The New Counter-Elite
The PayPal Mafia in an age of Unrestricted Warfare
I recently listened to this fascinating stream (“Is a New Counter-Elite About to Take Over?”) by Academic Agent and Kingpilled on the potential emerging counter-elites in the US. I wrote at some length here about what I believe to be Russia’s motivations in the context of the current Ukraine war. I think the current war, and future military and strategic developments that may occur, as China replaces Russia as the principal threat, and the interests of these new elites are linked.
I’ll give only a brief summary of the idea here; extracting those central to what I have to say here (please do watch the stream). The new counter-elite, based around the “Paypal Mafia”, of whom the most significant figures are Peter Thiel and Elon Musk, represent a new and different faction of the American elite. They share several things in common: they have set up businesses in new sectors which are dependent on governments for their income in so small part; their wealth is based on stock market valuations which are historically very high; and they have expressed interest in political ideas and thinkers in the dissident sphere. And whilst they can’t be trusted to be on “our side”, the possibility of their increasing importance as a new faction may be beneficial to our political situation, as pointed out by Mosca and Burnham.
And in this, they are linked to other figures who who have expressed statements and beliefs seemingly at odds with the regime (at least how it presents itself). The most important of these are Tucker Carlson, who is obviously linked to Musk through his move to X (Twitter), and Vivek Ramaswamy, who appeared from nowhere to generate considerable interest in the Republican primaries. Both have expressed counter-regime views, particularly regarding the Russia-Ukraine war. Both may play some role in a future Trump presidency.
The thesis is I believe correct; and the points are linked, as I hope to show.
“President Roosevelt as 'The New Statue of Liberty (1941)” 1
The Consensual War
All war - major, kinetic, battle-or-stalemate wars - are in some senses consensual, but the Russia-Ukraine war is surely a special case. For a major conflict accounting for the death and mutilation of probably hundreds of thousands of young men (and not-so-young men on the Ukrainian side), the fighting has been strangely controlled; localized to the brutal front line. Celebrities and politicians visit Kiev for show, although this is becoming less popular as time goes on. There has been no attempt by Russia to open another front to achieve a decisive breakthrough. Life goes on as normal in much of Ukraine, as Russia employed only limited hits on civilian targets. Ukrainian counter-attacks on Russian territories have had successes, notably the bombing of the Kerch bridge, but have been rare and isolated.
As I explained in my earlier piece, I do not believe that Russia’s primary goal in this war is the acquisition of territory per se, but rather the acquisition of people. Of course, the West’s increasing meddling in Ukraine had to be countered in some form, and it is deeply regrettable that Putin chose war. But both sides knew what they were doing. I believe Putin to be a thoroughgoing Machiavellian. I appears that the slow, grinding nature of the conflict since the early days when Russia failed to secure a knock-out blow taking Kiev, is either inevitable, or in the interests of both sides.
It has appeared clear from the start that the West’s strategy is to provide Ukraine with sufficient support to continue the fighting, but not to risk a major acceleration of the scale of the conflict. The standard narrative is to present this as a attempt to degrade Russia’s military capacities on the battlefield, and her economic capabilities through sanctions. Russia, though, has re-geared her economy to a war footing, and weathered sanctions; is out-producing the West in armaments and at the same time provided a good war-training of her army in modern warfare - at our expense.
The secondary explanation is that the Military-Industrial Complex (“MIC” hereafter) has re-equipped itself by donating out-of-date military kit to the Ukrainians whilst re-arming the West (and lining their pockets) paid for by the US’s financial might and the petrodollar. There is is undoubtedly part of the explanation. And at the same time, the comprehensive de-industrialisation of Germany, accelerated through the destruction of NordStream, could be explained as an example of Power (the US) destroying a potential “rival castle” in the form of a strong, German-led EU. And is it interesting to note that the clear winner in terms inter-EU politics has been neither France nor Germany but Poland - potentially a safer US ally over the longer term, and still a growing military and economic power. The long shadow of Zbigniew Brzezinski looms.
If this explanation is closer to the truth, then the US appears to have been pretty successful in its war aims. If the aim really was to degrade and humiliate the Russian military, it has failed and seeking an earlier settlement is sensible.
