https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palantir_Technologies

Palantir was founded in 2003. It has 4,000 employees and $3B of revenues using technology to make the military more effective. It is valued at more than $300B, the 30th most valuable company in the world! Yes, 100X revenues (not 8X or 25X) and $75M per employee (not $3M-10M). The founder, Alexander Karp, has written a book about what’s wrong with the US and what to do about it, in his spare time. The book jacket says he earned his doctorate in “social theory” from Goethe University in Frankfurt.

The 218-page book is rambling, with an extra 66 note pages. The bottom line is that everyone should be like the author, a hard charging owner engineer, focused on technical results AND deeply interested in the social, political and economic success of the nation. Hence, it crosses political boundaries!!!! A majority of the book castigates “the left”. About a quarter criticizes the shallow market right. However, the author raises great questions about what is required for success by the US that should not be discounted by either side of the political spectrum, IMO.

On specific policy questions, the author wants freedom for his firm to grow and succeed. Define some guardrails for AI. Don’t worry about personal freedom versus facial recognition. Invest in science. Prioritize science and technology. Honor leaders and leadership. Support the founder and ownership culture. Value science above finance and consulting. Adopt hard power, hawkish, deterrence foreign policies. Prioritize economic growth. Embrace best business practices. Validate rational trade-offs.

Crush “The Left”, It is Destroying Civilization

Karp claims that the “vampire squid” left is:

1. Anti-nation, post-nation, completely, irrevocably, unapologetically.
2. Without ideals, goals or ends.
3. Skeptical, opposing any beliefs, deconstructing all.
4. Opposing any national, community or political identity!
5. Uninterested in defining “the good life”.
6. Opposing the use of technology in support of the goals of the state or society.
7. Opposing the legitimization of the state via economic growth.
8. Uninterested in using the capabilities of technology for key industries.
9. Promoting neutral, rudderless values in the nation’s elites.
10. Prioritizing “woke” AI controls.
11. Restricting free speech.
12. Complacent about international threats.
13. Seduced by the lure of global peace, values and organizations.
14. Overly idealistic, unable to consider pragmatic trade-offs.
15. Unwilling to hold allies accountable.
16. Enamored with the role of trade alone in preventing national disputes.
17. Lost in the controlling ideology of “the oppressor vs. oppressed”.
18. Bereft of core values.
19. Vindictive, punishing opponents.
20. Unwisely emphasizing the pure moral character and actions of public office holders.
21. Ignorant of the role of culture in managing society.
22. Prioritizing individual rights at the expense of community.
23. Anti-Western culture and civilization.
24. Anti-community, of any kind.
25. Anti-shared, objective values or morality, especially by society’s elites.
26. Universalist, idealist, cosmopolitan opposed to practical and local values.
27. Anti-religious.
28. Unworried that the “separation of church and state” undermines belief.
29. Promoting tolerance and pluralism in order to undermine any objective truth.
30. Highlighting legal compliance and individual rights at the expense of “the good” and true justice.
31. Defining a realm of acceptable “liberal” values and prohibiting other values.
32. Opposing any benefits from historical civilizations.
33. Mostly interested in reviewing the oppressive roles of colonial empires.
34. Uninterested in objective physical or moral truths.
35. Uninterested in problem solving.
36. Certain of its moral superiority versus political and class opponents.
37. Opposed to conventional, objective, scientific knowledge.
38. OK with a “thin” moral world of market efficiency and legal freedoms.
39. Mostly interested in “performative discourse” instead of critical thinking.
40. Committed to a martyr’s idealism in political performance.
41. Opposed to recognizing the key role of great leaders.
42. Uninterested in the moral dimension of life.
43. Actively opposed to the moral and practical advances of Western Civilization.
44. Ambivalent regarding any objective notion of objective truth or beauty.
45. Opposed to the “great man” concept of history, replacing it with social pressures alone.
46. Committed to the self-evident progress of man through science, alone.

The extreme claims are mostly self-refuted by any neutral reader. Karp inappropriately commingles postmodernism, classical liberalism, liberal institutions, interest groups, the Democratic Party and its supporters. It is unclear whether he is an advocate employing the strawman technique or really doesn’t understand the differences between the many groups in the leftist coalition. He generally defines the most extreme, exaggerated, indefensible examples for criticism. He ignores the differences between philosophers and real people. He does quite a bit of name calling. He portrays his opponents as simpletons, unaware of tradeoffs. He generalizes leftists as pure feeling, intuitive beings rather than mixed constructive thinkers. He fails to recognize any of Jonathan Haidt’s morality flavors as being essentially important to left and right.

The Right is Not Blameless

1. The market pays finance/consulting folks more than engineers.
2. In the end, idealism is more important than pragmatism!
3. The neoliberal philosophy that elevates the market above religion is clearly wrong.
4. The pure market, pragmatic philosophy undermines any ultimate ends.
5. The commercial world is uninterested in “the good life”.
6. Criticism of “the state” undermines its valid role and what technology can do.
7. The state must be perceived as legitimate. An extreme distribution of wealth and income must be addressed in the political process.
8. A meritocratic, secular world alone cannot generate consensus values.
9. Growing international trade alone is not enough to avoid conflicts.
10. A commercial society does not require its managerial elites to engage in the political process.
11. The “productization” of life, the rise of instrumental logic, places humanity at risk and threatens any sense of cultural community or values.
12. The default hierarchical structure of large bureaucratic organizations is inherently less efficient and effective in the long run.
13. The most valuable, effective employees require freedom from rules and obedience.
14. Key government roles are valuable and should be compensated accordingly.
15. Inclusivity is required for firm effectiveness.
16. Firms are artificial entities. Like citizens, they should be obligated to support the nation.

