Peter Thiel's 'Dialog' network was super-secret. A data leak changed that
san.com"Attendees are also asked to provide their “Political leaning” and are given the choices of “Far Left,” “Left,” “Right,” and “Far Right.”
So why has this website not said if any, and if so which, of the 113 self declared as far left or far right? As thats in the public interest to be made public.
Is it because of fear after Thiel destroyed Gawker by funding the Hogan troal?
I find it more interesting that there is no center among those choices.
God, imagine being the first one to have to explain to the aliens what "left" and "right" are, trying to make sense of the insensate decision to yoke ourselves to such reductive labels just to scratch that tribal itch in our brains. It almost made sense back when we killed and enslaved each other for worshiping the wrong gods, or pledging fealty to the wrong lords. But what excuse today do we still have to flatten the whole churning mass of a person's belief system into a single point on a single line? It goes so much deeper than ignorance, laziness, or abstraction.
> One session is titled “Bring Back Nuclear.” Another will focus on “Disinformation and Deepfakes.” Participants will hear about “Contrarian AI Takes,” “Three Predictions for Iran” and “Democracy Under Surveillance.”
> One session is headlined “Build-a-Cult (Soapbox),” while another declares, “It’s Fun to Be in Charge.”
In this context, I worry that "Democracy under Surveillance" is not a warning... but a cookbook. [0]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Serve_Man_(The_Twilight_Zon...
Seems like a reasonable worry.
A principle I feel is true is when one is wealthy enough one starts to believe that rules don't apply to one self.
And so extrapolating upon that, I think it's reasonable to assume that shaping society is not a taboo of arrogance to these people but a Self-Granted right.
When one is wealthy enough, rules stop applying. The belief may be misaligned in some ways with reality, but the reality is similar.
All people who maintain power necessarily rationalize that they should maintain their power, to avoid feeling the cognitive dissonance that they should not have it.
There's no taboo against confidence in control, however misplaced, in anyone who has and maintains power.
They consider themselves to be superior and above the rest of humanity -- they are not our allies and they consider us to be "dangerous", so it's simple to work backwards from that they they are the dangerous ones.
So I'd like to hear pg explain away why billionaires are ok for society.
way to go. bout time we give these types of people some true fear. they shouldnt have to hide to speak there minds