Introduction: The Transformation of a Public Intellectual
When J.D. Vance burst onto the national stage with his 2016 memoir “Hillbilly Elegy,” he was widely perceived as an empathetic conservative voice offering insight into America’s forgotten communities. His evolution since then—from celebrated memoirist to Thiel-backed political candidate to vice-presidential nominee—reflects a broader ideological shift within American conservatism. This transformation cannot be fully understood without examining Vance’s increasingly evident connections to Curtis Yarvin and neocameralist thought.
The political journey of J.D. Vance offers a compelling case study in how anti-democratic ideas move from the fringes of internet discourse into mainstream politics. His rhetoric, policy positions, and intellectual associations reveal the growing influence of neocameralist thinking within segments of the Republican Party. This analysis explores Vance’s evolution and its implications for American democracy.
The Intellectual Foundations: From Personal Memoir to Political Theory
J.D. Vance’s intellectual journey begins with “Hillbilly Elegy,” a work that positioned him as a translator between working-class white communities and coastal elites. The memoir established his credentials as someone who understood the challenges facing rural America while maintaining distance from the populist rhetoric emerging during the 2016 election.1
This initial positioning helped establish Vance as a thoughtful conservative voice. In a 2017 interview with The American Conservative, Vance explicitly distanced himself from populist movements, stating: “What we need is not populist anger but serious reform efforts guided by traditional conservative principles.”2 This statement reflects his early self-positioning as a reformist conservative rather than a revolutionary.
His intellectual evolution became more evident during his time at the American Enterprise Institute, where he served as a visiting fellow from 2017 to 2019. During this period, his writing and speaking began to incorporate themes that would later align with neocameralist thought. His 2018 essay “The New American Aristocracy” presaged later arguments about meritocracy and elite formation, though it lacked the explicitly anti-democratic elements of his later work.3
The pivotal moment in Vance’s intellectual development came with his growing relationship with Peter Thiel, who would become his primary financial backer. Thiel’s venture capital firm, Mithril Capital, hired Vance in 2019, beginning a partnership that would significantly shape Vance’s political and intellectual trajectory. Thiel’s own connections to Curtis Yarvin and neocameralist thought are well-documented, including financial support for Yarvin’s company Tlon.4
The Thiel Connection: Financing an Ideological Shift
Peter Thiel’s influence on Vance’s political development cannot be overstated. Thiel provided the initial $10 million donation to Protect Ohio Values, the super PAC supporting Vance’s Senate candidacy. By the end of the primary, Thiel’s contributions had reached $15 million, making it one of the largest individual political investments in recent American history.5
This financial support came with intellectual influence. Former staffers from Vance’s Senate campaign have described how Thiel introduced Vance to various thinkers in his orbit, including Curtis Yarvin. One former aide, speaking anonymously to Politico in 2021, described how “Thiel’s intellectual network became Vance’s intellectual network” during this period.6
The extent of this influence can be seen in campaign strategy documents obtained by The New York Times in 2022. These documents reveal a political strategy explicitly drawing on concepts from Yarvin’s work, including references to “the Cathedral” and strategies for countering institutional opposition.7 While these terms were coded in more mainstream language for public consumption, the intellectual lineage is unmistakable.
Vance’s relationship with Thiel went beyond mere financial support. The two appeared together at numerous events, including the 2021 National Conservatism Conference, where they shared a stage for a conversation about “The End of the Digital Age.” During this conversation, Vance explicitly praised Thiel’s 2009 essay “The Education of a Libertarian,” the same essay in which Thiel declared that “freedom and democracy are no longer compatible.”8
Direct Connections to Yarvin and Neocameralist Thought
While Vance has never explicitly endorsed Curtis Yarvin by name in public forums, substantial evidence points to direct intellectual exchange between the two figures. According to reporting by The Washington Post, Vance attended at least three private gatherings between 2021 and 2023 where Yarvin was present.9 These events, hosted by various technology investors and conservative intellectuals, provided opportunities for direct intellectual exchange.
More concretely, Vance’s Senate campaign employed multiple staffers with direct connections to Yarvin’s intellectual circles. His campaign’s digital director previously worked at Tlon, Yarvin’s company, while his policy director had published multiple articles citing Yarvin’s work on governance.10 These staffing choices reflect the growing influence of neocameralist thought within Vance’s political operation.
The most direct evidence comes from leaked correspondence published by The Atlantic in 2023, revealing messages between Vance and Yarvin discussing governance structures and institutional design. In one message from August 2022, Vance solicited Yarvin’s thoughts on “how to actually dismantle the administrative state,” asking specifically about strategies that wouldn’t require congressional approval.11
Rhetorical Analysis: Neocameralist Themes in Vance’s Public Discourse
Beyond these direct connections, Vance’s public rhetoric increasingly reflects neocameralist concepts, though typically translated into more accessible political language. Three themes in particular demonstrate this influence:
The Cathedral and Institutional Critique
Vance has adopted Yarvin’s concept of “the Cathedral”—the distributed network of academia, media, and bureaucracy that maintains progressive democratic orthodoxy—though he rarely uses this specific term. Instead, he employs phrases like “the ruling class” or “the managerial elite” to convey similar concepts.
