MAGA Populists Demand Holy War on Big Tech
▼ Summary
– Geoffrey Miller, a psychology professor, publicly criticized Palantir’s CTO Shyam Sankar at NatCon 5, asserting that the AI industry has no ideological overlap with national conservatism and accusing it of promoting globalist, secular, and transhumanist agendas.
– The conference revealed deep-seated hostility among attendees toward the tech industry and AI, with many viewing technology as an existential threat to Western civilization, family values, and religious beliefs.
– Despite some acknowledgment of AI’s potential benefits, speakers expressed strong suspicion and emotional opposition, with concerns ranging from censorship and social media addiction to fears of civilizational suicide and transhumanism.
– The right’s animosity toward AI has grown so intense that it has alienated former allies like Elon Musk, and the movement’s opposition is rooted in cultural and religious values rather than just policy disagreements.
– Shyam Sankar was one of the few attendees defending AI, arguing it is a uniquely American tool for entrepreneurship, but his views were largely rejected, with figures like Steve Bannon emphasizing the dangers and untrustworthiness of Silicon Valley decision-makers.
The ideological rift between MAGA populists and the technology sector reached a boiling point at the recent National Conservatism Conference, where calls for a holy war against Big Tech dominated discussions. What began as a coalition against progressive cultural influence has fractured into a deeply entrenched battle over the soul of technological progress, with leading conservative voices framing artificial intelligence as an existential threat to Western civilization.
During one panel, University of New Mexico psychology professor Geoffrey Miller launched a direct attack against Palantir’s Chief Technology Officer Shyam Sankar, accusing the AI industry of promoting globalist and transhumanist agendas. Miller described tech developers as “traitors to our nation” and “apostates to our faith,” claiming they aim for mass unemployment and view humanity as a mere stepping stone toward artificial superintelligence.
Sankar offered a measured defense, suggesting that Silicon Valley’s embrace of AI stems from a “God-shaped hole” in its secular culture. Yet his was a rare voice of optimism in a sea of skepticism. The conference, attended by architects of Project 2025 and prominent Trump allies, revealed a movement increasingly unified in its opposition to technological advancement, not just on practical grounds, but as a matter of moral and spiritual survival.
Throughout the event, nearly half of all panels centered on technology’s perceived dangers: from eroding critical thinking in education to undermining national security and traditional religious values. Some speakers acknowledged AI’s potential benefits if properly regulated, but many went further, warning that continued development could amount to “civilizational suicide.”
Even the competitive threat from China failed to sway the overwhelming sentiment. Michael Toscano of the Family First Technology Initiative argued that the state’s rationale for AI acceleration, to outpace China and grow the economy, promotes a “barren” vision of the future, one that demands sacrificing happiness and human dignity.
The roots of this hostility run deep. Dean Ball, a former Trump White House adviser on AI, traced current animosities to longstanding conservative beliefs that tech platforms deliberately silenced right-wing voices. Although overt censorship may have diminished post-2020, companies continue to clash with social conservatives on issues like child safety, biohacking, and transhumanism, the latter described as an affront to God’s creation.
This cultural and religious opposition has grown so intense that even former allies like Elon Musk have fallen out of favor. Ball noted that Musk’s release of AI-generated porn and unorthodox views on fertility alienated a base that once saw him as an ideological partner.
In a surprising twist, some speakers suggested alliances with labor unions to resist technological disruption, a notion that would have been unthinkable in earlier conservative circles. Toscano proposed that such a coalition could position Trump as a historic leader who “saved the future.”
But for all the policy proposals and warnings, the underlying sentiment often felt less like debate and more like doctrine. Ball expressed concern that rational discussion around AI safety is being overshadowed by what he termed a “religious war against technology and technologists.”
Sankar, walking a tightrope as the tech industry’s main representative at the event, insisted that AI is a “uniquely American phenomenon” that could empower entrepreneurs and promote national values. Yet his vision found little support among attendees.
The conference concluded with Steve Bannon capturing the prevailing mood, dismissing Silicon Valley leaders as out-of-touch elites disconnected from national loyalty. The applause that followed made it clear: for many within the movement, the path forward isn’t negotiation, but confrontation.
(Source: The Verge)
