Peter Thiel, the brilliant yet controversial tech billionaire and co-founder of PayPal, is once again making waves with his novel ideas and endeavors. His AI service, Grok, is at the center of this scrutiny. Famous for his nocturnal playboy escapades and contrarian dog whistles, Thiel dropped a massive one onto Grok. He was looking forward to a big laugh from his newfound TED audience, but it never arrived. More importantly, this incident reveals the developing polarization around Thiel’s ideas and his greater tendency towards alignment with very far outside ideological positions.
Those familiar with Thiel know that he’s no stranger to the public discourse around apocalyptic themes. He even predicted that the antichrist might be climate activist Greta Thunberg. This statement encapsulates Thiel’s dangerous opposition to climate activism at large and reveals a wider ideological war over climate change. And yet, his comments resonate deeply with a specific set of intellectuals. They recognize the rise of a new environmental movement as an existential danger to the country’s historical values and social hierarchy.
“If Greta gets everyone on the planet to ride a bicycle, maybe that’s a way to solve climate change, but it has sort of this quality of going from the frying pan into the fire.” – Peter Thiel
The billionaire’s ideas draw from various intellectual influences, including the neoreactionary musings of Curtis Yarvin, a coder who advocates for a monarchist system. Thiel has always been enchanted by radical ideas. He is a passionate proponent of the newer libertarian principle of “exit,” the focus on our right to opt out of social obligations. His vision of a very exclusive “tech zionist” San Francisco is what animates this point of view. It presents a cautionary tale of a networked apartheid state by and for the technological elite.
Additionally, Thiel is on board with the pro-natalism movement to increase birth rates among Westerners. This ideological position is amplified by his desire to improve the demographic balance of the state to ensure a future more in line with his ideals.
In addition to his intellectual pursuits, Thiel has invested significantly in real estate, purchasing nearly 500 acres in New Zealand with intentions to establish a luxury survivalist compound. Local officials shot down his plan in 2022, calling the industrial compound an eyesore. This unexpected rejection highlights the conflict between Thiel’s grand plans and the prerogatives of home rule.
Yet the atmosphere surrounding Thiel’s ideas is indicative of a larger cultural moment in which apocalyptic narratives flourish. Historian Robyn Maynard expresses this idea beautifully. As she writes, “If we want to save our planet, we have to abandon some iterations of it. Such proclamations connect with a growing number of voices arguing for drastic changes in societal structures amidst crises ranging from climate change to economic instability.
As activist and artist Richard Seymour reminds us, this is not just an apocalyptic dystopian fever dream. Most importantly, he reminds us that we’re living it—just ask the ecological devastation from deadly viruses, soil erosion, capitalistic economic crises and geopolitical chaos. This narrow view justifies much of Thiel’s urgent rhetoric and his deeply disturbing vision for humanity’s future.
Political candidates are leaning into these narratives. Senator JD Vance praised the resiliency of American democracy, despite the organized protests and well-funded activists such as Greta Thunberg. If American democracy can survive a decade of Greta Thunberg’s condescension, you can surely put up with Elon Musk for a couple of months!” he quipped.
That kind of political environment has created an electric mood here in Washington, as Trey Goff wrote about recently. The tense environment though, often produces fiery debates over the social impacts of technocratic rule. In addition, they fear the advances of a new authoritarianism hidden in the name of progress.
“The energy in DC is absolutely electric.” – Trey Goff
As these narratives overlap, they pose a profound threat to the very foundations of democracy as we know it. Thiel’s embodiment of this new wave of thought raises questions about the future trajectory of societal norms and governance structures.