“ Karp explicitly says how he wants to cultivate a more martial society to defend “the West.””
And he stands shoulder to shoulder with the people destroying NATO, destroying USAID, destroying universities, and gleefully surrendering our democratic allies in Ukraine to the autocratic ally of Iran and North Korea, while Xi’s China watches in delight as the West commits suicide.
Well yes, with NATO shattered, there will finallybe some actual wars in the near future! super exciting if you run a tech company and not acompany of conscripts!
I couldn't agree more, Joe, as someone who formerly worked in marketing and design at Palantir I am just coming to understand how jargon and critical theory have been leveraged to obfuscate the company's real mission and the real outcomes of the AI/data "revolution." I wrote more about my experience here https://open.substack.com/pub/zigguratmag/p/the-guernica-of-ai-c4b?r=1i9yq&utm_medium=ios
The parallels - and differences - of the present SV technofeudalists activism with the Technocracy movement of the 1930s (when else?) are compelling. The anti-democratic and techno-fashy elements are a match obviously. But there are some differences in that today's would-be technocrats are not so much engineers (despite how they like to portray themselves) as the business owners of engineering firms. Also the kind of engineering has changed. Both yesterday's and today's technocrats aim to expand into social engineering, ofc, but they start from different places - manufacturing vs data mining and advertising. Someone should write a proper historical compare and contrast
Yes, the core ideas differ little from Howard Scott and the others (which also got a lot of traction among fascist engineers in 1920s Italy) but it lacked a basic political-economic foundation and the movement was nuked by the Depression. Courtesy of the digital revolution, the technofeudalists are now, unlike the relatively fringe technocrats of Scott/Veblen's day, now a ubiquitous presence up and down the entire structure of socio-economic life. There's no escaping them, they know it, and they're marinating in the rush of it all.
Thank you, John, for not mincing words in your review. It is critical to take down this garbage on all levels -- intellectual, geopolitical, humanistic, literary.
I suspect the authors wanted the book's publication to coincide with the "AI empire" push coming from the Trump/Musk [Vance] administration, and shoveled it together in short order (likely using AI, as you suggest). As a side note, I'm appalled that editorial standards at Penguin/Random House are so lax. (They must have announced the book long before the election, but there's a lot of "perfect timing" happening; did they rush it into production?)
re editorial standards, I am always dismayed while perusing Audible for a new book in the Science and Technology (as if they are the same thing) category, only to find RFK, Jr's book (among others) in that category. Pseudoscience and Lack of Critical Thinking need their own section.
John, I absolutely loved your review in Bloomberg. It opens up a deep seam of much-needed contemporary critique, and I look forward to your continuing to "mine" it! Two thoughts: I'm curious whether you have read Peter Gordon's 2016 book "Adorno and Existence," which was my introduction to Adorno's lifetime engagment with and critique of the ideas of existentialism and phenomenology. Finally, you might be amused by this--very early--attempt to describe the reactionary modernism (although, at the time, I didn't have the term) of high-tech culture: https://www.roberthoward.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Kidder-Review.pdf
Interesting line from the book about the kind of leaders the authors admire— who “can be far more alert and sensitive to the needs and demands of their public, even if they ruthlessly and viciously ignore them.” I guess that’s one way of describing an authoritarian surveillance state.
"...the authors propose is essentially some kind of merger or acquisition of the United States government by Silicon Valley, a state run by an engineering elite that would be empowered to “ruthlessly” pursue “outcomes.”
Thanks. I've been searching for a phrase to sum up the recent DOGE goings on ever since all the SV creeps lined up for inspection at the inauguration.
Who needs government when there's AI?! This sounds like the privatization final solution; and resembles what I've heard about the technofeudal critique. Super creepy, and already in power.
I’m a bit stumped by how Karp actually fits into Palantir. Bullshit aside, Palantir is in the defence contracting business, Karp doesn’t seem to be either a software or even a high-flying finance guy, he’s basically a jumped-up salesman (bring back the plaid suit and white shoes!). What does a salesman bring to the table that warrants the CEO job?
Also wonder incidentally who Karp’s intended audience is. As you mentioned, the corporatist Silicon Valley boilerplate has become so formulaic that AI can spit it out without breaking a sweat. Except for wannabe fascist court philosophers like Vance, nobody who is actually in the weapons systems/surveillance state business is going to read shit like this - they’re already in the killing/crushing/ game, they don’t need a sermon about it from some turd in California.
The company has been around for 20+ years and had a decent amount of success selling their stuff during Iraq. I don’t understand what Karp’s deal was originally, but by now he’s an established natsec guy.
In the 2000s their sales pitch was “we are not using AI”. At that time, the common wisdom in Silicon Valley was that AI was a dead end, instead one should build tools to scale up human judgment.
“ Karp explicitly says how he wants to cultivate a more martial society to defend “the West.””
And he stands shoulder to shoulder with the people destroying NATO, destroying USAID, destroying universities, and gleefully surrendering our democratic allies in Ukraine to the autocratic ally of Iran and North Korea, while Xi’s China watches in delight as the West commits suicide.