But there is another way of framing this that seems to make sense. Russia struggled to take Bakhmut, and it is clear that there is no prospect of her tanks rolling westwards to storm Berlin. The war has demonstrated that large-scale kinetic war between major powers is something of the twentieth century, not the twenty-first. Acquisition of territory is simply too costly in terms of lives with current technologies. Russia and the West are clearly in contact through back-channels -Tucker Carlson’s interview with Putin demonstrated that. They have made their points, and as I have said before, I am betting on a de-escalation of the war sooner rather than later. The recent resignation (or sacking) of Victoria Nuland, rather than be a cunning 4-D chess move, may simply be a sign of this. And Macron’s recent outburst that France would send troops were Putin to threaten Odessa could also be seen as a tacit acceptance of a deal based around something like the status quo. None of this, of course, need mean that the West and Russia are acting in cahoots - it may just be that their interests are coming to align.
And this does not mean we are moving towards an era of peace and harmony. Huntington was proved right, not Fukuyama. A move from a Biden presidency to a second Trump term will undoubtedly shift the US’s sights from Russia to China. We are in the realm of Unrestricted Warfare, to borrow from the term used by Chinese military strategists Qiao Lang and Wang Xiangsui - and a favourite of Steve Bannon whilst he was still at the White House.2
But before we get back to the rise of the new elites, let’s have a diversion into recent history.
The Covid years, revisited
Yes, we probably all want to forget the lockdown and vaccine years, but it is important not to. But before we do so, let’s revisit what probably my favourite thinker, Bertrand de Jouvenel, has to say about the state’s acquisition of power in the context of inter-state competition. I’ve edited some choice passages:
There is another way of growing stronger which is much more to be feared than any acquisition of territory; that is the advance made by one Power in exploiting the natural resources of its own domain. If it increases the draft which it makes upon the strength and wealth of its people and contrives to get this increase accepted, it then changes its relationship between its own sinews of war and those of its neighbours…
Every encroachment of Power on society, whether it has been made with a view to war or for some totally different purpose, gives that Power an advantage in war…
The lesson is that no state can remain indifferent to another state’s wresting from its people more of their rights. It must make a corresponding draft of its own people’s rights, or else pay dearly for its neglect to put itself on a level…
The most pressing and best known aspect of the phenomenon is the race in armaments. But the race in armaments is but the shadow of the race and the reflex of a much more serious development - the race in totalitarianism…
We see , then, that, as every advance of Power is useful for war, so war is useful for the advance of Power; war is like a sheep-dog harrying the laggard Powers to catch up their smarter fellows in the totalitarian race.3
de Jouvenel’s model perfectly illustrates the inexorable logic by which competitive states are compelled to adopt the technology (including the political technology) or rivals; they must, in the end, kill or be killed. This chapter of the book was written published in 1943, and de Jouvenel is concentrating here on the traditional forms of combat we had seen up to then. I hope it’s clear that out thinking needs to be updated and applied to the situation of our times.
One point I should make straight off it that his rhetorical flourish of the lure of totalitarianism can and should not be read directly across to the rivalry with China (in particular): there are differences between hard and soft power regimes (in Sam Francis’ terms). And de Jouvenel was principally focused on the competition between European powers: we need to bear in mind the fact that in our global world, civilisations are not the same. What will work for the Chinese will need to be adapted for the Western mind; please do not interpret this as an inevitability of a rush to the re-education camps of Xinjiang, any more than the fact that the West did not copy (directly in any event!) the gulag.
So: here’s my big call:
I think the clearest explanation of “what Covid was about” can be best be explained in the Jouvenelian frame. It was part of the Unrestricted Warfare race in actual or potential bio-weapons; the defences against them; and the introduction of political technologies to implement the regime surrounding them.
It would be simply foolish to assume that the West and China (in particular - though there will be other actors) are not engaged in research in this area. There’s plenty of evidence to suggest that it is taking place, but that’s not the point: it’s being driven by logic. And it is also irrelevant for the purposes of this argument to nail down where and how Covid came about, and from whom. Although it is noteworthy that, however bad the restrictions on our freedoms were, we could not match the “harder” force of the Chinese regime.
