6 ms·

I'm genuinely curious what the rational for Thiel is in doing this. He's a smart guy, but I just don't see the ROI. At this point, it seems very unlikely that

I'm genuinely curious what the rational for Thiel is in doing this. He's a smart guy, but I just don't see the ROI. At this point, it seems very unlikely that Trump will get elected. So Thiel isn't getting access to a future President. Plus, in addition to the monetary cost of the donation there's definitely a very real reputational cost. A lot of people in SV hate Trump and are completely mystified as to Thiel's support. (Personally, I'm also confused as to how a self-described libertarian would support a candidate who opposes freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and increased government control over the internet.)

pesenti 10y ago
Small chance of making it to the Supreme Court? http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57d80d57e4b09d7a687f9b03/amp http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57d80d57e4b09d7a687f9b03/a... ?
- morgante 10y ago
  > Small chance of making it to the Supreme Court? That honestly does not seem like a very compelling reason. I think Thiel can easily have a bigger impact on the world outside the Supreme Court.
- daveguy 10y ago
  If Trump became president and nominates Thiel I expect it would be one of the rare times that the Senate rejects the nomination -- considering this donation and relative lack of experience.
  - douche 10y ago
    I would support Thiel, or really, any engineer or tech-related person, being on the supreme court. It is absurd that we have fossils that do not have email accounts making decisions on laws touching on the technological future of the country for the rest of their natural lives.
    - jacquesm 10y ago
      Well, at least those fossils dedicated their lives to studying the law and whether or not they have email accounts doesn't mean squat. Decisions about technology are made with input from many who are well versed in technology.
internaut 10y ago
It's the Stagnation Hypothesis. More precisely it is the high level implications of the Stagnation Hypothesis. You won't know it from HN or a survey of typical developers but the people who really run Silicon Valley have a set of beliefs about the world which are very different to the people who work for them. Watch this all the way through. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMpmfaE9bII https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMpmfaE9bII
- morgante 10y ago
  I'm not talking about typical developers. Lots of top technology leaders have come out vehemently against Trump, [0] including Sam Altman, who I would definitely include in "the people who really run Silicon Valley." [1] To be clear, I'm not disputing Thiel's politics. I think he's right about a lot of things. They have near-zero overlap with Trump's policies. Trump is easily the least libertarian Republican presidential candidate in recent history. [0] https://shift.newco.co/an-open-letter-from-technology-sector-leaders-on-donald-trumps-candidacy-for-president-5bf734c159e4 https://shift.newco.co/an-open-letter-from-technology-sector... [1] http://blog.samaltman.com/trump http://blog.samaltman.com/trump
  - internaut 10y ago
    I believe you're missing a puzzle piece. Take the time out to watch a few of his Youtube videos. They are long and have very low view counts but they're important.
    - morgante 10y ago
      Sorry, but the priors on a random Internet commentator insisting that the only way to understand his farfetched, radical theory is to watch hours of videos are not very positive. It would be helpful if you could provide a rational and concise summary here. I'd genuinely like to learn more.
      - natrius 10y ago
        Short answer: globalization hurts the developed world in the absence of real technological breakthroughs (energy too cheap to meter, something we use a lot gets can now be made for half the price, etc.). A richer world just means more competition for scarce things. The rational policy for a self-interested superpower might be to ease up on globalization.
rorykoehler 10y ago
