Interesting piece. I recently read Peter’s book ‘Zero to One’. He is a contrarian thinker with incredible foresight. I agree with him that the tendencies towards global authoritarianism, particularly among popular academics, is alarming. Thanks for sharing.
Zero to One is a terrific little read. I am becoming more concerned about 'authoritarianism, particularly among popular academics' it is disconcerting to see where we are heading.
Thank you for the overview; stimulating reading. I think the 'Founding Fathers' in many countries understood the need for institutionalised checks and balances on (the misuse of) power. Since the 1980s these have largely been dismantled, and the media imagery of 'a world falling into chaos' gives weight to authoritarian arguments to 'sort it all out'. Problem-Reaction-Solution still works to herd the many.
I'm not sure why he is an investor in Space-X -- to me it's sending a double-message. There's enough to sort out on Planet Earth.
We see a general erosion in the institutions. I have not grasped why that is yet. This 'sort it all out' leader will be how Thiel describes the Antichrist. As you say "Problem-Reaction-Solution."
I think, in the short term, SpaceX is more about Starlink, this will become a + $100 billion business quite soon. War will be good to Starlink as Musk clearly shows on this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uItR09tDMXM
A corollary given by Marc Andreessen was that of social media’s reach of influence and ability to sow mis- dis- information. He likened it to the “Ring of Power,” just waiting for someone to grab it. And a political party did. Now we have AI in being used in national security activities, most notably in the Israel-Hamas war, which was frighteningly effective compared to that of 2013. AI is being introduced to DOGE/USDS, ferreting out wasteful political spending in an attempt to balance the Federal budget. Once Elon Musk and Trump vacate Washington, there will again be a more terrifying “Ring of Power,” again waiting for someone else to don it. Will there be anyone able to resist its corrupting influence?
The “Ring of Power,” what a terrible thought, and sadly coming to pass! Many years ago DARPA had a short video on the future of war, robot soldiers and ai - plus of course the Future of Life video with drones. The next 4 years will be a rollercoaster and then heaven knows what will come next - but for sure the “Ring of Power” is too much for many to resist!
Marc Andreesen had a very interesting interview on Lex Fridman podcast recently, referencing the social media “Ring of Power,” and current challenges. It covers many things mentioned here and more. Indirectly it potentially describes the ones most likely to grab the Ring.
Thank you for bringing this topic up in a balanced, seriously concerned manner.
I completely agree with your conclusions in the last paragraph:
"Individuals can take tangible steps. Engaging in informed discourse, supporting policies that promote decentralized governance, and ensuring that technological advancements remain tools for empowerment rather than mechanisms of control. Whether through scholarship, political action, or technological ethics, the responsibility falls on each of us to be vigilant, to resist both apocalypse and autocracy, and, perhaps, to forge a future where neither prevails."
I have a couple of questions however, which, as I see things, tie with the more abstract conclusion expressed in your piece, the "do not fear" feeling.
Why is it that we seem to now be able to reconsider the apocalyptic scenario and the figure of the Antichrist but cannot bring ourselves as individuals yes, but also as a society to reflect and uphold the obvious source of optimism in the Christ? And even if some of us do consider Messiah (or say we do), how (tangibly) are we expressing such consideration; His Way or our way?
And,
It appears that, according to Thiel and others, we have walked somewhat unconsciously into this end times scenario (I'm speaking about the majority of the world's population - purely evil ones do exist of course). What does that tell us about our individual and social ways? Having known about the end, why did it take us to get here, to stand at the door of doom, before we turned to look and realise? Could the same abilities, skills, technical prowess, intelligence, etc. have become the very cause of this persisting 'blindness'? If so, what is the way forward, tangibly?
1 Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.
Luke 21:25-28
“And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”
Thank you. Your questions about the seeming reluctance to embrace Christ's message of hope and the reasons for our collective "blindness" to the encroaching end times scenario are both profound and timely.
Addressing your first question, I believe the reasons for our societal hesitation to fully embrace Christ's teachings are complex and multifaceted. In an increasingly secular world, there's often a resistance to openly acknowledge religious faith, particularly within intellectual circles, you can see some hesitation with Thiel in his talk. Additionally, the emphasis on individualism and self-reliance can sometimes overshadow the communal and selfless aspects of Christian love. However, I also see signs of a growing spiritual hunger, a yearning for meaning and purpose beyond material pursuits. Perhaps Thiel's focus on the darker aspects of the end times can serve as a catalyst, prompting individuals to re-examine their values and seek solace in faith?
