So Peter Thiel, famed for various things but among them helping build better systems for authoritarian (or wannabe authoritarian) regimes to monitor their populations, is afraid of an authoritarian regime brought on by...environmentalists. And somehow those environmentalists, who have relatively little power or authority in our world, are going to bring us under the control of the Antichrist.
Every major tech company executive qualifies in that regard. Bout time for another Tower of Babel moment methinks.
For example, it's quite common in a discussion for people to not really listen but just jump from one topic to another just so they can have more space to speak. I like this part where Peter subtly calls out Ross on this:
> Thiel: We’re jumping around a lot of things. So, again, the critique I was saying is: They’re not ambitious enough.
I loved the Antichrist-Armageddon analogy too:
> But I think we have an answer to this plot hole. The way the Antichrist would take over the world is you talk about Armageddon nonstop. You talk about existential risk nonstop, and this is what you need to regulate.
This also my first time actually reading/listening to Peter Thiel. Except for the one time I read the first few pages of Zero to One (before I knew who he was) and realized that we have divergent beliefs on the nature of life.
To Douthat's credit, he did us a service by raising the contradiction behind Thiel's arguments—that his business interests belie his existential concerns in a way that suggest that what he's doing here is outlining a self-fulfilling "prophecy" that puts him alongside the Antichrist figure both men evoked.
All of this is masked by the banal historical, cultural, Biblical, and industry references that Douthat willfully leads him toward making.
Interestingly enough, to Thiel's credit, the whole "trans-" thing was interesting.
Thiel (on the Antichrist): I have a lot of thoughts on this topic, but one question is -- and this was a plot hole in all these Antichrist books people wrote -- how does the Antichrist take over the world? He gives these demonic, hypnotic speeches and people just fall for it. And so it’s this plot hole. ... It’s totally implausible.
In another timeline, the interviewer from the New York Times would respond, "Peter, as a Trump supporter ... seriously?"
But no, that's not our timeline. In this one, absurdities grow unquestioned until they turn into atrocities.
In one interview he said outright if Democrats won in 2024 it would be the end of Democracy, because of great replacement theory, while also in other interviews basically saying he doesn’t like Democracy because populous’ will never come around to his views.
I wonder what we'd learn if both men spoke exactly how they felt about the issues that were raised, and treated each other in a way that reflected these feelings.
But I know that would preclude the ironic hand-holding bow at the waist that the exchange ends with.
It was nonetheless interesting.
sirodoht•7mo ago