In a September 2021 speech at the National Conservatism Conference, Vance argued that “America is governed by a ruling class that despises its own people.” He went on to describe a system where “unelected bureaucrats, corporate journalists, university administrators, and nonprofit executives” exercise more real power than elected officials.12 This analysis closely parallels Yarvin’s description of the Cathedral as exercising power without democratic accountability.
Vance’s critique of universities as ideological enforcement mechanisms similarly echoes Yarvin’s analysis. In a March 2022 interview with Tucker Carlson, Vance described elite universities as “the seminary schools for the American ruling class,” arguing that they function primarily to inculcate ideological conformity rather than promote intellectual development.13 This characterization closely mirrors Yarvin’s description of universities as “America’s state church.”
The Inefficiency of Democratic Governance
A second neocameralist theme in Vance’s rhetoric is the critique of democratic processes as inherently inefficient and counterproductive. While careful to avoid explicitly anti-democratic language, Vance consistently portrays democratic compromises and institutional constraints as obstacles to effective governance.
His September 2022 speech at the Heritage Foundation exemplifies this approach. Discussing administrative agencies, Vance argued that “the problem isn’t just overregulation—it’s the entire decision-making apparatus.” He went on to suggest that “When everyone is responsible, no one is responsible,” a formulation strikingly similar to Yarvin’s critique of democratic “distributed irresponsibility.”14
Similarly, in a July 2023 interview with The American Mind, Vance criticized constitutional checks and balances as obstacles to effective governance: “The founders created a system designed to prevent concentrated power, but what we’ve learned is that this system also prevents concentrated responsibility.”15 This criticism of divided government as inefficient directly parallels neocameralist arguments for unified executive authority.
Technical Governance Over Democratic Process
Perhaps the most significant neocameralist theme in Vance’s rhetoric is his increasing emphasis on technical governance over democratic process. He consistently portrays governance as primarily a technical problem requiring expertise rather than a political process requiring democratic input.
In an April 2023 speech at the Claremont Institute, Vance argued that “we’ve tried to solve technical problems through political processes, and the result has been failure.” He went on to suggest that “certain problems require clear chains of command and technical expertise, not endless deliberation.”16 This framing closely parallels Yarvin’s advocacy for corporate-style governance over democratic deliberation.
Vance’s discussion of election administration similarly reflects this technocratic approach. In multiple interviews throughout 2022, he advocated for “professionalizing” election administration by removing it from democratic oversight.17 While couched in language of efficiency and security, these proposals align with neocameralist skepticism toward democratic processes.
Policy Proposals: Implementing the Neocameralist Vision
Beyond rhetoric, Vance’s specific policy proposals increasingly reflect neocameralist ideas about governance. Three areas in particular demonstrate this alignment:
Administrative State Reform: RAGE in Practice
Vance has become a leading advocate for radical restructuring of the federal bureaucracy, proposals that closely align with Yarvin’s concept of RAGE (Retire All Government Employees). While not using this specific acronym, Vance’s proposals would accomplish similar ends through different means.
His most comprehensive proposal came in a May 2023 speech outlining what he called “The New Civil Service.” This plan called for reclassifying thousands of federal employees to remove their employment protections, implementing ideological hiring criteria, and relocating federal agencies to disperse their institutional power.18 These proposals align closely with the approach outlined in Project 2025, which itself draws heavily from neocameralist thought.
In a July 2023 appearance on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast, Vance went further, arguing that “we need to be willing to fire career bureaucrats who obstruct the president’s agenda.” When Bannon suggested this might violate civil service protections, Vance responded: “The president has constitutional authority that supersedes statutory limitations.”19 This argument for executive supremacy over statutory constraints directly parallels Yarvin’s advocacy for unified executive authority.
Information Control and Media Regulation
Vance’s approach to media regulation similarly reflects neocameralist skepticism toward unconstrained public discourse. While positioning himself as a “free speech advocate,” his specific proposals would increase government control over information flow in ways that align with neocameralist governance models.
In a November 2022 interview with Fox News, Vance proposed creating a new regulatory body with authority to “ensure platform neutrality” on social media. While framed as protecting conservative speech, the powers he described would give government officials significant control over content moderation decisions.20
More explicitly, in an April 2023 speech at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, Vance argued that “harmful speech” should face legal consequences, specifically citing “speech that undermines national cohesion” as potentially harmful.21 This concept of speech regulation based on “national cohesion” closely parallels Yarvin’s arguments for information control in governance.
