From Contrarian Bet to Political Shift

In October 2016, just weeks before the U.S. presidential election, a video surfaced showing Donald Trump making offensive comments about women. Many people believed this would end his campaign. However, investor Peter Thiel reacted differently. Instead of pulling away, he showed strong support by donating $1.25 million to Trump's campaign shortly after the video became public. Thiel's decision stood out because most of Silicon Valley supported Hillary Clinton and promoted liberal values. The tech industry generally saw itself as rational and opposed to Trump's style of politics. Thiel, however, had a history of going against popular opinion and making bold decisions that often paid off, such as investing early in Facebook when others were unsure.

When Trump won the election, Thiel's influence became more visible. In December 2016, he helped arrange a meeting between Trump and fourteen major tech executives. This showed that Thiel had gained political importance and could connect the tech world with the new administration. Over time, the relationship between Thiel and Trump weakened. Trump later asked Thiel for a large financial contribution for his 2024 campaign, but Thiel declined.

Despite this, Thiel's impact remained, especially in Trump's choice of JD Vance, who had previously worked with Thiel, as his running mate. Thiel's actions also signaled a broader shift in Silicon Valley. His support for Trump showed that not all tech leaders followed the same political views. As he stepped back from direct involvement, other wealthy and outspoken figures began to take his place. One of the most prominent among them is Elon Musk, who has become a major voice in political and social discussions. Thiel played a key role in linking Silicon Valley with changing political trends, influencing both leadership choices and the direction of tech industry involvement in politics.

Elon Musk Changed Twitter into X and Influenced Online Speech

In the past, when Twitter was still known by its original name, Elon Musk was one of its most active and controversial users. He used the platform to promote his company, Tesla, share personal opinions, and sometimes make statements that affected the company's stock price. Regulators like the SEC even accused him of misleading investors with certain tweets. Musk often disagreed with Twitter's rules, especially those about content moderation and hate speech. He believed the platform should allow almost all speech, calling himself a "free speech absolutist." This view was similar to that of Donald Trump, another highly active user.

In 2022, Musk bought Twitter for $44 billion after a messy deal where he tried to back out but was forced to complete the purchase. After taking control, he made major changes. He reduced moderation efforts and removed people who supported stricter content rules. One key example is Yoel Roth. Roth had worked to limit harmful content. After Musk took over, he criticized Roth by sharing and misrepresenting his academic work. This led to online harassment, including threats, and Roth eventually resigned.

The platform, now renamed X, began showing more extreme and controversial content. This included conspiracy theories and political messages linked to far-right groups. Some of these ideas were previously limited to smaller communities but became more visible. This situation shows how powerful individuals can influence public opinion through large platforms. Musk is not just reflecting changes in politics; he may be shaping them by controlling what millions of people see. For example:

• Promoting certain political views to a large audience.
• Reducing content moderation rules.
• Amplifying controversial or unverified claims.

Similar ideas about influence and culture were discussed earlier by David Sacks and Peter Thiel, showing that debates about media, power, and ideas have existed for decades.

From Campus Debates to Political Influence

An earlier book by David Sacks and his co-author strongly criticized affirmative action, ethnic studies, and what they saw as "political correctness." The book even made a controversial claim about date rape accusations, which both authors later apologized for. However, they continued to support their broader ideas: that identity politics harms merit, political correctness limits freedom, and universities push one-sided views. Years later, Sacks used his wealth to influence politics more directly. In 2019, he donated large sums to support Gavin Newsom's campaign for governor of California, mainly because Newsom was seen as friendly to businesses and the tech industry.

But when COVID-19 lockdowns affected tech companies and new tax policies threatened profits, Sacks changed direction. He began supporting Republican candidates who promised lower taxes and fewer regulations. This shift became more visible in 2022. Sacks played a major role in funding a campaign to recall San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin. Boudin supported progressive policies such as reducing cash bail and focusing more on rehabilitation than punishment. At the same time, concerns about homelessness and property crime were growing in the city, especially in areas where tech companies were based.

Sacks and other tech leaders blamed Boudin for these problems. He spent large amounts on advertisements that linked Boudin to rising crime, even though data showed violent crime had actually gone down, and property crime trends were similar to those of other cities. The campaign focused on public fear and frustration. The recall succeeded, with 55% of voters removing Boudin from office. This event showed a clear pattern:

• Strong beliefs about "woke" policies are shaping political actions.
• Wealth is being used to influence local elections.
• Strategic campaigns targeting public concerns.

