4 ms·

Impulsive? He seems much more the calculating sort, which makes me skeptical about your judgement that he’s unethical.

georgespencer 3y ago
It's definitely possible to view his actions as part of some grand strategy, but I find his political manoeuvring to be short sighted and impulsive. As for the ethics, he started Palantir specifically to make money from the cascading need for government agencies (beyond the usual suspects) to encroach on the privacy of citizens.
jackmott 3y ago
he doesn’t think women should vote and donated millions to trump, does that help with the ethics?
- brigandish 3y ago
  I have to thank some of the comments above for causing me to look into Thiel more closely. As such, it seems you've cast what he thinks of the women's vote quite wrong. These are the two relevant quotes from an essay he wrote[1]: > Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron. > It would be absurd to suggest that women’s votes will be taken away or that this would solve the political problems that vex us. While I don’t think any class of people should be disenfranchised, I have little hope that voting will make things better. He's not saying that women shouldn't vote, but that they tend vote against his libertarian politics and thus he sees little hope for democratic solutions. Are we not allowed to think that certain politics are wrong or against our own wishes, and that groups tend to vote for certain types of politics? It seems to me to be very normal to feel a lack of hope or even apathy when looking at voting patterns. [1] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian/ https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...
  - ericjmorey 3y ago
    If he really thought that libertarianism was a good system, would he be okay with me expressing my freedom to use the resources he considers his? Or would he want government enforcement to maintain "his" resources?
    - pjscott 3y ago
      Pretty much all libertarians favor some mechanism for the enforcement of property rights. They may differ as to how, but they agree that you shouldn’t be allowed to steal other people’s stuff. (Please, I beg you, argue with the opinions that people actually have instead of something you just made up.)
    - brigandish 3y ago
      If that freedom of expression is speech and associated freedoms, then yes, why not? Perhaps there are anarchist libertarians who say there is no need for property rights enforced by government. However, I suspect those same people would also support a right to bear arms (without a government who except themselves could enforce such a right?) and, without a government to enforce the even deeper property right of assault laws, I can see calamity there, probably for you.
diogenes4 3y ago
Please, regale us with your own judgement of his ethics.
oblaff 3y ago
I don't think impulsive is the right word, but it is concerning that someone who is fervently anti-democractic is a key stakeholder in these sorts of public private partnerships globally.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
lacrimacida 3y ago
Perhaps morally impulsive if that isn’t a thing yet. Thiel seems to be a calculated and definitely not stupid at all but not trustworthy by any means.

It's definitely possible to view his actions as part of some grand strategy, but I find his political manoeuvring to be short sighted and impulsive. As for the ethics, he started Palantir specifically to make money from the cascading need for government agencies (beyond the usual suspects) to encroach on the privacy of citizens.

jackmott 3y ago

he doesn’t think women should vote and donated millions to trump, does that help with the ethics?

brigandish 3y ago
I have to thank some of the comments above for causing me to look into Thiel more closely. As such, it seems you've cast what he thinks of the women's vote quite wrong. These are the two relevant quotes from an essay he wrote[1]: > Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron. > It would be absurd to suggest that women’s votes will be taken away or that this would solve the political problems that vex us. While I don’t think any class of people should be disenfranchised, I have little hope that voting will make things better. He's not saying that women shouldn't vote, but that they tend vote against his libertarian politics and thus he sees little hope for democratic solutions. Are we not allowed to think that certain politics are wrong or against our own wishes, and that groups tend to vote for certain types of politics? It seems to me to be very normal to feel a lack of hope or even apathy when looking at voting patterns. [1] https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/education-libertarian/ https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...
- ericjmorey 3y ago
  If he really thought that libertarianism was a good system, would he be okay with me expressing my freedom to use the resources he considers his? Or would he want government enforcement to maintain "his" resources?
  - pjscott 3y ago
    Pretty much all libertarians favor some mechanism for the enforcement of property rights. They may differ as to how, but they agree that you shouldn’t be allowed to steal other people’s stuff. (Please, I beg you, argue with the opinions that people actually have instead of something you just made up.)
  - brigandish 3y ago
    If that freedom of expression is speech and associated freedoms, then yes, why not? Perhaps there are anarchist libertarians who say there is no need for property rights enforced by government. However, I suspect those same people would also support a right to bear arms (without a government who except themselves could enforce such a right?) and, without a government to enforce the even deeper property right of assault laws, I can see calamity there, probably for you.

diogenes4 3y ago

Please, regale us with your own judgement of his ethics.

oblaff 3y ago

I don't think impulsive is the right word, but it is concerning that someone who is fervently anti-democractic is a key stakeholder in these sorts of public private partnerships globally.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

lacrimacida 3y ago

Perhaps morally impulsive if that isn’t a thing yet. Thiel seems to be a calculated and definitely not stupid at all but not trustworthy by any means.