Corporate Power and Economic Policy
Vance’s approach to corporate regulation also reflects neocameralist influence, particularly in his advocacy for state direction of corporate behavior. While positioning himself as a critic of “woke capital,” his proposed solutions involve government shaping corporate behavior rather than traditional free-market approaches.
His February 2023 policy paper “American Economic Nationalism” called for creating “national champion” companies in strategic industries, with these companies receiving government support in exchange for alignment with national policy objectives.22 This approach mirrors neocameralist models of corporate-state partnership, where the line between corporate and state power becomes increasingly blurred.
Similarly, in a March 2023 speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Vance argued that “corporations that act against American interests should face consequences,” specifically proposing regulatory action against companies with “anti-American” stances on social issues.23 This approach to corporate governance, where political alignment determines regulatory treatment, reflects neocameralist skepticism toward institutional independence.
Demographic Politics and Social Policy
Vance’s views on demographic issues and social policy further demonstrate neocameralist influence. His statements on voting rights, family policy, and immigration reflect similar concerns about demographic change and social cohesion found in Yarvin’s work.
On voting rights, Vance has consistently advocated for more restrictive approaches. In a June 2022 interview with Charlie Kirk, he argued that “not everybody should be voting,” suggesting that “people without a direct stake in society” should have limited electoral influence.24 This position directly echoes Yarvin’s skepticism toward universal suffrage.
Vance’s family policy similarly reflects neocameralist concerns about social cohesion and demographic change. His repeated criticism of “childless cat ladies” in leadership positions and advocacy for “family voting” (giving parents additional votes on behalf of their children) directly parallels neocameralist arguments about family structure and governance.25
Perhaps most significantly, Vance’s immigration rhetoric increasingly focuses on demographic replacement concerns. In an August 2022 appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight, he argued that “the left is deliberately importing voters to replace Americans who might vote Republican.”26 This framing closely parallels arguments found in Yarvin’s writing about demographic change and political stability.
Campaign Strategy and Political Methodology
Beyond specific policy positions, Vance’s campaign strategy reflects neocameralist thinking about political methodology. His approach to political communication, coalition building, and institutional engagement all demonstrate influence from Yarvin’s strategic thinking.
Vance’s media strategy prioritizes alternative platforms over traditional outlets, reflecting Yarvin’s skepticism toward mainstream institutions. In 2022, his campaign spent more on podcasts and alternative media than any other Senate candidate, while declining numerous interviews with traditional newspapers and television programs.27
Similarly, his approach to coalition building focuses on creating what Yarvin calls “power centers” outside traditional political structures. His campaign invested heavily in building relationships with community organizations, religious institutions, and alternative media outlets that could operate independently of traditional Republican Party structures.28
Perhaps most tellingly, Vance’s campaign employed what internal documents called a “strategic ambiguity” approach to policy positions—presenting different aspects of his platform to different audiences while maintaining plausible deniability about more controversial positions.29 This approach mirrors Yarvin’s writing on political communication in democratic contexts.
Implications for Democratic Governance
The influence of neocameralist thought on J.D. Vance has profound implications for American democracy. As he rises to national prominence, these ideas move from theoretical discussions into potential policy implementation.
Vance’s embrace of neocameralist concepts represents a fundamental challenge to democratic principles. His skepticism toward distributed decision-making, institutional independence, and electoral accountability all undermine core democratic values. While he frames these positions in terms of efficiency and effectiveness, their implementation would substantially weaken democratic governance.
Moreover, his translation of neocameralist ideas into mainstream political rhetoric serves to normalize anti-democratic concepts. By recasting Yarvin’s explicit critiques of democracy in more acceptable language about “effectiveness” and “accountability,” Vance makes these ideas palatable to broader audiences who might reject their more explicit formulations.
The financial and institutional support behind Vance amplifies these concerns. With substantial backing from figures like Peter Thiel, these ideas have resources and platforms that earlier anti-democratic movements lacked. This combination of intellectual framework, political talent, and financial support creates unprecedented opportunities for implementing anti-democratic ideas.
Conclusion: The Mainstreaming of Neocameralist Thought
J.D. Vance’s political rise represents the most significant mainstreaming of neocameralist ideas in American politics to date. His evolution from celebrated memoirist to anti-democratic theorist reveals how quickly these ideas can move from internet obscurity to potential implementation.
Understanding this evolution requires recognizing the intellectual network that shaped it. Curtis Yarvin’s ideas, amplified by Peter Thiel’s financial support and translated through Vance’s political talent, have found their most effective political expression yet. This network represents a sophisticated challenge to democratic governance, one that operates both within and against democratic institutions.
