org

Chapter 48: The Invisible Handshake

The foreign policy speeches had elevated the campaign, lending it an air of presidential seriousness. But Julian knew that for the average voter, the wars of the world were a distant echo. The battles they fought every day were closer to home, waged against a series of invisible, frustrating, and seemingly omnipotent corporate forces. It was time to give that frustration a name.

The catalyst was, as it so often was, a moment of pure, unadulterated human rage from Marcus Thorne.

The chapter opened with Marcus in the war room, his face a mask of purple fury, his smartphone held to his ear as he was subjected to the seventh circle of hell: the automated phone tree of his cable and internet provider.

“No, I don’t want to check my balance!” he seethed into the phone. “I don’t want to hear about your new bundle offers! I want to talk to a human being about the thirty-dollar ‘Network Maintenance Fee’ you slapped on my bill for no damn reason!” He stabbed at the phone’s keypad. “Representative! OPERATOR!”

Julian watched the spectacle, a quiet, analytical expression on his face. Marcus finally slammed the phone down on the table, defeated.

“That,” Julian said calmly, breaking the silence, “is a monopoly tax.”

Marcus looked at him, his rage momentarily forgotten, replaced by confusion. “A what?”

“A monopoly tax,” Julian repeated. “It is a tax levied on you, not by the government, but by a private corporation. And it is a tax you are forced to pay, not in dollars, but in your time, your sanity, and your money. You pay it because you have no other choice.”

He stood and walked to a whiteboard. “In your town, Marcus, how many choices do you have for high-speed internet?”

“One,” Marcus grumbled. “The other one is a satellite service that’s slower than a dying pigeon.”

“Exactly,” Julian said. “So the one company has no incentive to provide good customer service. They have no incentive to offer fair prices. They can add a thirty-dollar ‘Network Maintenance Fee’ to your bill for no reason, because where else are you going to go? That is the essence of a monopoly. And our country is riddled with them.”

He used this single, universally relatable moment of frustration to launch into a broader explanation of the hidden monopolies that governed American life. He connected the dots.

“It’s the airline industry,” he said, drawing a new box on the board. “In dozens of major American cities, a single carrier controls over seventy percent of the flights. That’s why your ticket prices are high, your seats are shrinking, and you get charged extra to bring a bag.”

“It’s the pharmaceutical industry,” he continued, drawing another box. “Companies use a web of patents and legal tricks to extend their monopolies on life-saving drugs for decades, allowing them to charge a cancer patient in Ohio ten times what they charge a patient in Canada for the exact same pill.”

He then introduced the core, counter-intuitive concept. “And how do these monopolies get created and protected? You would think it’s because of a lack of government regulation. Often, it is the exact opposite. It is because of a phenomenon called regulatory capture.”

He explained. “Imagine a giant, thousand-page regulation is passed, with the stated goal of ensuring safety and quality in a certain industry. A massive corporation with a hundred lawyers and a billion-dollar compliance department has no problem with this. They might have even lobbied for the regulation themselves. But for a small startup, a new competitor with five employees, that thousand-page regulation is an insurmountable wall. It is a barrier to entry that keeps them out of the market.”

He looked at his team, his expression serious. “This is the invisible handshake. It is the secret, unspoken agreement between big government and big business. The government gets to say it is ‘doing something,’ and the big corporation gets what it really wants: a protected market, free from the threat of new competition. And the person who pays the price for this handshake is always, always the consumer.”

The MARG solution, he explained, was a simple, two-pronged assault. First, a renewed, aggressive enforcement of the nation’s old anti-trust laws to break up the existing monopolies. Second, a radical simplification of the regulatory code.

“The goal of regulation should be to ensure a fair and safe marketplace,” he concluded. “It should not be to create a legal minefield that only the largest and most powerful players can navigate. Simple, clear rules foster competition. And competition is what lowers prices and improves quality for everyone.”

The campaign’s new video, released the following week, was a masterpiece of political communication. It opened with a grainy, secretly recorded audio clip of a real person’s maddening, circular conversation with an automated phone tree. The familiar, infuriatingly cheerful robotic voice filled the screen.

