The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter • Hacker News Board

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#91

Post by no_flags » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:25 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #68

GuiA wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most Silicon Valley magnates are not geniuses. They're average to above-average smart, with other traits (grit, luck, the right connections, etc) that put them in their situation. Once you have a few dozen million dollars, it's not so hard to maintain and grow that (unless you go on idiotic spending sprees) because you start getting access to the kind of investments that have much higher expected returns than the kin…

> Once you have a few dozen million dollars, it's not so hard to maintain and grow that (unless you go on idiotic spending sprees) because you start getting access to the kind of investments that have much higher expected returns than the kind of investments a blue collar worker has access to. This. This is really important to understand because it's the fundamental cause of the divide between the super-rich and ever…

> access to the kind of investments that have much higher expected returns than the kind of investments a blue collar worker has access to.

What kind of investments are you and the original comment referring to?

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#92

Post by junko » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:26 PM UTC

vasilipupkin wrote: post #75

Why is everyone surprised that Peter Thiel said this or said that? Is that because we expect Peter Thiel to be a genius, when he is just a person with probably a boatload of baggage, some brilliance and plenty of idiocy - similar to anybody else ?

It's also a tiny bit scary that he also owns Palantir, but that might just be the Jason Bourne hat I'm wearing for this weekend

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#93

Post by ohnomrbill » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:26 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #27

falsestprophet wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thiel has opposed mass [1] immigration to the United States which should not be mistaken with opposition to all immigration. For context, only 15% of new lawful permanent residents in 2014 were selected for education or skill (the employment-preference category). [1] like (but not limited to) anyone who likes strolling over the border or overstaying visas

> The billionaire tech investor has been a staunch opponent of immigration. Back in 2008, Gawker found that Thiel had donated $1 million to NumbersUSA, an anti-immigration group that has consistently been labelled racist and a firm fan of active population control. ... > He then invested in the SeaSteading Institute which wanted to turn Thiel’s dream into a reality. The reason? He felt the government wasn’t doing eno…

(Disclaimer: I will vote for some candidate this election, but I would write in a name before voting for Trump.)

I see this conflation in almost all the election news I hear - people assume that Trump supporters are against any immigration. In fact, the white, blue collar workers making Trump's base are okay with most immigrants. They (quite understandably) dislike illegal South American immigrants, who compete with them for a shrinking pool of manufacturing and menial labor jobs. While immigration may benefit the country as a whole, illegal immigration from South America does not benefit them; instead, it contributes to ever-worsening employment prospects. To convince Trump supporters of the benefits of immigration, one must present a solution which simultaneously addresses the lack of jobs for workers at the low end. Until then, the tradeoff is clear - blue collar workers would rather ship illegal immigrants home than have increased local competition for employment, which I find understandable. Trump is also in favor of tariffs, etc. to keep American manufacturing jobs, and has spoken against NAFTA. For a blue collar worker, he may be the best candidate left in the race - and his protectionist position combined with a strong stance against illegal immigration may mean that he has been the best candidate in the race for a long time. (Again, seen from the perspective of a white, blue collar worker).

For Thiel, I can see a few reasons why a protectionist, anti-illegal immigration stance makes sense. He may believe we really do have an overpopulation problem, and wishes to stem the flow of illegal immigrants into America on those grounds. A protectionist stance makes more sense - America's prosperity in the 70's and 80's and South Korea and China's relative prosperity today make the case for keeping a manufacturing base at home, coupled with a reasonably strong creative and technical sector.

Again, this is just speculation on the beliefs of others; my own beliefs are different. But I think it's important to consider that Trump supporters may have reasonably nuanced views on immigration too, even if they don't align with our own stance.

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#94

Post by colmvp » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:28 PM UTC

tstactplsignore wrote: post #49

bko wrote: post #16

> despite Trump’s advocacy of protectionist tariffs and extreme immigration restrictions, measures that would seem at odds with the radical libertarian image Thiel projects. This is what's most baffling considering Trump is the most statist candidate in modern politics. Most of his success is built on anti-immigration and tariffs. He may agree with more non-interventionist/isolationist foreign policy of Trump, but I…

>He may agree with more non-interventionist/isolationist foreign policy of Trump There's really not any good evidence that Trump would do anything of the sort. He was for the wars in Iraq and Libya at the time, and is only against them now (and pretends he always was) because he's the ultimate political opportunist. Considering that right now he's said that he will "bomb the shit" out of ISIS and "send a few troops",…

Well it's a bit more nuanced. He was for the war prior to when it started but then changed his tune fairly soon after it started, even before Saddam was caught.

I'm not sure where he truly stands. But I suppose I'll take his word that he'll want the U.S. to play an active role.