I've always found the right-libertarian philosophy to be extremely confused. They want freedom to do whatever they want but they also want to base everything off of capitalism which by definition means you can't do whatever you want unless you're rich. It just doesn't make any sense (unless of course you're already a billionaire in which case your world is already quite libertarian in reality).
- solipsism 10y ago
  I have my problems with Libertarianism, but I don't understand what you don't understand. Libertarians think everyone should have freedom to do whatever one wants, but that says nothing of having power to do whatever one wants.
  - rorykoehler 10y ago
    Freedom is not freedom without power to exercise said freedom.
    - WalterBright 10y ago
      The word 'freedom' has many different meanings.
    - solipsism 10y ago
      Freedom in the Libertarianism context (and in most contexts) means lack of coercion or constraint imposed by government or other institutions. It doesn't refer to freedom from natural or physical constraints. That wouldn't make any sense to advocate for. Does this clear it up for you?
      - rorykoehler 10y ago
        Precisely. The inability of a person to choose their desired path because they need money to feed their family is textbook economic coercion. We've long passed the point where lack of resources (especially food) is a physical/natural constraint.
_yvjs 10y ago
Has Thiel described himself as "libertarian" recently? Even if he has, I'm not sure he means it in the same sense as the general population. I like Samuel Hammond's analysis. His shorthand for Thiel's political philosophy is "corporate feudalism": https://medium.com/@hamandcheese/why-peter-thiels-endorsement-of-trump-actually-makes-perfect-sense-894f9c530476 https://medium.com/@hamandcheese/why-peter-thiels-endorsemen... https://medium.com/soapbox-dc/peter-thiels-plan-to-become-ceo-of-america-715857ceaaa7 https://medium.com/soapbox-dc/peter-thiels-plan-to-become-ce... Strange to be investing this late in the race though.
- Senji 10y ago
  Neoreactionary(NRx). Dark Enlightenment.
  - abcampbell 10y ago
    Why doesn't someone just ask him why he's giving the money. He's participating the democratic process, would be interested to hear his rationale rather than a bunch of speculations about what he may or may not believe.
    - Sacho 10y ago
      You don't need to ask him - he already gave a speech at the RNC endorsing Trump.
m_ke 10y ago
Senate races? Enthusiasm for Trump is falling and if republicans don't show up to vote then it's very likely that democrats will get control of the senate. Then there's Palantir. Even if Trump doesn't win, the "law and order" rhetoric is resonating with a lot of americans. Trump wants to ban muslims, put together a deportation force, bring back stop and frisk, more border control, nukes for everyone, boots on the ground to fight ISIS, more surveillance, more military spending. All of these would lead to more government contracts for Palantir.
- morgante 10y ago
  > Then there's Palantir. That's a fair point. Palantir is very well-positioned to be the IBM of Trumpism.
  - rodgerd 10y ago
    Am I meant to infer "do for Trump what IBM did for Hitler" from that?
    - morgante 10y ago
      Yes, though Trump is obviously not a carbon copy clone of Hitler.
      - rodgerd 10y ago
        Hitler never ran for a public office that gave him access to nuclear weapons, for starters.
        jacquesm 10y ago
        That wouldn't have stopped him either. Given that nuclear weapons did not exist it would have been highly surprising if he had. Oh, and the Nazis did try to make them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nuclear_weapon_project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nuclear_weapon_project
rodgerd 10y ago
> I'm genuinely curious what the rational for Thiel is in doing this. Maybe he's just a racist who holds women in contempt and hates muslims. It's hardly unheard of.
newscracker 10y ago
> I'm genuinely curious what the rational for Thiel is in doing this. He's a smart guy, but I just don't see the ROI. I personally see him more of a cunning guy than just smart because I find his actions disturbing.
- abcampbell 10y ago
  Seems like the kind of questions Twitter was designed for no? Has anyone asked?

