I wonder if he's been talking to AI a lot and it pushed him over the edge to psychosis?
I'm not sure even this is what destroys Denethor's mind though so much as it is the thought of the ring. He sees it as his by right of need. He sacrifices both his sons in his madness to have it, for the madness of power. His view of the world is so bleak that saving it in a way that destroys it seems "right" to him
It's not a particularly flattering portrayal- the military success is shown as belonging to Boromir more than Denethor- but at least it shows him sane.
In any sane place, his hate of democracy and freedom would make him a pariah. Instead, he is the current US Vice President's mentor and most trusted advisor.
You just described a good dozen or so VC/Tech Bros
I am actually sympathetic to much of what Thiel has done, but the current arc makes the supposed Howard Hughes oddities look positively reasonable.
- Expressed hesitation on whether the human should survive without being moved into computers [1]
- That Greta Thunburg could be the antichrist and cause the end of humanity [2]
- (Leaked) Apparently he has also called Pope Leo the antichrist [3]
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSp07P8jvYs
2. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Ao_umPlSV6o
3. https://www.thelettersfromleo.com/p/new-jd-vances-top-donor-...
probably on other podcast outlets also
There is no "THE Antichrist" there are only antichrists, plural, normal not supernatural people and organizations that behave in a notably non-christlike way, and both parties here seem to qualify easily.
Agreed, it would be exceptionally hard to choose just 1 (or even 10) right now.
That's not really a reasonable argument, because Thiel hasn't had the power of the Vatican (especially the power the vatican used to have), but what he's done with his power so far is much more concerning to me that what the vatican has done in the last 4 years, yes.
I think we both agree that the catholic church has received an unwarranted elevation and presumption of beneficence in media, but the distinction I'm drawing is that a billionaire who's toiling in American politics and claiming Greta Thunburg could be the antichrist is actively concerning.
Funnily enough, the bible agrees, or at least John's epistles.
People who fantasize themselves as the antichrist (like Thiel, he's not very good at hiding it) ought to remember that antichrists being a dime a dozen is quite biblical.
I take it you would like to compare against the whole of the Vatican's existence, and not against just the whole of Peter Thiel's adulthood?
To this extent, Shpiel is like any zealot who stalks the halls of institutional religion.
However...
> Thiel is consciously seeking to position himself as a figure of religious authority, using scripture and philosophy to preach in favor of a capitalism that murders democracy. He clearly wants to recruit people to his cause, perhaps to start a movement.
Many US voters have already joined the movement and the current Presiking speaks and acts as though he has no intention of being removed.
US voters need to wake up if ever an awakening was needed. Home-grown lunatics and thieves now run the country. As oligarchs, they are positioning themselves to be untouchable by destroying democracy and the rule of law:
> his companies and allies embedded in Trump’s fascist regime and his protégé, JD Vance, a heartbeat from the presidency—Thiel has launched a campaign to herald the Antichrist.
It’s all deeply weird, and films like the Mountainhead increasingly seem like they might be more accurate than not.
There’s just clearly some limit around accumulated wealth where it detaches people further and further from reality.
(Matthew 19:24) "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Coming to grips with his Sin by trying to explain the Antichrist "but not THE Antichrist because that would require believe in the Bible".
Well with the antichrist in charge of the US, I guess he has a good example to follow :)
To me, all this shows is being rich still won't make you smart.
With that said, I wish the Pope would send a real message. Start excommunicating Roman Catholics who enable Trump. I would start with the ones on the US Supreme Court then move on to Congress and the VP.
Put simply, he (and many other tech bros) have galaxy brained themselves into some very stupid stuff.
I thought Thiel's argument was that the anti-AI crowd might tend towards a pagan primitivism (like with mentioning those like Greta) and authoritarian measures to stamp out technology with an Anti-Christ leader, emphasizing base physical pleasure over technological "progress". I guess that's one "End Times" possible trajectory.
Catholicism's not necessarily really for or against (classically) liberal democracies, with exception of specific configurations that might be condemned afaik with books like "Liberalism is a Sin" (liberalismisasin.com) or writings against the "heresy of Americanism".
The Vatican could have pointed to Catholic views of prophecy, like Rev. Huchede's "History of Anti-Christ", so people might compare views being presented: https://archive.org/details/huchede-history-anti-christ-best...
p. 11 says, in contrast to a top comment here that claims there is no singular Anti-Christ figure: "the Sacred Scriptures speak of Antichrist in various places as being a particular person or individual."
Rome has been thought to have fallen to modernism with the Vatican 2 changes, which sets them up more for accepting or bringing about the rise of an Anti-Christ movement in the views of some traditionalists
(can elaborate on anything if anyone requests it)
vrganj•5h ago
The title translates to:
>American heresy: should Peter Thiel be burned at the stake?
expedition32•2h ago
embedding-shape•2h ago
nutjob2•2h ago
mtrovo•1h ago
And if you wanna go back even further just remember that while Europe and christian countries were living in the dark ages the Islamic world was the one driving forward scientific knowledge and the exchange of ideas with the East. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
vrganj•2h ago
mikkupikku•1h ago
vrganj•1h ago
mikkupikku•1h ago
notahacker•1h ago
kergonath•1h ago
That is not the Vatican’s article at all. It’s just a website. You make it sound like the Catholic Church is openly discussing burning someone, it is not the case. And the trope "faut-il brûler … ?" is common in French and completely metaphorical. Again, nobody is advocating putting anyone on a bonfire.
vrganj•1h ago
I think calling that "the Vatican's article" is fair.