Prophecy Update: Peter Thiel — Building the Beast System He Warns About
Part 3: The Three Movements – Game B, Dark Enlightenment, and Network States
To finish this lesson, let’s dive deeper into the three movements I mentioned earlier:
Game B (Collective Intelligence Utopia),
the Dark Enlightenment (Anti-Democratic Vision),
and Network States (Digital Secession).
These are the pillars of the Phoenix conspiracy,
Funded and influenced heavily by figures like Peter Thiel. While Thiel’s direct ties to Game B are more indirect through Silicon
Valley networks. His funding of Curtis Yarvin and support for Balaji Srinivasan’s ideas tie him squarely to the Dark Enlightenment
and Network States.
All three aim to dismantle the West’s constitutional republics and rise from their ashes as a techno-authoritarian empire, aligning
eerily with biblical prophecies of a beast system where no one can buy or sell without the mark (Revelation 13:17).
Game B: Collective Intelligence Utopia
Game B is a conceptual framework and memetic tag that emerged in the early 2010s as an alternative to what its proponents call
“Game A”—the current dominant societal model characterized by rivalry, exploitation, power asymmetries, and destructive externalities
like environmental degradation and inequality. Instead, Game B envisions a scalable, “omni-win-win” civilization that prioritizes human
flourishing, sustainability, and anti-fragility. It emphasizes navigating complexity through emergence rather than rigid, complicated
systems, fostering hyper-collaboration, and aligning incentives with the well-being of all individuals and the commons.
Origins and Key Proponents
The idea originated from informal meetings between 2012 and 2013 involving thinkers like Jordan Hall, Eric Weinstein, Seb Paquet, and
Venessa Miemis (now Hall). It stemmed from a failed attempt to launch the “Emancipation Party,” evolving into discussions on
“Deep Code” and a new societal “game.” The group disbanded into “spore mode” (independent experimentation), but the concept gained
wider attention when Bret Weinstein discussed it on the Joe Rogan Experience in 2017. Key proponents include:
Jordan Hall: Describes Game B as leveraging humanity’s evolutionary advantage in collective learning since the Cognitive Revolution,
focusing on coherence in complex systems.
Daniel Schmachtenberger: Involved in projects like The Emergence Project, emphasizing design criteria such as omni-consideration
(aligning actions with broader impacts) and non-rivalrous dynamics.
Jim Rutt: Notes its roots in political disillusionment and shift toward personal and institutional change.
Other figures like Eric and Bret Weinstein have popularized it through podcasts and writings, framing it as a response to self-terminating
aspects of modern civilization.
Core Ideas and Relation to Collective Intelligence and Utopia
At its heart, Game B leverages collective intelligence—humanity’s ability to accumulate knowledge and innovate collaboratively—to create
environments of high coherence and voluntary participation. It draws on evolutionary biology, viewing collective learning as a post-Cognitive
Revolution superpower that enabled rapid cultural evolution.
Key elements include:
Hyper-collaboration: A meta-protocol for working together without exploitation, using tools like integral theory to address memetic (ideas),
physiologic (health), social, and infrastructural layers.
Infinite Game: Unlike Game A’s finite, win-lose structure, Game B is an ongoing process where the goal is to sustain play, outcompeting
rivalrous systems through appeal rather than force.
Utopian Aspects: While proponents explicitly reject labeling it as a “utopia” (to avoid idealistic traps), it evokes utopian ideals by aiming
for a society of maximized flourishing, where technology and collaboration enable non-self-terminating progress. Reflections on utopian
pitfalls, such as over-reliance on visionary thinking, are common in Game B discussions.
Efforts are divided into amelioration (mitigating Game A harms), transition (prototyping new models), and full Game B (emergent co-creation),
with no fixed blueprint to allow for organic development.
Criticisms and Controversies
Game B is not without challenges. Critics argue its abstract, non-prescriptive nature makes implementation difficult, potentially leading
to vague or ineffective outcomes. The early group’s disbandment highlights tensions between personal transformation and systemic change.
Some view it as overly optimistic or elitist, rooted in tech-adjacent circles, and disconnected from real-world power dynamics. In broader
critiques of alternative societies, it’s sometimes lumped with movements accused of undermining Western institutions by promoting
decentralized alternatives, though direct evidence of anti-democratic intent is lacking—it positions itself as cooperative and evolutionary
rather than destructive.