pesenti 10y ago

Small chance of making it to the Supreme Court? http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57d80d57e4b09d7a687f9b03/amp http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57d80d57e4b09d7a687f9b03/a... ?

morgante 10y ago
> Small chance of making it to the Supreme Court? That honestly does not seem like a very compelling reason. I think Thiel can easily have a bigger impact on the world outside the Supreme Court.
daveguy 10y ago
If Trump became president and nominates Thiel I expect it would be one of the rare times that the Senate rejects the nomination -- considering this donation and relative lack of experience.
- douche 10y ago
  I would support Thiel, or really, any engineer or tech-related person, being on the supreme court. It is absurd that we have fossils that do not have email accounts making decisions on laws touching on the technological future of the country for the rest of their natural lives.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    Well, at least those fossils dedicated their lives to studying the law and whether or not they have email accounts doesn't mean squat. Decisions about technology are made with input from many who are well versed in technology.

internaut 10y ago

It's the Stagnation Hypothesis. More precisely it is the high level implications of the Stagnation Hypothesis. You won't know it from HN or a survey of typical developers but the people who really run Silicon Valley have a set of beliefs about the world which are very different to the people who work for them. Watch this all the way through. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMpmfaE9bII https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMpmfaE9bII

morgante 10y ago
I'm not talking about typical developers. Lots of top technology leaders have come out vehemently against Trump, [0] including Sam Altman, who I would definitely include in "the people who really run Silicon Valley." [1] To be clear, I'm not disputing Thiel's politics. I think he's right about a lot of things. They have near-zero overlap with Trump's policies. Trump is easily the least libertarian Republican presidential candidate in recent history. [0] https://shift.newco.co/an-open-letter-from-technology-sector-leaders-on-donald-trumps-candidacy-for-president-5bf734c159e4 https://shift.newco.co/an-open-letter-from-technology-sector... [1] http://blog.samaltman.com/trump http://blog.samaltman.com/trump
- internaut 10y ago
  I believe you're missing a puzzle piece. Take the time out to watch a few of his Youtube videos. They are long and have very low view counts but they're important.
  - morgante 10y ago
    Sorry, but the priors on a random Internet commentator insisting that the only way to understand his farfetched, radical theory is to watch hours of videos are not very positive. It would be helpful if you could provide a rational and concise summary here. I'd genuinely like to learn more.
    - natrius 10y ago
      Short answer: globalization hurts the developed world in the absence of real technological breakthroughs (energy too cheap to meter, something we use a lot gets can now be made for half the price, etc.). A richer world just means more competition for scarce things. The rational policy for a self-interested superpower might be to ease up on globalization.

rorykoehler 10y ago

I've always found the right-libertarian philosophy to be extremely confused. They want freedom to do whatever they want but they also want to base everything off of capitalism which by definition means you can't do whatever you want unless you're rich. It just doesn't make any sense (unless of course you're already a billionaire in which case your world is already quite libertarian in reality).

solipsism 10y ago
I have my problems with Libertarianism, but I don't understand what you don't understand. Libertarians think everyone should have freedom to do whatever one wants, but that says nothing of having power to do whatever one wants.
- rorykoehler 10y ago
  Freedom is not freedom without power to exercise said freedom.
  - WalterBright 10y ago
    The word 'freedom' has many different meanings.
  - solipsism 10y ago
    Freedom in the Libertarianism context (and in most contexts) means lack of coercion or constraint imposed by government or other institutions. It doesn't refer to freedom from natural or physical constraints. That wouldn't make any sense to advocate for. Does this clear it up for you?
    - rorykoehler 10y ago
      Precisely. The inability of a person to choose their desired path because they need money to feed their family is textbook economic coercion. We've long passed the point where lack of resources (especially food) is a physical/natural constraint.

_yvjs 10y ago

Has Thiel described himself as "libertarian" recently? Even if he has, I'm not sure he means it in the same sense as the general population. I like Samuel Hammond's analysis. His shorthand for Thiel's political philosophy is "corporate feudalism": https://medium.com/@hamandcheese/why-peter-thiels-endorsement-of-trump-actually-makes-perfect-sense-894f9c530476 https://medium.com/@hamandcheese/why-peter-thiels-endorsemen... https://medium.com/soapbox-dc/peter-thiels-plan-to-become-ceo-of-america-715857ceaaa7 https://medium.com/soapbox-dc/peter-thiels-plan-to-become-ce... Strange to be investing this late in the race though.

Senji 10y ago
Neoreactionary(NRx). Dark Enlightenment.
- abcampbell 10y ago
  Why doesn't someone just ask him why he's giving the money. He's participating the democratic process, would be interested to hear his rationale rather than a bunch of speculations about what he may or may not believe.
  - Sacho 10y ago
    You don't need to ask him - he already gave a speech at the RNC endorsing Trump.

m_ke 10y ago

Senate races? Enthusiasm for Trump is falling and if republicans don't show up to vote then it's very likely that democrats will get control of the senate. Then there's Palantir. Even if Trump doesn't win, the "law and order" rhetoric is resonating with a lot of americans. Trump wants to ban muslims, put together a deportation force, bring back stop and frisk, more border control, nukes for everyone, boots on the ground to fight ISIS, more surveillance, more military spending. All of these would lead to more government contracts for Palantir.

morgante 10y ago
> Then there's Palantir. That's a fair point. Palantir is very well-positioned to be the IBM of Trumpism.
- rodgerd 10y ago
  Am I meant to infer "do for Trump what IBM did for Hitler" from that?
  - morgante 10y ago
    Yes, though Trump is obviously not a carbon copy clone of Hitler.
    - rodgerd 10y ago
      Hitler never ran for a public office that gave him access to nuclear weapons, for starters.
      - jacquesm 10y ago
        That wouldn't have stopped him either. Given that nuclear weapons did not exist it would have been highly surprising if he had. Oh, and the Nazis did try to make them: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nuclear_weapon_project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_nuclear_weapon_project

rodgerd 10y ago

> I'm genuinely curious what the rational for Thiel is in doing this. Maybe he's just a racist who holds women in contempt and hates muslims. It's hardly unheard of.

newscracker 10y ago

> I'm genuinely curious what the rational for Thiel is in doing this. He's a smart guy, but I just don't see the ROI. I personally see him more of a cunning guy than just smart because I find his actions disturbing.

abcampbell 10y ago
Seems like the kind of questions Twitter was designed for no? Has anyone asked?