No it was the "Antitrust Paradox" by Bork who made a very compelling argument that at the time trust busting was too aggressive and we should focus not on the effect of monopolies on competitors but on consumers.
In the recent decide it might have swung too far in the other direction.
Bork made the argument. But as with all ideologies, that was then embraced and, with the aid of monopoly-money billions (the real kind), reamplified throughout the "public" (monopoly-fed) discourse and corridors of policy definition (legislatures, regulators, academe). Jane Mayer's Dark Money tells much of that story.
Some who find themselves so embraced shun the contact. Bork reveled in it.
In the recent decide it might have swung too far in the other direction.