Contact tracing isn't bullshit. It is how they dealt with sexually transmitted diseases four decades ago...it works.
The issue is that the UK govt is composed of a combination of incompetent and corrupt people (one of the companies involved in this is owned by a minister). And they are trying to go with the low-cost option (whilst the govt is subsidising 1/4 of salaries paid in the whole country) rather than the old-school, proven way.
It is kind of shocking but it is the result of a political system (and culture) that rewards incompetence and sloth.
Can someone please explain to me how a “libertarian” like Peter Thiel could start and run one of the most anti libertarian companies? What are his beliefs, exactly?
I mean besides “zero to one” and “competition is for losers, build a monopoly”?
I wonder how much effect he had on Zuck early on. He was the first big check in. Seems it was a great match there.
There's libertarians, and then there's libertarians. Thiel is a huge fan of Hans Hermann-Hoppe, who writes things like:
"In a covenant concluded among proprietor and community tenants for the purpose of protecting their private property, no such thing as a right to free (unlimited) speech exists, not even to unlimited speech on one's own tenant-property. One may say innumerable things and promote almost any idea under the sun, but naturally no one is permitted to advocate ideas contrary to the very purpose of the covenant of preserving and protecting private property, such as democracy and communism. There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society. Likewise, in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal. They – the advocates of alternative, non-family and kin-centered lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism – will have to be physically removed from society, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order."
This quote is from Hoppe's "Democracy: The God That Failed", which Thiel has referenced before. The overall thesis there is that economic freedom is the cornerstone of libertarianism, and it's fundamentally incompatible with democracy, so libertarians have to explore other options. It specifically promotes monarchy, on the basis that a monarch is more like a business owner with a vested long-term interest.
You might argue that this isn't really libertarianism - indeed, many libertarians don't consider Hoppe to be one. This is basically proto-neo-reaction, at the point where it still hasn't explicitly rejected libertarianism altogether. But regardless of where you draw the line, this all is the evolution of Murray Rothbard's strain of libertarianism, after it moved away from social liberalism towards paleoconservatism - it's not just some random people coming and declaring their politics to be "libertarian" out of the blue. Nor is there any shortage of ex-libertarians in NRx circles, so it's clearly a common path, not unique to Thiel.
Needless to say, the libertarian paradise described above could use something like Palantir to implement the "covenant".
Sounds more like fascism with the alignment of political and corporate power.
But the label is irrelevant, Thiel and Palantir's actions are anti-democratic and their involvement in any government activities immediately raise privacy and safety concerns.
Just because Thiel has referenced this speaker before doesn’t mean he agrees with everything he says. It’s a bit suspicious Thiel would agree that talk of “promoting“ homosexuality should get someone expelled from society.
Do you have any references showing Thiel believes these words you quoted?
"I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible"
This is literally the primary thesis of Hoppe's book.
And note that Hoppe's isn't saying that promoting homosexuality should get one expelled from society, but rather from communities with "covenants" that restrict it. This arrangement is all about one-dollar-one-vote, so rich people needn't worry - they can live however they want, even establishing their own "covenant" if need be.
That explanation is much more reasonable. If people can choose which covenant to belong to, that's better then some larger collective (like a federal government) imposing it's morals on smaller groups.
Principles dont matter if you dont have the money to put them into practice.
If palantir is what it takes for him to fund/back a visionary company or leader that will create a truly freer society, then that investment was well worth it.
>Can someone please explain to me how a “libertarian” like Peter Thiel could start and run one of the most anti libertarian companies? What are his beliefs, exactly?
None. He is a slimy character with no principles or morals besides his own selfish drive. He wants to make money, period. Other considerations don't factor into it. Make no mistake, he (and people like him, the capitalist sociopaths that hold power in our society) would kill your entire family for a handful of pennies if they would get away with it.
If there were any justice in the world these kinds of people would be shunned and censored by society. Yet it's precisely the opposite. These are the behaviours which are encouraged and rewarded.
Because his wealth isn't enough and he can still insert himself into other policies to obtain more influence, more power, and more money?
My question to you is why you care what Thiel thinks and why you're dissapointed. As far as I'm concerned, these guys are the lowest of the low and they only hold their position through gross exploitation.
Nobody should be amassing this impossible wealth and seeking to gain more and these CEOs are basically economic despots to my mind.
Holy shit, and I didn't think that this whole contact tracing bullshit could look even worse.