The Real Stakes, and Real Story, of Peter Thiel’s Antichrist Obsession

Summary

Laura Bullard traces how Peter Thiel’s public preoccupation with the Antichrist and the katechon draws on René Girard’s mimetic theory and the controversial legal thinker Carl Schmitt. The piece reconstructs Thiel’s private lectures and public appearances, shows the sustained influence of Austrian theologian Wolfgang Palaver on Thiel, and links these ideas to concrete political and technological interventions—Palantir, investments in military tech, and support for National Conservatism figures such as JD Vance. Bullard contrasts Palaver’s peace-focused Girardian reading with Thiel’s pragmatic, sometimes contradictory moves that risk empowering surveillance and nationalist actors.

Key Points

Thiel has been publicly developing a narrative around the Antichrist and the katechon that shapes his recent speeches and networks.
Wolfgang Palaver, a Girardian theologian, has been a persistent intellectual influence—and occasionally a corrective—on Thiel.
Thiel borrows from Carl Schmitt’s fear of global unification while drawing on Girardian ideas about mimetic rivalry and scapegoating.
Those philosophical currents help explain Thiel’s real-world choices: Palantir, military-tech investments, and backing of National Conservatism figures.
Some Girardians condemn how Thiel and allies have simplified or instrumentalised Girard to justify exclusionary politics.
Palaver fears Thiel risks accidentally enabling the very centralised power (the Antichrist) he claims to oppose.
The story connects abstract theology and political theory to tangible consequences for surveillance, electoral politics and global alignments.

Content summary

The article reconstructs Thiel’s armageddon-themed lectures (notably a 2023 Paris talk) and details his intellectual trajectory from Stanford Girardian circles to funding technology and political movements. Thiel frames modern civilisation as vulnerable to both technological catastrophe and the rise of a unifying Antichrist who would exploit fear to impose ‘peace and safety.’ Palaver, who first critiqued Nazi jurist Carl Schmitt’s apocalyptic thinking, initially sought to debunk Schmitt but has watched parts of his scholarship be repurposed by Thiel.

Bullard outlines how Girard’s mimetic theory (imitation leading to rivalry, and the scapegoat mechanism) underpins the debate: Girard urges non-violence and rejects scapegoating, while Schmitt sought katechons to prevent global unity that might usher in the Antichrist. Thiel, influenced by both, appears to oscillate—advocating disunified, multipolar checks on global power while backing surveillance and political actors that could consolidate power in dangerous ways. The piece maps these intellectual debates onto concrete actors (Palantir, JD Vance, National Conservatism) and raises questions about the ethics and risks of translating apocalyptic theory into strategy.

Context and relevance

This is important because it links high‑level philosophical and theological ideas to real-world power: a billionaire investor’s worldview matters when it shapes technology, defence spending, and political careers. The article helps readers understand how intellectual currents (Girard, Schmitt, Strauss) inform tech policy, surveillance infrastructure and nationalist politics. For anyone tracking AI, national security, civil liberties or the influence of oligarchic money on democracies, this piece provides a sharpened lens on motive and method.

Author style

Punchy — Bullard combines thorough reporting with clear, critical framing: the piece both narrates meetings, emails and lectures and amplifies why the philosophical roots matter for policy and politics. If this subject matters to you, the article makes that case briskly and insistently.

Why should I read this?

Short version: it’s wild, it’s consequential, and it’s not just an eccentric billionaire hobby. Thiel’s Antichrist talk isn’t theatre — it helps explain why he bankrolls surveillance tech, backs certain politicians, and talks about geopolitics the way he does. If you care about where power, tech and ideology meet, this saves you time by unpacking the how and the why.