Who Is the Antichrist Today? Slavoj Žižek on Thiel, AI Power, and Monopoly
In this conclusion piece, Slavoj Žižek argues that Peter Thiel’s use of the Antichrist is revealing: Thiel casts regulation, globalization, and state oversight as apocalyptic threats while ignoring the destabilizing power of the tech and surveillance systems he helps build. The essay contrasts Thiel’s libertarian-oligarchic vision with René Girard’s theory of mimetic desire and Jacques Lacan’s account of desire as shaped by the Other. Žižek also challenges Thiel’s praise of monopoly and “mission,” suggesting that a broader idea of vocation—visible in ordinary, poorly paid care work—offers a more humane alternative to competitive techno-capitalism.
Thiel, the Antichrist, and the fear of regulation
The piece begins by examining Peter Thiel’s habit of describing his opponents as Antichrist-like figures. Žižek argues that Thiel sees threats everywhere in regulation, global governance, climate fear, and AI panic, while presenting himself as defending freedom. The essay notes the tension between this rhetoric and Thiel’s own role in supporting powerful surveillance and military technologies.
Girard, mimetic desire, and the turn to monopoly
Žižek connects Thiel’s thinking to René Girard, especially mimetic desire and sacrifice. He argues that Thiel borrows Girardian language but reverses its meaning: instead of breaking sacrificial logic, Thiel’s worldview can justify exclusion and oligarchic concentration of power. The essay also highlights Thiel’s praise of monopoly over competition as part of a broader defense of techno-feudal power.
Lacan, the big Other, and a different way to read desire
The essay brings in Lacan to show what Girard’s framework misses. Desire is not only imitation; it is also shaped by the symbolic order, the “big Other,” which structures social life through rules, customs, and expectations. This helps explain why Thiel’s model of radical, self-made innovation is treated as a simplification of a more complex social reality.
Vocation versus oligarchic creativity
Žižek ends by agreeing with Thiel only in part: he accepts that blind competition can be destructive, but rejects the idea that only wealthy innovators can escape it. Instead, he points to vocation—especially in forms of care work such as nursing—as a meaningful alternative to market competition. The conclusion frames this as a broader ethical and social vision, one that resists both pure profit logic and the manipulation of desire through digital monopolies.
Key takeaways
- Thiel’s Antichrist rhetoric is presented as a critique of regulation, but Žižek sees deep irony in it.
- The essay argues that Thiel borrows from Girard while reversing Girard’s anti-sacrificial message.
- Lacan’s idea of the big Other is used to show that desire is socially structured, not just imitative.
- Žižek criticizes the celebration of monopoly and digital power as forms of techno-oligarchy.
- Vocation, especially in care work, is offered as an alternative to competitive capitalist logic.
Source: Slavoj Žižek, “CONCLUSION: WHO IS THE ANTICHRIST TODAY,” published on Substack on 2026-04-08. Read the original at https://slavoj.substack.com/p/conclusion-who-is-the-antichrist-f3d Read the original post on Substack.