the NYT interview is just filled with how Thiel sees the world. Someone on twitter described it as "the contrarian undergrad who hasn't gotten punched in the face yet"

>When I remark that President Obama had eight years without any ethical shadiness, Mr. Thiel flips it, noting: “But there’s a point where no corruption can be a bad thing. It can mean that things are too boring.”

"Boring things suck, let's make stuff exciting" is his argument for corruption.

>"It’s like, even if you appointed a whole series of conservative Supreme Court justices, I’m not sure that Roe v. Wade would get overturned, ever.”

Given the current reality of 5-4 votes on these issues, if we were to replace the 5 "for" votes with 5 more "against" votes, I believe that can cause things to be overturned, yes.

It really feels like Thiel has never actually thought about politics deeply, beyond platitudes he's heard. I assume that's not true, but it sure reads like that.

I really wish this had been a video interview, because if it reads absurdly, I bet the soundbites would be even moreso.

So now they're carving up fiefdoms? Where does this end?

Peter Thiel is an anti-democracy monarchist. It ends when the country is broken up into small enough chunks that he can declare himself King of one of them.

https://techcrunch.com/2013/11/22/geeks-for-monarchy/

Is it at all worrisome that this man, through his donations, has an ear to the president?

As a side note, it's interesting to note that either California or Texas seceding would be irreparably damaging to the country because the political scales would tip so greatly.

That's the goal from their perspective. Neoreactionaries are former anarcho-capitalists who want to break up the public democratic government so that they can implement private government.

https://techcrunch.com/2013/11/22/geeks-for-monarchy/

I don't think either the California National Party or the Texas secession movement want to secede because they are comprised of neoreactionaries. That article doesn't provide a shred of evidence that neoreactionaries are involved in any actual secession movements.

As a side note, that linked article and the assumptions you make off of it (the article does not mention "anarcho-capitalism" or "private government") both seem wildly unbased, more than bordering on conspiracy. The evidence against Thiel is more or less tantamount to him funding a startup founded by Yarvin, but surely there could have been a plethora of non-political motivations behind that.