A bureaucratic class seems intent on casting success and experience as evidence of corruption. In reality the opposite is true — success and market experience come from consistently demonstrated and measurable good judgement.
This may be the point: portray anyone with real-world experience as too conflicted to serve in government so only professional bureaucrats/activists/NGO-types (with the same views as NYT reporters) are eligible
A bureaucratic class seems intent on casting success and experience as evidence of corruption. In reality the opposite is true — success and market experience come from consistently demonstrated and measurable good judgement.
That's the converse of corruption; having more people with proven judgement like David Sacks inside the bureaucracy to reform it would be beneficial