Regarding your second question, the biblical passages you cite offer valuable insights into our current predicament. The verses from 1 Peter and Luke emphasize the need for vigilance and discernment in the face of deception and impending chaos. The fact that we seem to have "walked unconsciously" into this scenario suggests a collective complacency, a failure to heed the warnings and recognize the signs of the times. As you suggest, our very abilities and technological prowess may have contributed to this blindness, creating a sense of control and invincibility that has dulled our spiritual awareness.
The way forward, as I see it, lies in reclaiming our agency and embracing the "fear not" injunction. This doesn't mean ignoring the dangers or retreating into passivity. Rather, it means actively engaging with the challenges, guided by faith and a commitment to truth. As individuals, we can cultivate spiritual disciplines like prayer and meditation, deepening our connection to the divine and fostering inner strength. Societally, we can support institutions and initiatives that promote ethical behavior, responsible technology use, and a renewed focus on community and shared values.
I think Thiel's analysis ultimately points to the urgency of choice. We are not merely passive observers of an unfolding apocalypse but active participants in shaping the future. By embracing both vigilance and hope, we can resist the forces of darkness and work towards a world where, as you say, "neither apocalypse nor autocracy prevails."
Thank you for taking the time to reply, replying to my questions, and for re-affirming the tenets of your original piece which should come as a reminder of where we stand today, hopefully to many.
Humanity - and I include myself first and foremost - is prone to 'not seeing the forest for the tree'. But, in the current apocalyptic space, many religious and non-religious people (Thiel and Chomsky among others), just like the majority among us, seem 'not to be seeing the tree for the forest'. We see the forthcoming apocalypse but not the Way out.
That tree, rather fittingly, is the Cross of Jesus Christ/Messiah, the only real hope we have by which we have been offered Salvation out of the coming dead-end and aporia.
Thank you for your time, and blessings to you and yours.
But He gives more grace. Therefore He says:
“God resists the proud,
But gives grace to the humble.”
Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. James 4:6-8
...it is indeed a choice, but it will take a large enough pushback to change that inevitability. So in fact the choice is that we will get "technological globalization." for good and bad!
Hi and good morning, thanks the reply. Historically, deeply centralized and powerful mass systems have often appeared eternal, even when riddled with deficiencies, degradations, contradictions, weaknesses, and widespread illegitimacy: until they suddenly aren't. Capital "G" Globalization today operates on a similar space just over a far larger spatial span, reliant on intricate dependencies that stretch across the planet, yet its increasingly viewed as illegitimate or corrosive by populations in both core and peripheries. And I would even go so far as say that in comparison to many past collapsing mass centralized systems, its vulnerabilities are even more stark: its financialization-driven architecture is fragile, its supply chains are brittle, and its survival depends on universal buy-in that no longer exists. So, in my opinion, while there is a basis for fears that " choice is that we will get "technological globalization." for good and bad!", in reality, all systems are choices, and the very scale of Globalization's interdependence makes its unraveling, should it come, not just possible but potentially out-of-the-blue, swift and spectacular
Thank you, you summed up the core vulnerability of our current hyper-globalized system so powerfully. The historical parallels you draw are what I failed to articulate especially highlighting the 'financialization-driven architecture' and 'brittle supply chains' – these are exactly the pressure points we need to be discussing more. The idea that its very interdependence makes a swift and spectacular unraveling possible, as you say, and as we saw in 2008... yet this is something I think many people are still struggling to grasp.
I agree that "fear not" is the best answer. Just because technology is accelerating faster than ever before doesn't mean all religious thinking is now null and void. Also agree that the stakes are high, because AI magnifies human agency.
I feel that we are very much seeking the Ring of Power with AI, though, and the idea of "diffusing it' only makes it worse, with even more human judgment to be eliminated. I also strongly feel that as individuals, we have been made almost powerless.
Without reading the article: no, he’s never right about anything and should be denaturalized and deported back to South Africa where he can be summarily executed, fuck you.
Interesting piece. I recently read Peter’s book ‘Zero to One’. He is a contrarian thinker with incredible foresight. I agree with him that the tendencies towards global authoritarianism, particularly among popular academics, is alarming. Thanks for sharing.
Zero to One is a terrific little read. I am becoming more concerned about 'authoritarianism, particularly among popular academics' it is disconcerting to see where we are heading.
Agreed. Sam Harris is another you can add to the list.
