Technofascism: Palantir’s Manifesto
Context:
In their 22-point manifesto, The Technological Republic, Palantir (specifically CEO Alex Karp and Nicholas Zamiska) outlines a vision where software and "hard power" are the primary safeguards for Western democracy. This manifesto has been met with significant criticism.
Members of the media may directly contact the following experts:
Céline Castets-Renard (English & French)
Full Professor, Civil Law Faculty; Canada Research Chair Holder International and Comparative AI Law (Tier 1)
Professor Castets-Renard's research focuses on the regulation and governance of digital technology and artificial intelligence (AI) from an international and comparative law perspective.
“By posting his “Manifesto”—comprising twenty-two principles drawn from the book *The Technological Republic* (2025)—on the X platform, Palantir CEO Alex Karp reaffirms his dystopian, techno-fascist vision of the world and the role played by AI as an operational system for the U.S. military and ICE in a fusion of powers with the Trump Administration: far-right ideologies and the anti-humanist economic interests they espouse are outrageous and should spur us to resist.”
David Murakami Wood (English & French)
Full professor, Criminology, Faculty of Social Sciences; Canada Research Chair in Critical Surveillance and Security Studies
Professor Murakami Wood is an interdisciplinary specialist in surveillance, security and technology around the world. His research focuses on the rise of AI-based "smart cities", the regulation of Artificial Intelligence, private surveillance companies, and the relationship between surveillance and the response to the climate crisis.
“My view is that the open fascism of Trump’s second term has created an environment in which the leaders of big tech firms like Palantir can openly advocate for white supremacy and what they think of as European civilizational values. It’s not just a marketing tactic; they believe in this and it is common amongst the richest men in the world (see also: Elon Musk). The problem is that Palantir is deeply embedded in many countries’ data governance infrastructures, not just in defence, but in health, welfare and energy systems. Any country which values democracy, equity, multiculturalism and a common future for humanity should reject their products and services along with their technofascism and authoritarianism.”
Étienne Brown (English & French)
Associate professor, Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Arts; Faculty member, Centre for Law, Technology and Society
Professor Brown’s research examines the ethics and political philosophy of the digital public sphere and new information technologies, including artificial intelligence.
“From an epistemological perspective, the manifesto is an exercise in motivated reasoning: Karp’s glorification of war is the post hoc rationalization of acts of violence facilitated by Palantir’s technology in the United States and abroad. Karp also celebrates billionaires’ influence on politics, which is rapidly transforming the US into an oligarchy.”
Jasmin Manseau (English & French)
Assistant Professor, Business Analytics & Information Systems, Telfer School of Management
Professor Manseau’s research focuses on emerging AI technologies, particularly on gen-AI and conversational assistants.
“Accepting that advanced AI systems will continue to be developed, the key issue becomes how firms choose to deploy them. My research on how AI shapes human dignity suggests the onus is on organizations to ensure their use supports, rather than erodes, human dignity, and that this requires careful consideration.”
Alan McCafferty (English Only)
Cyber Security Program Director, Professional Development Institute
At the uOttawa PDI, Mr. McCafferty serves as the Director of the Advanced Information and Cyber Security Management Program and the technical lead for the Information Integrity Lab. He also manages one of only four advanced cyber ranges of its kind in the world.
“When someone like Alex Karp—whose Palantir Technologies has already had a profound impact on society—publishes a manifesto, debate is inevitable; the real question we should consider is why this narrative is being advanced now and how those who listen and react will shape beliefs, misbeliefs, and future policy.”