this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2026
322 points (99.4% liked)

politics

29509 readers
5563 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The surveillance giant has exploded in value as it’s scored massive contracts from the Trump administration.

Major military contractor and surveillance giant Palantir has posted a chilling manifesto on social media that calls for tech companies like itself to play a larger role in a dystopian future where imperialist and white supremacist powers are unleashed and Americans are increasingly subject to the whims of the surveillance state.

The post contains 22 points it says were summarized from a 2025 book, The Technological Republic, written by Palantir co-founder Alex Karp and Nicholas W. Zamiska, head of corporate affairs and legal counsel to the company’s CEO.

The company, also co-founded by Peter Thiel, says that the U.S. should adopt mandatory national military service on a “universal” basis. The military’s needs should be prioritized above all because “the ability of free and democratic societies to prevail … requires hard power,” rather than soft power.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Some of them do take a moment of thought, but I would suggest they only read like good points if you accept the tone and wording instead of thinking about the implications. 30 seconds or less of thought about any one of those points reveals they are horrible. But how many people give those 30 seconds? Especially 22 times.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

That's why I said "if you didn't know who wrote it and what their vision for the future is."

I mean, if you didn't know who wrote it, or anything about them, and you read these:

  1. Free email is not enough. The decadence of a culture or civilization, and indeed its ruling class, will be forgiven only if that culture is capable of delivering economic growth and security for the public.
  1. Our society has grown too eager to hasten, and is often gleeful at, the demise of its enemies. The vanquishing of an opponent is a moment to pause, not rejoice.

What indication is there that you should be cautious about what they're saying?