Thank you for savaging the book in your review.
Well yes, with NATO shattered, there will finallybe some actual wars in the near future! super exciting if you run a tech company and not acompany of conscripts!
I couldn't agree more, Joe, as someone who formerly worked in marketing and design at Palantir I am just coming to understand how jargon and critical theory have been leveraged to obfuscate the company's real mission and the real outcomes of the AI/data "revolution." I wrote more about my experience here https://open.substack.com/pub/zigguratmag/p/the-guernica-of-ai-c4b?r=1i9yq&utm_medium=ios
The parallels - and differences - of the present SV technofeudalists activism with the Technocracy movement of the 1930s (when else?) are compelling. The anti-democratic and techno-fashy elements are a match obviously. But there are some differences in that today's would-be technocrats are not so much engineers (despite how they like to portray themselves) as the business owners of engineering firms. Also the kind of engineering has changed. Both yesterday's and today's technocrats aim to expand into social engineering, ofc, but they start from different places - manufacturing vs data mining and advertising. Someone should write a proper historical compare and contrast
Musk's maternal grandfather!
Joshua N Haldeman - had not made that connection. Well spotted!
Yes, the core ideas differ little from Howard Scott and the others (which also got a lot of traction among fascist engineers in 1920s Italy) but it lacked a basic political-economic foundation and the movement was nuked by the Depression. Courtesy of the digital revolution, the technofeudalists are now, unlike the relatively fringe technocrats of Scott/Veblen's day, now a ubiquitous presence up and down the entire structure of socio-economic life. There's no escaping them, they know it, and they're marinating in the rush of it all.
Thank you, John, for not mincing words in your review. It is critical to take down this garbage on all levels -- intellectual, geopolitical, humanistic, literary.
I suspect the authors wanted the book's publication to coincide with the "AI empire" push coming from the Trump/Musk [Vance] administration, and shoveled it together in short order (likely using AI, as you suggest). As a side note, I'm appalled that editorial standards at Penguin/Random House are so lax. (They must have announced the book long before the election, but there's a lot of "perfect timing" happening; did they rush it into production?)
re editorial standards, I am always dismayed while perusing Audible for a new book in the Science and Technology (as if they are the same thing) category, only to find RFK, Jr's book (among others) in that category. Pseudoscience and Lack of Critical Thinking need their own section.
"Quackery" could be its catchall title.
John, I absolutely loved your review in Bloomberg. It opens up a deep seam of much-needed contemporary critique, and I look forward to your continuing to "mine" it! Two thoughts: I'm curious whether you have read Peter Gordon's 2016 book "Adorno and Existence," which was my introduction to Adorno's lifetime engagment with and critique of the ideas of existentialism and phenomenology. Finally, you might be amused by this--very early--attempt to describe the reactionary modernism (although, at the time, I didn't have the term) of high-tech culture: https://www.roberthoward.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Kidder-Review.pdf
I haven't but it looks great, and I'll checck it out!
"...reverse engineering the Frankfurt School’s critique of low-key fascism to do a little low-key fascism yourself ..."
Damn. That's fascinating and infuriating.
Interesting line from the book about the kind of leaders the authors admire— who “can be far more alert and sensitive to the needs and demands of their public, even if they ruthlessly and viciously ignore them.” I guess that’s one way of describing an authoritarian surveillance state.
"...the authors propose is essentially some kind of merger or acquisition of the United States government by Silicon Valley, a state run by an engineering elite that would be empowered to “ruthlessly” pursue “outcomes.”
Thanks. I've been searching for a phrase to sum up the recent DOGE goings on ever since all the SV creeps lined up for inspection at the inauguration.
This is what the SV oligarchs divine from the fever dream rants of Curtis Yarvin.
Who needs government when there's AI?! This sounds like the privatization final solution; and resembles what I've heard about the technofeudal critique. Super creepy, and already in power.
I’m a bit stumped by how Karp actually fits into Palantir. Bullshit aside, Palantir is in the defence contracting business, Karp doesn’t seem to be either a software or even a high-flying finance guy, he’s basically a jumped-up salesman (bring back the plaid suit and white shoes!). What does a salesman bring to the table that warrants the CEO job?
Also wonder incidentally who Karp’s intended audience is. As you mentioned, the corporatist Silicon Valley boilerplate has become so formulaic that AI can spit it out without breaking a sweat. Except for wannabe fascist court philosophers like Vance, nobody who is actually in the weapons systems/surveillance state business is going to read shit like this - they’re already in the killing/crushing/ game, they don’t need a sermon about it from some turd in California.
The company has been around for 20+ years and had a decent amount of success selling their stuff during Iraq. I don’t understand what Karp’s deal was originally, but by now he’s an established natsec guy.
In the 2000s their sales pitch was “we are not using AI”. At that time, the common wisdom in Silicon Valley was that AI was a dead end, instead one should build tools to scale up human judgment.