Thank you for the overview; stimulating reading. I think the 'Founding Fathers' in many countries understood the need for institutionalised checks and balances on (the misuse of) power. Since the 1980s these have largely been dismantled, and the media imagery of 'a world falling into chaos' gives weight to authoritarian arguments to 'sort it all out'. Problem-Reaction-Solution still works to herd the many.
I'm not sure why he is an investor in Space-X -- to me it's sending a double-message. There's enough to sort out on Planet Earth.
We see a general erosion in the institutions. I have not grasped why that is yet. This 'sort it all out' leader will be how Thiel describes the Antichrist. As you say "Problem-Reaction-Solution."
I think, in the short term, SpaceX is more about Starlink, this will become a + $100 billion business quite soon. War will be good to Starlink as Musk clearly shows on this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uItR09tDMXM
A corollary given by Marc Andreessen was that of social media’s reach of influence and ability to sow mis- dis- information. He likened it to the “Ring of Power,” just waiting for someone to grab it. And a political party did. Now we have AI in being used in national security activities, most notably in the Israel-Hamas war, which was frighteningly effective compared to that of 2013. AI is being introduced to DOGE/USDS, ferreting out wasteful political spending in an attempt to balance the Federal budget. Once Elon Musk and Trump vacate Washington, there will again be a more terrifying “Ring of Power,” again waiting for someone else to don it. Will there be anyone able to resist its corrupting influence?
The “Ring of Power,” what a terrible thought, and sadly coming to pass! Many years ago DARPA had a short video on the future of war, robot soldiers and ai - plus of course the Future of Life video with drones. The next 4 years will be a rollercoaster and then heaven knows what will come next - but for sure the “Ring of Power” is too much for many to resist!
Marc Andreesen had a very interesting interview on Lex Fridman podcast recently, referencing the social media “Ring of Power,” and current challenges. It covers many things mentioned here and more. Indirectly it potentially describes the ones most likely to grab the Ring.
Thanks James - I will watch it
The one thing that the Technocrats seem to have forgotten:
https://substack.com/@stevenberger/note/c-94359613?r=1nm0v2
Profits are at stake?
Probably :-)
Thank you for bringing this topic up in a balanced, seriously concerned manner.
I completely agree with your conclusions in the last paragraph:
"Individuals can take tangible steps. Engaging in informed discourse, supporting policies that promote decentralized governance, and ensuring that technological advancements remain tools for empowerment rather than mechanisms of control. Whether through scholarship, political action, or technological ethics, the responsibility falls on each of us to be vigilant, to resist both apocalypse and autocracy, and, perhaps, to forge a future where neither prevails."
I have a couple of questions however, which, as I see things, tie with the more abstract conclusion expressed in your piece, the "do not fear" feeling.
Why is it that we seem to now be able to reconsider the apocalyptic scenario and the figure of the Antichrist but cannot bring ourselves as individuals yes, but also as a society to reflect and uphold the obvious source of optimism in the Christ? And even if some of us do consider Messiah (or say we do), how (tangibly) are we expressing such consideration; His Way or our way?
And,
It appears that, according to Thiel and others, we have walked somewhat unconsciously into this end times scenario (I'm speaking about the majority of the world's population - purely evil ones do exist of course). What does that tell us about our individual and social ways? Having known about the end, why did it take us to get here, to stand at the door of doom, before we turned to look and realise? Could the same abilities, skills, technical prowess, intelligence, etc. have become the very cause of this persisting 'blindness'? If so, what is the way forward, tangibly?
1 Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.
Luke 21:25-28
“And there will be signs in the sun, in the moon, and in the stars; and on the earth distress of nations, with perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring; men’s hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. Now when these things begin to happen, look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near.”
https://lightforthelastdays.co.uk/articles/christianity-and-the-last-days/10-signs-of-the-second-coming-of-jesus-christ/
Thank you. Your questions about the seeming reluctance to embrace Christ's message of hope and the reasons for our collective "blindness" to the encroaching end times scenario are both profound and timely.
Addressing your first question, I believe the reasons for our societal hesitation to fully embrace Christ's teachings are complex and multifaceted. In an increasingly secular world, there's often a resistance to openly acknowledge religious faith, particularly within intellectual circles, you can see some hesitation with Thiel in his talk. Additionally, the emphasis on individualism and self-reliance can sometimes overshadow the communal and selfless aspects of Christian love. However, I also see signs of a growing spiritual hunger, a yearning for meaning and purpose beyond material pursuits. Perhaps Thiel's focus on the darker aspects of the end times can serve as a catalyst, prompting individuals to re-examine their values and seek solace in faith?