It also revealed a new approach: powerful individuals using money and messaging to reshape political outcomes when they disagree with existing leadership.

Tech Billionaires Are Drawn to "Utopias"

Every year, thousands of people gather at Burning Man in Nevada's Black Rock Desert. It is a week-long event focused on creativity, self-expression, and a "gift economy," where money is not supposed to be used. Despite its anti-capitalist image, many wealthy tech leaders attend, including Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, and Larry Page. This interest is not random. Many tech founders are deeply attracted to the idea of building a perfect society, or "utopia." Their work often assumes that technology can fix major human problems. They tend to see current systems like governments, banks, and media as outdated and inefficient, similar to old software that needs updating. Several major tech projects reflect this thinking:

• Bitcoin was created to avoid central banks and government control.
• Decentralized finance (DeFi) aims to replace traditional financial institutions.
• Social media platforms were designed to bypass traditional news gatekeepers.

Some tech leaders are pushing even further. Elon Musk has proposed building a human colony on Mars. Peter Thiel has supported ideas like floating cities outside government control. A real-world example is Prospera, a private charter city launched in Honduras in 2020. It operates with its own rules, including low regulation and business-friendly laws. When Honduras tried to end the program, Prospera responded with a massive lawsuit. This shows how these projects can clash with national governments and local populations. The core issue is that "utopia" means different things to different people. For many tech elites, it often means less government and fewer restrictions on business. This idea also overlaps with political movements that distrust institutions and authority. These efforts raise a key question: who decides what a "perfect society" should look like?

From Red MAGA to "Dark MAGA"

For many years, MAGA was linked with bright red hats and traditional Republican imagery. Around 2022, a new version called "Dark MAGA" began to appear. This version used darker visuals, online memes, and a more aggressive tone. It was influenced by internet culture and some tech industry ideas. Early supporters included Curtis Yarvin, who argues for replacing democracy with a system run more like a company. Some cryptocurrency entrepreneurs also supported this shift because they hoped for fewer rules on digital money. Elon Musk became a major public supporter, attending rallies and funding political efforts with large donations.

At the same time, important work was happening behind the scenes through The Heritage Foundation. This group created "Project 2025," a long-term plan to reshape the U.S. government. The plan suggests:

• Reducing the size and power of federal agencies.
• Replacing career workers with loyal supporters.
• Giving more control to the president.

A key link between politics and tech is JD Vance. Before entering politics, he worked in venture capital and was supported by Peter Thiel. Vance supports ideas that match both MAGA goals and tech industry interests. One major overlap is cryptocurrency. Many crypto founders want systems that operate with little or no government control. Project 2025 supports reducing regulation, which could benefit crypto markets.

A political group called Fairshake spent over $130 million supporting candidates who favor crypto-friendly policies. Vance has openly supported reducing the power of regulators over digital assets. This connection between politics, tech investors, and cryptocurrency shows how Dark MAGA is not just about messaging; it also involves policy ideas that could reshape government and the economy.

Big Tech and Political Power Came Together

In his farewell speech, Joe Biden warned that the United States was at risk of becoming an oligarchy, where a small group of wealthy and powerful people controls major decisions. However, the situation was no longer a future threat; it had already taken shape. Large technology companies used their money, influence, and control over digital platforms to support Donald Trump's return to power. When Trump won the 2024 election, he not only secured the presidency but also the popular vote. This gave him stronger public support compared to his 2016 victory. For Trump, this win had personal benefits.

Ongoing legal cases and investigations against him could now be stopped or weakened. His close allies also stood to gain, as his control over the system could help them avoid strict rules or consequences. As a result, rules and laws began to seem flexible for those connected to him. Government contracts, regulations, and enforcement could be influenced more easily. Financial markets reacted quickly to this shift. Stocks in industries like defense, fossil fuels, and major tech companies rose sharply, suggesting that investors expected fewer regulations and more freedom for big businesses. The connection between big tech and Trump can be explained in two main ways:

• Shared ideas: Both tech leaders and the populist right often distrust traditional institutions. They oppose what they call "woke" culture and support fewer rules, favoring a more libertarian approach.
• Financial gain: After Trump's victory, the world's richest individuals increased their wealth by about $64 billion in a single day, showing how much they benefited.

The situation reflects a shift where powerful companies and political leaders support each other. While tech companies once promoted ethical behavior, profit and influence appear to have become stronger priorities.