Democrats decided to nominate the candidate who voted for the war and has a very Hawkish foreign policy, not the one who was against it. So one way or another, Americans are voting for interventionism.

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#95

Post by Houshalter » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:29 PM UTC

GuiA wrote: post #34

The Diversity Myth, a 1995 book [Thiel] co-wrote with David O. Sacks, railed against multiculturalism, which, they wrote, “exists to destroy Western culture.” What is up with all these people lately thinking that Western culture is some form of homogeneous block that's been unadultered for millennia and has recently come under "multiculturalist" attack? Especially coming from the US, a country that didn't exist when…

I'd be interested in seeing what the arguments in the actual book are. I recall reading something about this before, that pointed to evidence that more diverse groups are less happy and have more conflict. And that people in general like being part of a group of similar people and having a group identity, humans being tribal creatures.

Anyway I'm not sure he's claiming western culture is homogenous. But it does seem like there is a cluster in culture space that is "western" and we don't have a better label for it.

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#96

Post by junko » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:30 PM UTC

lisper wrote: post #68

GuiA wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most Silicon Valley magnates are not geniuses. They're average to above-average smart, with other traits (grit, luck, the right connections, etc) that put them in their situation. Once you have a few dozen million dollars, it's not so hard to maintain and grow that (unless you go on idiotic spending sprees) because you start getting access to the kind of investments that have much higher expected returns than the kin…

> Once you have a few dozen million dollars, it's not so hard to maintain and grow that (unless you go on idiotic spending sprees) because you start getting access to the kind of investments that have much higher expected returns than the kind of investments a blue collar worker has access to. This. This is really important to understand because it's the fundamental cause of the divide between the super-rich and ever…

Aaand that's popped the balloon and back to reality. Nevermind billion dollar ideas, let's just focus on a lifestyle business where you can't go wrong, headache and conscience-wise

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#97

Post by vasilipupkin » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:31 PM UTC

junko wrote: post #92

vasilipupkin wrote: post #75

Why is everyone surprised that Peter Thiel said this or said that? Is that because we expect Peter Thiel to be a genius, when he is just a person with probably a boatload of baggage, some brilliance and plenty of idiocy - similar to anybody else ?

It's also a tiny bit scary that he also owns Palantir, but that might just be the Jason Bourne hat I'm wearing for this weekend

he doesn't own Palantir. He owns a stake in Palantir.

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#98

Post by winter_blue » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:31 PM UTC

randothrowaway wrote: post #90

winter_blue wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are being dishonest if you think it's about legality. It's not about that. It's about the race of the immigrants. If all our illegal immigrants were from Germany and Ireland, I am certain that there would be far less complaining. In fact most of the angry people today would not be fighting to keep them out -- they'd be fighting for visas for them.

You think pro illegal immigration congressman Luis Gutierrez and the Catholic churches harboring those here illegally would be doing so if most people here coming illegally were from India and Hindu or Sikh?

Yes, I do. There are plenty of non-Hispanic white congressmen who take the same stance as Luis Gutierrez.

The truth is that the people behind most of this anti-immigrant rhetoric can't see the humanity of someone who is not of their same skin color. When they call a human being "an illegal" -- it's dehumanizing, and it plainly reveals they don't see their common shared humanity. I've noticed it in the language they use, and they way they talk about other people -- and not just immigrants, but black Americans as well. They simply do not see other races as people like themselves.

I absolutely do not think that Luis Gutierrez is someone that is just looking out for "his own people", as you seem to be implying.

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#99

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:32 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #64

randothrowaway wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They are total hypocrites Maybe they are angry because people are coming illegally.

You're right - a descendant of French immigrants has quite the leg to stand on. After all, his great-grandparents legally entered the country... At the time when undesirables, like Chinese, Indians, and the Polish were barred from entry. But at least the Frenchmen came legally! Sure, entry was granted under an extremely racist immigration law, but the legality is what gives him the moral high ground to stand on.

[deleted]

Re: The Strange Politics of Peter Thiel, Trump’s Most Unlikely Supporter

#100

Post by boona » Thu, Jul 21, 2016, 5:34 PM UTC

vasilipupkin wrote: post #81

vasilipupkin wrote: post #75

Why is everyone surprised that Peter Thiel said this or said that? Is that because we expect Peter Thiel to be a genius, when he is just a person with probably a boatload of baggage, some brilliance and plenty of idiocy - similar to anybody else ?

for example, if it's indeed true that Peter Thiel is skeptical of women's suffrage, then I think it is reasonable to conclude that he is probably at least to some extent an idiot and we should view his actions at least partially through that prism

I would love to hear WHY he's skeptical. I'm sure he's heard all the traditional arguments like we have, which means he has additional information that I don't.

Don't you think it's more intellectually honest to question and hear what others have to say rather than just paint them as idiots because they don't believe what you believe.