The Chinese were able to implement their hard Covid regime through a mixture of technologies: the absolute prevalence of the smartphone and app-based existence, testing and vaccination programmes rolled into this, and a widespread 5G network. And, of course, the political technology that creates the acceptance of these things within the population. Note that this is something other than hard managerialism or brute force: the Chinese for an unreasonable amount of time were quiescent; but in the end, non-compliance did eventually come, and (though I’m not saying this is causal), Xi dropped the zero-Covid policy soon thereafter.
To quote David P. Goldman writing at the start of the Covid years (notably before vaccination commenced):
China has had years to prepare for this sort of crisis. In 2015, I toured Huawei’s headquarters in Shenzhen, and saw a twelve-by-twelve foot map of Guangzhou City, with countless small lights. Each of these denoted a smartphone… Tencent’s WeChat messaging app allows users to take their temperature and other vital signs and send them to the cloud in real time. Chinese citizens in quarantine were required to use a smartphone app to monitor their medical condition… All smartphones with enable GPS give telecom providers a precise record of the user’s itineraries.4
The West has been playing catchup. Uppermost in everybody’s mind should be the constant promotion by Tony Blair of vaccines and digital identity strategy. It is striking that our streets are filled with workmen installing 5G masts whilst out potholes remain unfilled. And I think it unlikely that £36 billion of Covid Test-and-Trace cash was spiffed on a crap app and lateral flow tests.
So is this what Covid was about? Lockdowns here can be seen as a tool to normalise the population, both to engage in a mass trial of different types of vaccines (for a virus for which it was totally unnecessary) and to introduce a new regime of medical surveillance in the context of potential threats. And despite the fact that many of us resisted, we cany but help admit that the vast majority of the population complied all too willingly.
In the light of this, the Covid experience may have been the early stages of a new form of warfare. It would be akin to the nuclear arms race of the original Cold War. It may be real or a bluff, as all things are; but the huge costs are suggestive that it is real. And it has been publicised from the start of the Covid years that DARPA have been involved in funding vaccine research.
In the end, I just don’t buy a simplistic narrative that runs, “The elites hate us, and want us controlled, and/or destroyed.” Population size, economic prosperity and even the spirit of the people are key elements of total strategy5. This doesn’t mean they have our best interests at heart (quite the opposite when it comes to issues like mass immigration), but it does mean we are tools in their utilitarian armoury. We could call it the Grey Pill. It fits a Jouvenalian explanation well. China was ahead of us in this political technology, and we have been forced to make up ground.
And it crosses over with other aspects of an unrestricted warfare narrative and the rise of the new elites.
The New Elites in the context of Unrestricted Warfare
It is obviously not the case that hard military power is going anywhere; indeed we have had a stark lesson of its importance (and Western failure) recently in the case of the Houthis effectively blocking the Red Sea to Western shipping. The MIC will do fine - in some regards even better. But in others the New Elites are prominent representatives of a new faction that whose interest may not always align with the traditional MIC, partially because they will naturally compete for cash and attention in the security world.
I went through Covid and the biosecurity side because it links well with many of the central players. Ramaswamy had a background in biotech before launching his political career, although his venture Roivant can hardly be called a success story; more of a hedge fund for a portfolio of cheap investments than real research. Two of its subsidiaries were involved in the research in the early days of Covid: in therapeutics and research databases6; but this is hardly decisive.
Most obviously, one part of Thiel’s Palantir is intimately involved in the NHS; it was utilised for vaccination rollout software and PPE distribution; and recently won a £330m contract to “organis[e] information that NHS Trusts hold on different databases in one place, with accurate, up to the minute information”.7 Covid was a significant driver of Palantir into the healthcare systems of the UK and across Europe more generally8. And Musk’s ultimate goal to make X the “everything app” (recall WeChat) is an obvious ambition to be the leader in the digital ID arena.
In addition, the involvement of the pharma industry in areas of biosecurity will have some effect on their alignment within the elites. It will also be interesting to note whether research is directed towards the large players, or niche specialists. If the latter, this is the hedge fund model that is Ramaswamy’s business background.