Then, it cut to Julian, sitting in a simple chair, looking directly into the camera. He calmly and clearly explained the concept of the “monopoly tax” and the “invisible handshake.”

He ended with a direct, powerful message. “The next time you are stuck on hold,” he said, his voice even and strong, “the next time you see a surprise fee on a bill, I want you to remember that you are not just losing your time. You are paying a tax. A tax that doesn’t build our roads or fund our schools. A tax that serves no one but a company that knows you have no other choice. A truly free market is not about the freedom of corporations to get bigger and bigger. It is about the freedom of the American people to choose.”

The video resonated with a deep, primal anger that crossed every political and demographic line. It had taken a universal, modern-day frustration and given it a name, an explanation, and a solution.

The Discourse, 48; The Politics of Universal Annoyance

Section 48.1: The "Monopoly Tax" as a Unifying Concept

The introduction of the "monopoly tax" is a brilliant piece of political branding because it takes a series of disparate, frustrating consumer experiences (the cable bill, airline fees, high drug prices) and unifies them under a single, easily understood, and politically potent concept. The power of the term "tax" is crucial. A tax is a non-voluntary, coercive payment. By framing these corporate fees and poor services as a "tax," Julian Corbin is arguing that they are not the result of a normal market exchange between a willing buyer and a willing seller. He is arguing that they are a form of rent-seeking—the extraction of economic value from others without creating any new value—made possible by a rigged, non-competitive system. This transforms the consumer's feeling of personal frustration into a sense of political injustice. It is a deeply populist message, but one that is grounded in a sound economic critique of market concentration.

Section 48.2: "Regulatory Capture" as the Invisible Enemy

The core intellectual argument is the clear explanation of "regulatory capture." This is a key concept from public choice theory, a branch of economics that studies the behavior of political actors. The theory posits that regulatory agencies, which are created to serve the public interest, often become "captured" by the very industries they are supposed to regulate. This happens because the industry has a strong, concentrated interest in the regulations, while the public's interest is diffuse and unorganized.

Corbin's "invisible handshake" is a powerful, populist metaphor for this complex academic concept. He is identifying an "invisible enemy." The traditional populist narrative pits "the people" against "big corporations." The traditional conservative narrative pits "the people" against "big government." Corbin's narrative is more sophisticated and, arguably, more accurate. He is arguing that the true enemy is the collusion between big government and big business. This is a powerful and unifying idea. It appeals to the Right's inherent distrust of government bureaucracy and to the Left's inherent distrust of corporate power. By identifying the interaction between the two as the primary problem, he transcends the traditional political binary and creates a narrative that can appeal to a much broader and more powerful coalition.

Section 48.3: The Power of a Relatable Catalyst

The strategic communication begins not with an abstract lecture, but with a universally relatable human experience: Marcus Thorne's rage-filled battle with an automated phone tree. This grounds the entire complex, abstract discussion of monopoly and regulatory capture in a simple, visceral, and slightly humorous moment. An audience does not need a degree in economics to understand Marcus's frustration; they have almost certainly felt it themselves. This creates an immediate emotional buy-in for the argument that follows. When Julian then says, "That is a monopoly tax," he is not presenting a dry theory; he is providing a clear and satisfying explanation for a pain the audience already feels. This technique—starting with a relatable, human-scale problem and then "zooming out" to explain the larger systemic forces that create it—is a core pedagogical method of the MARG campaign. It respects the voter's lived experience and makes them feel seen and understood.

Section 48.4: From Annoyance to Platform

Ultimately, the entire sequence is a masterclass in political communication. It demonstrates how to take a seemingly minor, "first-world problem"—a bad customer service experience—and to successfully connect it to a grand, systemic critique of the entire political economy. This is an incredibly effective way to politicize a previously apolitical frustration. The campaign is making the argument that the small, daily indignities and annoyances that people experience are not random acts of corporate incompetence; they are the direct, predictable result of a set of deliberate policy choices. By doing so, the campaign transforms a passive, frustrated consumer into an engaged, angry, and motivated citizen.