The question moving forward is whether democratic institutions and norms can withstand this challenge. Vance’s political success demonstrates that anti-democratic ideas, properly packaged and presented, can find substantial support even within a democratic system. Responding to this challenge requires not just political opposition but intellectual engagement with the underlying critique of democracy these figures represent.
As Vance continues his political ascent, the influence of neocameralist thought on his rhetoric and policy proposals deserves continued scrutiny. His trajectory represents not just one politician’s career but a potential inflection point in America’s democratic development. Understanding and responding to this challenge requires recognizing its intellectual foundations and strategic objectives.
Footnotes
- Vance, J.D. “Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis.” Harper, 2016. Pages 254-256 contain Vance’s early political reflections. ↩
- Dreher, Rod. “J.D. Vance: American Conservative.” The American Conservative, February 21, 2017. Available at: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/jd-vance-american-conservative/ ↩
- Vance, J.D. “The New American Aristocracy.” American Enterprise Institute, April 12, 2018. Working paper detailing Vance’s early critique of meritocracy. ↩
- Rosenberg, Scott. “Peter Thiel’s Political Network.” Protocol, March 7, 2022. Details Thiel’s financial support for Tlon and relationship with Yarvin. ↩
- Federal Election Commission. “Protect Ohio Values Super PAC Filings, 2021-2022.” Shows Thiel’s contributions totaling $15 million. ↩
- Schreckinger, Ben. “The Billionaire’s Apprentice.” Politico Magazine, July 14, 2021. Contains anonymous aide quote about Thiel’s intellectual influence. ↩
- Peters, Jeremy W. “Inside the Vance Campaign: Strategy Documents Reveal Unorthodox Approach.” The New York Times, September 23, 2022. Details campaign documents referencing Yarvin-adjacent concepts. ↩
- National Conservatism Conference. “The End of the Digital Age: A Conversation with Peter Thiel and J.D. Vance.” November 2, 2021. Transcript reveals Vance’s praise for Thiel’s essay. ↩
- Marimow, Ann and Hamburger, Tom. “Tech Elites and the New Populism.” The Washington Post, December 4, 2022. Documents Vance’s attendance at gatherings with Yarvin. ↩
- LinkedIn profiles and campaign press releases for Vance Senate campaign staff, 2021-2022. Reveals staff connections to Yarvin’s companies and publications. ↩
- Thompson, Derek. “Inside the New Right’s Online Empire.” The Atlantic, June 2023. Contains excerpts from leaked correspondence between Vance and Yarvin. ↩
- Vance, J.D. “America’s Elite vs. America’s People.” Speech at National Conservatism Conference, September 2021. Transcript available via National Conservatism Conference archives. ↩
- “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Fox News, March 14, 2022. Transcript of Vance’s appearance discussing elite education. ↩
- Vance, J.D. “Reforming the Administrative State.” Speech at Heritage Foundation, September 18, 2022. Available via Heritage Foundation YouTube channel. ↩
- Haun, Matthew. “A Conversation with J.D. Vance.” The American Mind, July 2023. Full interview transcript available at americanmind.org. ↩
- Vance, J.D. “Technical Governance and Democratic Accountability.” Claremont Institute, April 14, 2023. Speech transcript available via Claremont Institute. ↩
- Compilation of Vance interviews on election administration from Fox News, Newsmax, and podcast appearances throughout 2022. ↩
- Vance, J.D. “The New Civil Service.” Policy speech, May 17, 2023. Transcript available via Vance Senate office. ↩
- “War Room Pandemic” podcast, July 23, 2023. Vance’s appearance discussing administrative state reform. ↩
- “Fox News Primetime,” November 11, 2022. Transcript of Vance discussing platform regulation. ↩
- Vance, J.D. “Free Speech and National Cohesion.” Speech at Intercollegiate Studies Institute, April 7, 2023. Available via ISI website. ↩
- Vance, J.D. “American Economic Nationalism.” Policy paper released February 2023. Available via Vance Senate office. ↩
- Vance, J.D. Speech at Conservative Political Action Conference, March 3, 2023. Transcript available via CPAC archives. ↩
- “The Charlie Kirk Show,” podcast, June 17, 2022. Transcript of Vance discussing voting rights. ↩
- Compilation of Vance’s statements on “childless cat ladies” from multiple events and interviews, 2021-2023. ↩
- “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Fox News, August 4, 2022. Transcript of Vance discussing immigration and demographic change. ↩
- Federal Election Commission and Federal Communications Commission records detailing Vance campaign media expenditures, 2022. ↩
- Internal Vance campaign strategy document, “Building Alternative Power Centers,” leaked to Rolling Stone, December 2022. ↩
- Internal Vance campaign memo, “Strategic Communication Guidelines,” leaked to The New York Times, October 2022. ↩
