I think this is an unfair characterization of his political views. This is my understanding of how Peter Thiel views the world: - Our entire economic system i

I think this is an unfair characterization of his political views. This is my understanding of how Peter Thiel views the world: - Our entire economic system is structured for growth. With growth things are good and everyone can share in a piece of an ever-growing pie. Without growth you get a zero sum game and collapse. - We are in a 'great stagnation' where growth is stalling in most industries. Every industry outside of tech (and arguably tech now too). - The 'Neoliberals' (Obama and Clinton types, liberal centrists) don't see this stagnation as the existential threat it is and the institutions in place can't make the changes necessary to help correct for it. - Without correcting for this problem you get an apocalyptic scenario and collapse of society. - There's a dash of fair trade protectionism and an anti-immigration view somewhere in this that I don't totally understand (this is my weakest understanding of his politics, but it comes up when he talks and in his donations). ## Then with this framing Trump in this context: - I think Peter Thiel thinks Donald Trump is an idiot, but his administration's willingness to ignore precedent may allow them to break out of some of the existing constraints that prevent large change. - Focusing on anything except the stagnation problem is meaningless in the long run. - The push back against China IP issues is good and something others were afraid to do. - He thinks the immigration push back and protection of American workers is necessary for political stability. ## The questions I have with this view: - He often asserts this stagnation problem exists, but without any real evidence (he just acts like it's obvious). I'd want some reason to think that now is different than historically - is it just a comparison to low hanging fruit in scientific discovery of the last couple hundred years? Something else? I think there are problems in academia, but I'm not sure I buy this 'great stagnation' argument up front. - Trump seems like killing the patient to cure the disease, Peter Thiel would argue that actually things are mostly the same and Trump hasn't really changed day to day life for people. Currently this is largely true (unless you're an undocumented immigrant that had your children taken from you). This is playing with fire though and collapses of democracy are real - Putin was elected before becoming a dictator. I think he's playing dangerously here with his assumptions of what is possible. - Continued support after this first term I just can't accept - it seems pretty clear at this point that Trump is a bad/criminal actor that only has his interests in mind with his actions.