In today’s world, discussions about existential threats and apocalyptic visions are increasingly prevalent, especially among influential figures in politics and technology. One notable individual at the forefront of these conversations is tech billionaire Peter Thiel, who is reportedly spearheading a clandestine society aimed at uniting brilliant minds to prepare for future upheavals. This article explores the implications of these “end-times” ideologies and their growing presence in power circles.
By Joscha Abels, Post-Doctoral Researcher, Institute of Political Science, University of Tübingen, and Juliana Tappe Ortiz, Post-Doctoral Researcher, Institute of Political Science, University of Tübingen. Originally published at The Conversation
EPA/JIM LO SCALZO
Recent reports reveal that Peter Thiel is running a secretive society designed to unite influential CEOs, billionaires, and political leaders. Among its members are notable figures such as NATO Supreme Commander Alexus Grynkewich and Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of former U.S. President Donald Trump.
Thiel, a German-American entrepreneur and political activist known for co-founding PayPal and the software firm Palantir, has drawn significant attention for this group, referred to as “Dialog.” Earlier this year, he even delivered a confidential lecture series in San Francisco, framing political and technological issues in biblical terms.
Thiel has publicly articulated his belief that humanity faces dire existential threats—ranging from nuclear war to uncontrolled artificial intelligence—that might culminate in “Armageddon.” His perspective suggests that only the most capable individuals, such as those within his secret society, would endure in such catastrophic scenarios.
Thiel’s views may seem extreme, but he is not alone. A growing number of influential figures in both political and technological spheres are increasingly framing today’s world through the lens of a looming civilizational crisis, filled with impending catastrophes.
Politics of the End Times
Throughout history, political leaders have often invoked fears of decline and collapse. For instance, Augustus, the first Roman emperor, used the notion of moral collapse in Rome to justify his consolidation of power. However, our current “end-times politics” stands apart in various ways. Threats—be they real or imagined—now spread rapidly through social media algorithms that often amplify hysteria and conspiracy theories.
In Silicon Valley, influential figures regularly engage in discussions that frame AI as either humanity’s savior or a harbinger of extinction. Palantir CEO Alex Karp has characterized the race for AI advancement as our “Oppenheimer moment,” where leading nations must decide whether to halt the development of potentially dangerous technology or continue to pursue it for strategic advantage.
Yet this phenomenon is not confined to the technology sector. End-times narratives have infiltrated political discourse, as leaders leverage these philosophies to promote radical agendas.
U.S. military personnel have lodged a significant number of complaints alleging that their commanders have employed biblical rhetoric about end-times to rationalize U.S. military actions in Iran. Reports indicate that leadership referenced Armageddon, framing the conflict as a vital precursor to the return of Christ.
This rhetoric takes place against a backdrop where the Trump administration has cultivated strong ties with the Christian right, particularly evangelical groups, as a core support base for its “spiritual warfare”. The U.S. Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, has portrayed himself as an instrument of divine will in this existential battle for Christianity.
Hegseth and other key figures have been reportedly populating their departments with evangelicals and Christian Zionists. These occurrences reflect a broader trend where political and corporate leaders intertwine their interpretations of Christianity with notions of American dominance.
Radical Minds, Radical Politics
Trump’s belligerent statements regarding Iran, including his alarming declaration made in April that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again,” underscore the perilous consequences of this myth-making. Such rhetoric opens pathways for radical political movements in the U.S. and beyond.
The Trump administration has consistently portrayed Europe as on the brink of a decline, predicting “civilizational erasure” fueled by unchecked immigration and European integration. Similarly, Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, has raised alarms about a looming “societal collapse” in the UK.
Research indicates that people are often more inclined to support extraordinary measures when they perceive an existential threat. Moreover, the psychological tendencies of political leaders significantly impact decision-making, especially in times of uncertainty. The unpredictable consequences of technological and environmental shifts give rise to risks and anxieties, creating the potential for leaders to portray adversaries, social movements, or minority groups as mythical enemies.
Consequently, end-times politics evolves into a battle over defining the greatest threats to humanity. With humans facing an array of risks, these worldviews inevitably shape the trajectory of national and global politics.
This phenomenon also presents a compelling reason to engage. In much of modern history, the most impactful individuals have been elected officials and state representatives. However, a new breed of leader has surfaced: technology executives wielding substantial wealth and media influence. Their impact can extend deeply into governance, as exemplified by Elon Musk’s involvement with the U.S. Department of Government Efficiency and the integral role of SpaceX in U.S. global strategy.
Historically, scholars have framed global politics within the context of institutions and structural relations, with globalization analyzed through the lens of business interests. Now, the trajectory of both appears increasingly tethered to the psychology of a select political and corporate elite.
End-times leaders often amplify specific threats while minimizing others. Frequently, technology executives draw connections between a prosperous future and the urgency of disruptive innovation. U.S. venture capitalist Marc Andreessen advocates for “technological accelerationism,” suggesting that unregulated technological growth is the key to resolving the world’s existential predicaments.
The challenge lies in discerning between authentic threats and narratives that incite fear while diverting attention from more pressing issues. In a landscape rife with collapse predictions, it may be more crucial than ever to concentrate on evidence-based risks such as the climate crisis and the erosion of democratic systems.
When considering whether technology can effectively address climate change or foster global peace, it’s prudent to approach the claims of tech billionaires with skepticism. Notably, Thiel has recently shown hesitancy, contemplating a bunker in New Zealand and a refuge in Argentina as potential retreats.
