I don't think this bodes well for Amazon, in particular.
Trump has a grudge against Bezos and it won't be out of character for Trump to hint to Thiel to express his loyalty by being harsh on Amazon
Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
31–40 of 172 posts
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would it be fair to say that US libertarians are anarcho-capitalists while the leftist libertarians are anarcho-syndicalists?
Most US libertarians are just proponents of classical liberalism. "Left libertarianism" is very niche and sounds a bit like an oxymoron to me. I don't know much about Peter Thiel but it's hard for me to reconcile his outspoken support for Trump with the "libertarian" label.
The term was invented by anarcho-communists and co-opted by the right:
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perot was in favor of direct democracy, Theil believes that democracy is making things too difficult for capitalism. Perot was in favor of increasing taxes on the rich, Theil is effectively a feudalist. Both men were billionaires who invested in computing and were involved in the 'military industrial complex'. But the word 'libertarian' has been dragged so far to the right in the US in recent years that it's not a me…
Would it be fair to say that US libertarians are anarcho-capitalists while the leftist libertarians are anarcho-syndicalists?
Many US libertarians are anarcho-capitalists, but certainly not all. Most are just minarchists.
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#34Rumours of Theils maleavolence are greatly exaggerated. His bio better resembles a modern day Ross Perot, libertarian and all. Network analysis and data mining inteilligence toolsets were used in the intel comminity lkng before Palantir, same as mercenaries were vighting foreign wars ling before Blackwater. A real problem in government is lack of domain expetise in oversight. Heres a chance to have some of that if th…
How white supremacist do you have to be, to be acceptably labelled 'malevolent'? * Enough to consistently regard ethnic minorities as threatening? * Enough to consume white supremacist literature? * Enough to endorse white supremacist literature to those around you? * Enough to write white supremacist literature? Your threat model is a caricature. When individuals with track-records like Thiel are selected for positi…
What the hell are you talking about? It reads like you are accusing Thiel of being a white supremacist. If so, please provide citations.
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would it be fair to say that US libertarians are anarcho-capitalists while the leftist libertarians are anarcho-syndicalists?
This is is irrelevant with regard to Thiel, because, as the parent points out, he’s a neo-feudalist working for the abolition of democracy. He funds several “Dark Enlightment” figures like Curtis Yarvin and even says as much himself: https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/21/14671978/alt-right-menciu... https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...
Democracy does not equal liberty. It may, arguably, be the best way of preserving liberty. But then again it may not.
"Many will be shocked to learn that the word “democracy” was neither used in the Declaration of Independence nor in the Constitution. Indeed, the Founding Fathers were anxious and fearful of allowing any form of tyranny, including the tyranny of the majority." [1]
[1] https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/democracy-versu...
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most US libertarians are just proponents of classical liberalism. "Left libertarianism" is very niche and sounds a bit like an oxymoron to me. I don't know much about Peter Thiel but it's hard for me to reconcile his outspoken support for Trump with the "libertarian" label.
The term was invented by anarcho-communists and co-opted by the right: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Etymology
I imagine the downvotes are out of disbelief, but this is not really disputed (it's worth clicking the link).
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
How white supremacist do you have to be, to be acceptably labelled 'malevolent'? * Enough to consistently regard ethnic minorities as threatening? * Enough to consume white supremacist literature? * Enough to endorse white supremacist literature to those around you? * Enough to write white supremacist literature? Your threat model is a caricature. When individuals with track-records like Thiel are selected for positi…
What the hell are you talking about? It reads like you are accusing Thiel of being a white supremacist. If so, please provide citations.
I refer you Thiel's multiple published articles on multiculturalism during his time at Stanford for the journal 'Academic Questions', such as 'Multiculturalism and the decline of Stanford', followed by the book he co-authored called "the Diversity Myth", about how multiculturalism is horrific and how multiculturalism exists to destroy white culture, are where you should look if you wish to get a good idea of what is going on in that man's mind.
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, I find an explicit campaign contribution to be considerably less sleazy than paying a politician hundreds of thousands of dollars for "making a speech" (a very popular ruse with the Clintons, and now Obama). Less sleazy in that campaign funds have to be accounted for (i.e., actually spent on the campaign, or retained for a future campaign) while "speaking fees" can be spent any way you want.
This is a very American point of view, in the rest of the western world we consider buying off politicians to be be immoral, a corrosive thing inimical with democracy
So the wealthy don't donate to politicians in the rest of the western world?
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#39Rumours of Theils maleavolence are greatly exaggerated. His bio better resembles a modern day Ross Perot, libertarian and all. Network analysis and data mining inteilligence toolsets were used in the intel comminity lkng before Palantir, same as mercenaries were vighting foreign wars ling before Blackwater. A real problem in government is lack of domain expetise in oversight. Heres a chance to have some of that if th…
Perot was in favor of direct democracy, Theil believes that democracy is making things too difficult for capitalism. Perot was in favor of increasing taxes on the rich, Theil is effectively a feudalist. Both men were billionaires who invested in computing and were involved in the 'military industrial complex'. But the word 'libertarian' has been dragged so far to the right in the US in recent years that it's not a me…
Thiel is hardly alone in this view. Many libertarians are in favour of a constitutional republic over a democracy where 51% of the people have absolute power.
Re: Is Trump mulling Peter Thiel for a top intelligence advisory post?
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is is irrelevant with regard to Thiel, because, as the parent points out, he’s a neo-feudalist working for the abolition of democracy. He funds several “Dark Enlightment” figures like Curtis Yarvin and even says as much himself: https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/21/14671978/alt-right-menciu... https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educatio...
Democracy does not equal liberty. It may, arguably, be the best way of preserving liberty. But then again it may not. "Many will be shocked to learn that the word “democracy” was neither used in the Declaration of Independence nor in the Constitution. Indeed, the Founding Fathers were anxious and fearful of allowing any form of tyranny, including the tyranny of the majority." [1] [1] https://www.cato.org/publications…
We call what the founders described a representative democracy, whether they used the word or not isn't relevant as what they meant by democracy is more aptly called direct democracy today. You are objecting to the use of a term because you aren't using the term in the modern way, and that's a silly semantic debate. The United States is a democracy according to the modern use of the word, please just accept it and stop making this silly argument.