[hacknat]

I don't disagree, but I think there is a lot of nuance to it. Thiel is an ardent disciple of Rene Girard. If people want insight into how Thiel sees the world, I would strongly recommend reading The Straussian Moment. There is a Peter Robinson interview about the essay that can serve as a good primer[1].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRleB034EC8

[Applejinx]

Girard and thus Thiel hold that "If there is a normal order in societies, it must be the fruit of an anterior crisis."

They're not wrong that this is A source of order, but they overlook the human tendency to form community and cooperate: this vision of theirs is about how to form societies when they are by definition all against all, a brutal struggle of nihilism and despair.

That's only one way humans can be, and it's a way that competes with the more leftist tendency to make everything about the community and cooperation.

Seems like a meta-narrative is needed that incorporates both of these positions that are held by their supporters as the ONLY position that can exist.

[hacknat]

You need to read Girard more closely (I recommend reading Things Hidden...)

Girard does not embrace a Hobbesian view of the world, he is trying to explain the origin of human cooperation and society. The scapegoat narrative is not a nihilistic war of all-against-all it is a narrative of all-against-one to create order. Human cooperation can exist when violence is pared-down to one person (the scapegoat).

Where Girard admits that nihilism can come into play is when the scapegoat narrative becomes openly acknowledged. Which is what he argues Christianity effectively did (opened up the scapegoat mechanism for all to see, thus rendering it ineffective). Girard predicts that our lack of a scapegoat mechanism will likely lead to apocalyptic violence.

Frankly, I think the leftist view that humans can cooperate out-of-the-head-of-Zeus is naive and needs no account, because it has never happened.

[caeril]

Right, except very frequently, the scapegoat isn't a single figure, but rather a group.

The Bourgeoise, the Jews, the QAnons, the Blacks, the Whites, the Immigrants, the Rich, the Anti-Vaxxers, the Catholics, the Muslims, the Kulaks, the <insert group here>

If humanity could unite and create order under the periodic ritual sacrifice of a single King, we'd be much better off than the way it actually happens, which is scapegoating and sacrificing millions of people at once.

[fallingfrog]

Sorry, but all this stuff about the “scapegoat narrative” and so forth is clearly the sort of syncretic pseudo-spiritual voodoo that crops up from time to time.

[Applejinx]

I'm an open source developer.

I see folks cooperating all the time. Best part of the job. Granted, we are 'leaving money on the table', but this is better.

[intro-b]

absolutely — my few sentences is just a rough summary of a small part of Thiel's thinking and ideology

summing his life as a Silicon Valley bad guy is a gross oversimplification — his actions and work is the product of decades of his study and thought, and has evolved in a number of ways over time if you follow his writings and interviews

it's clear that he holds the ideas he's arrived at with conviction, and has been in the process of enacting them through financial or political or intellectual means

[angelzen]

As the rosy promises of Silicon Valley flounder and the naked reality of techno-capitalism becomes apparent (hello serfdom, err, gig economy, we've missed ya), it is imperative to find a scapegoat. What better scapegoat than a disciple of Girard?

[aaroninsf]

IMO his intellectualism provides active cover for an autocratic-minded zero-sum sociopathy, which when married to his accumulated wealth represents an existential threat.

This is not irrelevant to the conception of and market of Palantir.

He is the Erik Prince of "tech" and like Prince, is a literal merchant of death.

[hacknat]

If true that distinguishes him from nobody, including people without power. However, a serious investigation of Thiel's work dismisses any serious accusation of "Intellectualism" it is well thought out and philosophically rigorous.

Is he completely correct? Probably not. But then, who is?

If one person is an existential threat to humanity (which is what I assume you mean) then, frankly, we probably "deserve" it (in the evolutionary sense). Thiel is useful here to countermand this point. One of his most useful ideas is that the so called "powerful" and "elite" have much less power than we think they do and can can be easily circumvented if ignored (of course there are marginal cases).

[zepto]

> autocratic-minded zero-sum sociopathy

Where is the evidence of this?