The "right" has historically had more implied trust from heavy-duty surveillance mechanisms of government than the left.
What the left is doing is censoring "politically-incorrect" (as they see fit) speech, and banning accounts; this then is driving members censored/shadow-banned/outright banned by the leftist thread of big tech consumer companies to find/invent tech alternatives.
This then is opening up a potential Pandora's box of surveillance problems for such surveillance mechanisms; for example, the historical reality of Microsoft's origins wasn't at all what Microsoft's P.R. department claimed ("Bill Gates is a unique entrepreneurial genius and gift to mankind, not unlike the second coming of Jesus (actually literally-stated implications of a popular Gates-criticizing Reddit post from about a year or so ago that got immediately brigaded by a swarm of bots/P.R. agents all lavishing praise on everything Gates-related), but rather a practical measure taken to address a then-serious and quickly-growing-out-of-control practical problem: before Microsoft, the home computer market had something in the order of 3,700+ unique operating systems; a decision was made that it would be far more efficient to take a "Lord of the Rings" approach rather than having experts on hand uniquely-qualified in all 3,700+ OSs.
What Thiel is doing by signaling to the "Far Right" which is in itself another emotionally-triggering clickbait term meant to get more views from the left rather than an accurate depiction of political reality is simply extending his historical approach to its logical conclusion.
The surveillance mechanisms came out with a project that mysteriously was "discontinued" literally days before "Thefacebook.com" was registered as a domain name; said project literally described ... pretty much "Facebook" to a tee.
Now Facebook and other social media companies are viewed as not only "Leftist" in politics (abstractly mostly irrelevant), but in their application of their political leaning, by kicking out an increasingly-larger portion of the populace who doesn't "adopt" their "way of thinking" ... these social media institutions are ironically doing the exact opposite of what the surveillance mechanism wants them to do: corral users into homogenous, easy-to-track pens.
He's not at all "tearing down tech" as much as signaling that it may be time for "yet another" social media giant that is more permissive in its approach to user content, and so can more easily attract a larger audience in a homogenous technical pen that will be easier to keep track of automatically instead of having human analysts constantly trying to keep track of things manually by interacting with a dozen or more increasingly wonky user interfaces.