Entangled with the banner of “patriotic technology”, a series of companies are redefining strategic order, conventional warfare, and even the sovereignty of states. The line between civilian and military, and between the public and private power of these technological oligarchies, is becoming increasingly blurred. The controversial manifesto from Palantir – Peter Thiel’s company turned data management giant for military use –, published on X, announces a new era of AI-based deterrence. In reality, what it is building is an empire of new technological vulnerabilities and rights in favor of the power and software of Silicon Valley giants.
The world has plunged into a process of militarization that has been accompanied by a profound shift in the relationship between the so-called market and the military. Today, major military technology companies retain exclusive control over data-based systems, fundamental for operations in conflict. Technology is not transferred to governments; rather, these companies are integrated into the decision-making architecture related to warfare, to the point that many experts, such as economist Francesca Bria, denounce the “privatization of sovereignty” of states in favor of technological actors.
Palantir, for example, is embedded in Ukraine's war economy. Its software powers intelligence systems for a long list of countries, from the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to the government of Germany or the Israeli army. They are not the only ones: GovCloud, from Amazon Web Services, or Azure Government, from Microsoft –developed in collaboration with OpenAI, Meta, and Anthropic–, have also been incorporated into classified military and intelligence operations. Amnesty International has been denouncing Palantir since 2020 for human rights violations. AI is also a weapon for repression.
But what is alarming about the claims published by Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, are the ideological foundations of this technological, political, and social transformation. The hard power of these Silicon Valley giants is fueled by white supremacism and a supposed civilizing superiority. This is what has led some experts, such as technology philosopher Mark Coeckelbergh, to describe Palantir's message as "an example of techno-fascism." Karp, Thiel, or Elon Musk are delighted to play the bad guys from the position of power conferred on them by an immense amount of personal data and the platformization of our lives, preferences, and needs. This has made them the ultimate exponents of a new form of domination that they exercise with delight and at the expense of democratic principles.
The military escalation benefits them. And nothing they say or do has deterred, so far, either governments or investors. At the end of last year, more than a hundred of the main European banks, asset managers, insurers, and pension funds increased the total number of Palantir shares they owned by almost 70% compared to the previous year, according to journalistic research by various European media outlets.
Rearmament is also ideological. The internet has reshaped the old concept of “cognitive warfare”. Digital space is a new front of dispute. A virtual territory for the conquest of the mind and the shaping of opinion, where cognitive processes such as attention, memory, and emotional responses can be distorted or exploited.
The possibilities are immense: from the algorithmic amplification and acceleration of messages that penetrate the capillarity of society to the creation of specific virtual images, designed for viralization. The goal is to feed perceptions. It is not just about changing what people think, but also how they act. It seeks to sow doubt, erode belief in facticity, introduce contradictory narratives, polarize opinion, radicalize groups, and fuel actions that can disrupt or fragment a community. It is about identifying and exploiting pre-existing vulnerabilities and social fractures, amplifying harassment, intruding into civil spaces, and destabilizing them. And all this happens in the absence of binding consensus for global AI governance that imposes ethical principles on this entire technological revolution.
