Peter Thiel's Heroic Political Fantasies
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
>Why did the NYtimes publish this garbage ?
Probably because the rest of the staff shares the author's personal resentment for Thiel, which isn't surprising considering their liberal bias.
Calm your sensibilities, it's nothing of the sort. It's an op-ed piece that has a negative bias against Thiel (who has also said dumb things). Why does this site criticize any piece that speculates are conveys opinion?
Personally when I listen to talks by Thiel or Musk I almost wonder, do I really need to drop everything and go build rockets? But to be honest, I find working on digital products pretty fulfilling. I think it's a real craft. The deeper question of fulfilment then goes to what you're building with that craft (I've found marketing campaigns are less fulfilling than user-facing products, for example), and then the even-deeper question goes to what you want to do with your life, and then there's the yet-deeper question of how you want to interact with, and have your life experienced by, other people. At that point the question of whether you're going from Zero-to-One (what Thiel calls technology) or One-to-Many (what he calls globalization) starts to recede in importance when making personal choices.
You need to drop everything and make them rich.
that's a bit of jargon from a different German philosopher (Heidegger). IMO, that sentence is trying to smear Theil as a Nazi, since Heidegger was one and some of Nietzsche's concepts were reappropriated by them.
Personally I think Peter talking at the RNC and [hopefully for me] exerting some kind of influence on Trump is the best thing to happen. I still see Trump as a blank slate. With his presidency [IMO] inevitable I think it's super important that people like Peter start steering him in the right direction.
Don't delude yourself that he's neutral. He has a clear agenda of promoting racism, violence, and religious intolerance because that's what his future Trump Network customer base wants to hear. If he is elected he'll most likely resign on day 2 because he can make much more money licensing his brand than actually having to deal with complex problems that can't be solved by simply building a wall, deporting all muslims, etc. for 4 years.
1. Get elected. 2. Resign in favor of Pence. 3. Get a general pardon in the Federal investigations against him. 4. Profit.
Then there's the part where he said the party shouldn't focus on fake "culture wars" like which bathrooms transgender people use. How were those parts received by the RNC's target audience?
Even if a person seems horrible as a human being, if some of his/her ideas make sense and align with your ideas, than it's OK to support them. I happen to like Trump because he happens to think that America's problems are internal and should be solved internally - no need to make any issue into a "global issue" and solve it through an international trade agreement or through a war that affects everyone in the world even if it's not their f problem!
No, it's not. Not when that person has other horrific ideas that should not be supported by any sensible human being. Not if that person is a pathological liar that jumps from one idea to the contrary on a whims notice. Not if that person uses racism and violence as a platform. Not if that person openly calls for committing war crimes and invading other countries. It's - and I'm deliberately choosing the godwin route here - akin to saying "It was ok to support Hitler because I support the construction of the Autobahn."
Citations can be found en masse here: https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrumpSpam/comments/4teoxl/
Do you have any quote for that? Trump is acceptable for many people outside US, because he wants to limit US involvement in wars. His main opponent on other side has long history if initiating wars. There is a serious risk she/he would even start war with Russia.
Like:
1. if you decide to invade Iraq, do a f proper large scale invasion, sweep the whole country, purge anyone opposing, pay some some of the reconstruction bill by training and equipping local forces, and after like 5 years or so of this occupation and purging, after you cleaned up the mess (or at least after you've reunited the country against one common enemy - YOU, which is still better than leaving a civil war behind), then f leave with parade and give them a "national freedom day" to celebrate or whatever. or
2. if you want a foreign president down, either do it diplomatically, or give up, or do a proper job of f assassinating him and his entire family, don't start a bloody civil war that destroys an entire country and turns its population into refugees.
...the so called "partial involvement", where you go in, kick the bad guys' ass, and then leave without cleaning the mess or paying for it to be cleaned is the problem.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/3/donald-trump-...
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/dec/...
Anyways, since the choice currently boils down to Trump vs. Clinton: I regard trump as a deeply dangerous candidate. He seems oblivious to a lot of issues and seems to be focused primarily on furthering his ascend to power, by whatever means necessary. While Clintons politics certainly have their own set of issues I'd prefer her as president since the person in the oval office should show a little interest in complicated matters. In that regard, she passes.