So what are the other areas of unrestricted warfare, and what does it imply for the New Elites?
Some areas are clearly not linked, and will suit the more traditional analysis of the interests of the MIC and global corporations. These would include energy competition and infrastructure protection/destruction (think Nordstream).
Nuclear defence will rise on the list of importance. On that note, it is interesting that Dominic Cummings wrote on December 31st: “If you watch media followup, you'll see NO reporting on the substance, e.g the fact that our nuclear weapons infrastructure is dangerously rotting & is tens of billions secretly in the hole, with huge knockon effects beyond its destructive effects on MoD which has got *even worse* & *even more lying* during the war.”9 And it is suspicious that the UK has chosen to broadcast details of two Trident launch failures - whether they happened or not. This looks to be like a clear campaign for more cash.
Incidentally, Cummings is the only clear example I can think of a counter-elite figure in the UK, although note that unlike those in the US, he has no current power base. . Some gems are:
“the system is working as intended”10 (retweeting Elon Musk, on diversity hires in the DAA)
“Tories like Labour support an 'asylum' system that prioritises foreign sex criminals over British voters & taxpayers, both parties think attacks like this are a price worth paying to stay in the ECHR, both parties are supported by the old media, old academia and old Whitehall.”11
“Peace abroad, regime change at home"12
And yet whilst he is a vocal critic of our approach to the Russia war, he is forever doubling down on the Covid narrative. This is, I think, about more than simply protecting his reputation.
Other areas are clearly central to the interests of the New Elites though. One is communications and encryption. Goldman again:
“The issue comes down to whether we get everyone’s data or China gets everyone’s data” a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency told me recently… The Holy Grail of data security is quantum communication, an application of physics that China has pioneered… The system that makes the communication possible cannot be hacked, because any outside intervention disrupts the signal itself and alerts the participants to eavesdropping… The National Security Agency and its Five Eyes counterparts have had the capacity to tap into every satellite transmission in the world, eavesdropping on friends and foes. That is the foundation of the US Intelligence Community’s enormous influence in policy making, as well as the rationale for an $80 billion intelligence budget, of which $56 billion is spent through private contractors… Quantum cryptography will prevent the United States from eavesdropping on the conversations of its allies.”13
(Emphasis mine.)
I am certainly in no position to offer any opinion on the truth or otherwise of this, except to say that, if it is the case, you can be sure that US Government will not be taking it lying down, and it is an area of business that some of our New Elites, particularly through Palantir and SpaceX, would be well placed to be involved in.
One last, and decidedly spooky, area of crossover with the New Elites that I will draw your attention to is their interest in transhumanism. This report - “Human Augmentation – The Dawn of a New Paradigm” - was published by the Ministry of Defence in May 2021. I’ll just pull out a few quotes from the Executive Summary:
We cannot wait for the ethics of human augmentation to be decided for us.
The need to use human augmentation may ultimately be dictated by national interest.
Human augmentation is our first insight of what lies beyond today’s Information Age - the coming of the Biotech Age.
Human augmentation may lead to fundamentally new concepts of warfare.
Let’s not write off the possibility that all of this is just bluff. In the field of defence, anything could be. But again, the crossover with the interests of Musk and Thiel is striking.
These are just some guesses; areas for further thought and research.
Of course, this would mean that the New Elites are more closely aligned with the regime than they present themselves. We can but hope that there is enough of a window for Mosca’s taste of freedom to come into play before anything else gets us.
Naughty mid-century German work
Bertrand de Jouvenel, “On Power”, pp155-7 (Liberty Fund edition)
From David P. Goldman’s short, inciteful book “You will be Assimilated - China’s plan to Sino-form the world” (it is much better than the potboiler title). p 34
See “The Collapse of British Power”, Corelli Barnett, p ix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roivant_Sciences
https://www.palantir.com/uk/healthcare/
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/02/seeing-stones-pandemic-reveals-palantirs-troubling-reach-in-europe
Goldman, pp 110-118
You want a nice run down on Russia, here you go https://open.substack.com/pub/slavlandchronicles/p/welcome-to-the-slavlands-stalker?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=ga0u4
Same as it ever was.
Same as it ever was.