Real Problems/Challenges/Opportunities

1. As a nation, we don’t have generally agreed upon priorities, values, and ideals.
2. Since we don’t have priorities, we don’t effectively apply our rich resources as a nation.
3. We don’t have a consensus that other values trump market values.
4. We don’t appreciate the critical role of the nation. We have lost our patriotism.
5. We don’t have a dream, story, history, myth, image of a great nation. Without some constructive narrative we won’t have a civilization.
6. Lacking a national identity, we are rootless, anxious, listless, worried, adrift.
7. Nationalism is replaced by globalism or secularism as an organizing structure.
8. In post-Vietnam, Watergate, 1960’s world, skepticism is the default world view, undercutting the development, acquisition, promotion or application of any serious moral, social, cultural, religious or political belief.
9. Skepticism is a self-reinforcing worldview. The lack of “belief” undermines interpersonal trust, institutions, community, politics and patriotism.
10. Skepticism undermines belief in objective moral, physical and aesthetic truths. A relativist, subjective philosophy elevates tolerance, social distance, safety, and conflict avoidance as leading social values.
11. The neo-liberal market philosophy has resulted in economic efficiency, market values and instrumental logic quietly dominating moral, social, cultural, religious and political views for many. Results matter but can be overdone.
12. Criticism of government roles and performance has undermined the core expectation and demand that government deliver results, respond to citizens and operate effectively and efficiently. Government and science are not enemies. Government and industry are not enemies.
13. We observe the positive results that can be delivered by entrepreneurial, founder, owner, responsible organizations but have not found solid ways to ensure that this approach impacts all industries, especially the government sector. Results matter but can be overdone.
14. The neoliberal “free market” political philosophy of Milton Friedman justifies corporations to ignore the nation or community as a valid stakeholder. It encourages corporations to treat all decisions as opportunities to maximize economic returns, undermining other valid political, social and moral responsibilities. Results matter but can be overdone.
15. Effective organizations relentlessly focus on final results, structuring their plans, systems, and resources with reinforcing feedback loops and expectations. Less effective organizations and industries waste resources. Global or local market competition, anti-trust regulation, tax structures, industrial policy, education, effectiveness audits, best practices sharing, outsourcing, benchmarking, etc. can be used to improve. Results matter but can be overdone.
16. All industries contribute to a healthy economy and society. None should be allowed to be ineffective.
17. Lacking a national culture, mass media, effective political parties, or shared religious views, the socialization of students and young adults is critical. Education matters. In a meritocracy, the role of suburban high schools and leading universities is essential.
18. Solid and exceptional talents and leadership matter to organizations and nations. Our political systems mostly fail to use these capabilities. We apply idealistic “oughts” to our political processes rather than reasonable incentives for participation and results.
19. We apply unrealistic ideals to political candidates instead of evaluating their effectiveness. This attracts “talking heads” and repels effective candidates. We should judge politicians as we judge other professionals, managers and leaders. Politics and governing are messy businesses, like sales, purchasing, negotiations, mergers and acquisitions in business. We need to set proper expectations and ignore how the sausage is made.
20. Cultural and social expectations matter. They should not be set by politicians. Historically, social, economic, intellectual and leadership elites informally shaped, refined and enforced these commonly held views. In our radically individualistic culture, we have not found an effective replacement for the old approaches.
21. In national and international politics, we need to evaluate both hard and soft power approaches. We need to consider ideals and pragmatic factors. Trade-offs are often required.
22. Leadership matters. In a complex world, firm and political leaders require great skills to be effective.

Karp’s Solutions

1. A stronger central government to make better choices.
2. Industrial policies and government funding.
3. Overhaul political incentive systems to get better candidates.
4. Revise laws to align corporations with national priorities.
5. Provide incentives to better use the founder/ownership model for firms.
6. Fund scientific research.
7. Defeat the “far left” views and policies of “progressive”, new left, postmodernist Democrats.
8. Elevate the nation as the primary social/community vehicle for society.
9. Promote the Teddy Roosevelt “man in the arena” view of society, politics, institutions and leadership.
10. Promote the Teddy Roosevelt “speak softly and carry a big stick” view of international relations. Increase hard power, especially for technological areas.
11. Use the resources of science, technology, IT and business to improve society.

Summary

Karp argues that “the technological republic” can address the problems he has identified. His primary solutions are technocratic ones. I think that the “neutral” problems he has identified are important. I don’t think his “solutions” really fix them. The solutions are mainly focused on using firms and talents like his in supporting the government’s military capabilities.

Greater nationalism is one approach to the core problems, but strong nationalism has a mixed history and may not be a widely supported solution in the modern or postmodern world. Individualism is too strong. Religious and political views are diverse. Racial, ethnic, regional and class groups are diverse.