However, let's be clear: there are people who very much DO believe he will do what he says. I know plenty of people who want - and believe he will - follow through on his ban on Muslims immigrating into the USA (they always remind me it's temporary, until we "figure out what's going on," assuming our immigration services have no idea what they are doing), and build a wall because they feel that's as good as anything to deter people.
People truly believe he will do as he claims. Those of us who think "no way someone can believe that" should be incredibly careful and put down a vote for someone other than him this fall, rather than thinking "oh there's no way he would do all that, right?"
Many people voting him in actively WANT him to do many of his more controversial things.
On a larger picture: I regard the fact that a large chunk of people by now seem oblivious to facts and unreachable for civilized dialogue as the threatening streak in the last major votes, see brexit, see the rise of the AFD in germany. The crucial question for the next coming years will in my opinion be how we can enter a reasonable discourse with people that see every statement as a bipartisan issue that must be decided on principle, regard all measured statements as lies and political correctness and are unwilling to compromise on anything. We live in interesting times indeed.
Good on ya for having the courage to do that.
Trump is one of two candidates. What, exactly, requires courage? Tons of people support Trump.
There is zero actual substance here, the author takes a single anecdote from his book, interprets it to mean that Thiel thinks running a small business is not worthwhile and then proceeds to end with this:
-----------------------------------------
Silicon Valley, too, is of two minds. There are those who recognize that their uniquely innovative culture is a precipitate of a lot of expensive long-term institutional investment on the part of governments, universities and corporations, and that to function in a democracy you need to worry about stuff you personally don’t think is important. And there are those who believe only in charisma and prowess, the blinding insight and iron will that get you from zero to one.
-----------------------------------------
Silicon Valley isn't of two minds, it is of many; and no, the uniquely innovative culture isn't the sole result of expensive long-term institutional investment on the part of governments.
What's the reason then? Are the people just better and smarter there?
For example, William Shockley's transistor company brought a bunch of smart PhDs to what was at the time a rural area (Mountain View). A few of these PhDs - called the "traitorous eight" - left to work on their own. Over 65 companies in the area over the next 20 years came from there, including Intel and AMD. You know why William Shockley chose SV? Because his mother lived in Palo Alto.
Narcs are barely a step up from psychopaths. They literally lie professionally and have no conscience to speak of.
They're also famous for having no empathy whatsoever. So the chances that Trump genuinely cares about the struggling and low paid is zero.
There is absolutely no rational reason to want someone with NPD as president.
Donald Trump is irresponsible and wrong, and you should note that many military service members in particular are rooting for Gary Johnson. Advocating for war crimes is wrong. Nuking Syria will not work. But don't mind us, we've only fought the wars of the past two decades.... Listen to the guy who dodged the draft.
The fact that Johnson is so popular among vets and service members should be a telling indictment of the foreign policies of both Trump and Clinton.
Sure, all the fascism in his speeches and platform could be some grand act just to rile people up, but he's giving no reliable indication that the terrifying things he says aren't what he really believes.
But I am, of course, biased. As a Jew, I can't stomach anyone who brings white supremacism and open antisemitism into the mainstream. It's just bad for me, you know?
It's time we had a woman in office! Hillary has done nothing wrong!
[citation needed]
https://mic.com/articles/147711/donald-trump-s-star-of-david...
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/07/03/trumps-star-david-ant...
you're welcome.
1. The image was lifted from a reddit channel known as anti-semitic and white supremacist.
2. The image uses and reaffirms anti-semitic prejudices, namely the prejudice that jewish world domination/conspiracy using money and buying power.
3. The image uses the david star.
I grant you that (2) and (3) in isolation might be forgiven and an honest mistake, but in combination, especially in combination with (1) they can't be regarded as anything other than an obvious antisemitic slur.
You better be able to explain how a genuine anti-semite would do that without using conspiracy theories yourself.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/04/politics/donald-trump-star-of-...
Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas.
has Trump done that?
Cruz pulled his "new york values" thing and got called out pretty quick.
Princess Leia and Nick Denton would have had much in common.