Regarding your second question, the biblical passages you cite offer valuable insights into our current predicament. The verses from 1 Peter and Luke emphasize the need for vigilance and discernment in the face of deception and impending chaos. The fact that we seem to have "walked unconsciously" into this scenario suggests a collective complacency, a failure to heed the warnings and recognize the signs of the times. As you suggest, our very abilities and technological prowess may have contributed to this blindness, creating a sense of control and invincibility that has dulled our spiritual awareness.
The way forward, as I see it, lies in reclaiming our agency and embracing the "fear not" injunction. This doesn't mean ignoring the dangers or retreating into passivity. Rather, it means actively engaging with the challenges, guided by faith and a commitment to truth. As individuals, we can cultivate spiritual disciplines like prayer and meditation, deepening our connection to the divine and fostering inner strength. Societally, we can support institutions and initiatives that promote ethical behavior, responsible technology use, and a renewed focus on community and shared values.
I think Thiel's analysis ultimately points to the urgency of choice. We are not merely passive observers of an unfolding apocalypse but active participants in shaping the future. By embracing both vigilance and hope, we can resist the forces of darkness and work towards a world where, as you say, "neither apocalypse nor autocracy prevails."
Thank you for taking the time to reply, replying to my questions, and for re-affirming the tenets of your original piece which should come as a reminder of where we stand today, hopefully to many.
Humanity - and I include myself first and foremost - is prone to 'not seeing the forest for the tree'. But, in the current apocalyptic space, many religious and non-religious people (Thiel and Chomsky among others), just like the majority among us, seem 'not to be seeing the tree for the forest'. We see the forthcoming apocalypse but not the Way out.
That tree, rather fittingly, is the Cross of Jesus Christ/Messiah, the only real hope we have by which we have been offered Salvation out of the coming dead-end and aporia.
Thank you for your time, and blessings to you and yours.
But He gives more grace. Therefore He says:
“God resists the proud,
But gives grace to the humble.”
Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. James 4:6-8
That is well said. It could be possible that the inner crisis leads many more to 'draw back to God'. I am hopeful. Blessings to you and yours. Colin
why would anyone believe "technological globalization is inevitable", its certainly not inevitable, its a choice.
...it is indeed a choice, but it will take a large enough pushback to change that inevitability. So in fact the choice is that we will get "technological globalization." for good and bad!
Hi and good morning, thanks the reply. Historically, deeply centralized and powerful mass systems have often appeared eternal, even when riddled with deficiencies, degradations, contradictions, weaknesses, and widespread illegitimacy: until they suddenly aren't. Capital "G" Globalization today operates on a similar space just over a far larger spatial span, reliant on intricate dependencies that stretch across the planet, yet its increasingly viewed as illegitimate or corrosive by populations in both core and peripheries. And I would even go so far as say that in comparison to many past collapsing mass centralized systems, its vulnerabilities are even more stark: its financialization-driven architecture is fragile, its supply chains are brittle, and its survival depends on universal buy-in that no longer exists. So, in my opinion, while there is a basis for fears that " choice is that we will get "technological globalization." for good and bad!", in reality, all systems are choices, and the very scale of Globalization's interdependence makes its unraveling, should it come, not just possible but potentially out-of-the-blue, swift and spectacular
Thank you, you summed up the core vulnerability of our current hyper-globalized system so powerfully. The historical parallels you draw are what I failed to articulate especially highlighting the 'financialization-driven architecture' and 'brittle supply chains' – these are exactly the pressure points we need to be discussing more. The idea that its very interdependence makes a swift and spectacular unraveling possible, as you say, and as we saw in 2008... yet this is something I think many people are still struggling to grasp.
I agree that "fear not" is the best answer. Just because technology is accelerating faster than ever before doesn't mean all religious thinking is now null and void. Also agree that the stakes are high, because AI magnifies human agency.
I feel that we are very much seeking the Ring of Power with AI, though, and the idea of "diffusing it' only makes it worse, with even more human judgment to be eliminated. I also strongly feel that as individuals, we have been made almost powerless.
"He does not retreat into the Benedict Option, that modern impulse to withdraw from society and cloister oneself from the encroaching tide"
Other than his doomsday bunker in the south of New Zealand, of course (which at the moment he seems to be hold off on).
If crazy is “right” then perhaps yes. But, if he is “right” politically then Yes. If he is right socially, ethically, or morally then no.
no
Without reading the article: no, he’s never right about anything and should be denaturalized and deported back to South Africa where he can be summarily executed, fuck you.
It is Musk that is from South Africa.