In the context of prophecy, Game B’s vision of a hyper-collaborative, tech-enabled utopia could deceive many into abandoning traditional
governance, paving the way for a one-world system under the guise of “omni-win-win.” While Thiel isn’t directly funding Game B leaders,
his influence in Silicon Valley overlaps with proponents like the Weinsteins, who share circles with him.
The Dark Enlightenment: Anti-Democratic Vision
The Dark Enlightenment (also called neo-reactionary or NRx) is a reactionary philosophical movement that rejects core Enlightenment values
like democracy, egalitarianism, and progress, advocating instead for hierarchical, authoritarian governance. It views modern liberal society
as a decadent “Cathedral” of institutions (media, academia, bureaucracy) that enforce progressivism and political correctness, threatening
Western civilization.
Origins and Key Figures
Emerging in the late 2000s, it was formalized by Curtis Yarvin (pen name Mencius Moldbug) in 2007–2008 blog posts, with Nick Land coining
the term in his 2013 essay. Influences include thinkers like Thomas Carlyle, Julius Evola, and libertarian Hans-Hermann Hoppe. It spread
via online forums and gained traction in Silicon Valley by the 2010s.
Key figures:
Curtis Yarvin: Proposes “neocameralism”—authoritarian capitalist city-states run like corporations, with a “national CEO” or monarch.
Nick Land: Advocates “accelerationism,” where capitalism and technology destabilize society for radical change, explicitly anti-democratic.
Peter Thiel: A venture capitalist linked to NRx, funding related projects and describing himself as “fully enlightened.”
Others include Marc Andreessen and political influencers like JD Vance and Steve Bannon, who have echoed its ideas.
Core Beliefs and Anti-Democratic Aspects
NRx posits that democracy is incompatible with freedom, leading to fascism or inefficiency. It favors absolute monarchism, where power
aligns with property rights to minimize violence. Yarvin’s “formalism” envisions small, competing “gov-corps” allowing citizens to
“vote with their feet.” It incorporates scientific racism (“human biodiversity”), eugenics, and misogyny, seeing equality as unnatural.
Anti-democratic elements include calls to dismantle institutions like Harvard and the New York Times, retire government employees (RAGE plan),
and install surveillance-heavy systems for control.
Criticisms and Controversies
Critics label it neo-fascist, with Benjamin Noys calling it capitalism accelerated to fascism. It’s accused of factual inaccuracies,
historical misrepresentations (e.g., idealizing autocracies), and links to white nationalism, including the 2019 Christchurch attacks.
In tech circles, it’s seen as a threat to democracy, influencing surveillance tools like Clearview AI and policies under figures like
Elon Musk. Broader dangers include its spread among elites, potentially eroding democratic norms in favor of techno-authoritarianism.
Prophetically, this movement’s explicit rejection of democracy mirrors the beast’s rise, where power concentrates in a few hands,
enforcing control through technology—exactly what Thiel funds via Yarvin.
The Network States: Digital Secession
Network States, conceptualized by Balaji Srinivasan in his 2022 book The Network State: How to Start a New Country, represent
digital-first societies that begin as online communities and evolve into sovereign entities. They challenge traditional nation-
states by prioritizing shared beliefs over geography, using technology like blockchain for governance.
Origins and Key Ideas
Srinivasan, a former CTO of Coinbase and tech investor, first floated ideas in a 2013 talk on Silicon Valley secession. A network
state is a “highly aligned online community with capacity for collective action” that crowdfunds territory, gains diplomatic recognition,
and operates like a startup nation. Steps include forming online (e.g., via crypto), building parallel institutions, and achieving
sovereignty. It draws on libertarianism, envisioning opt-in citizenship like a gym membership, with examples like digital currencies
bootstrapping independence without war.
Digital Secession Aspects
Secession is digital and voluntary: communities “exit” flawed systems by forming new ones, shifting allegiance online before physically.
Geography becomes secondary as members “vote with their feet” to aligned territories. Supported by tech like Web3, it’s backed by investors
like Andreessen and the Winklevoss twins, with Thiel’s libertarian leanings aligning closely.
Criticisms and Controversies
While optimistic about pluralism, critics see it as a threat to democracy and the West, enabling tech elites to bypass regulations
and create “technofeudal” enclaves. It could fragment societies, exacerbate inequality, and resemble neocolonialism. Some view it as
undermining constitutional republics by promoting corporate-like governance, potentially leading to authoritarianism if power concentrates
in founders. Srinivasan disputes this, framing it as innovation, but detractors call it a “fever-dream” for libertarians.
In prophetic terms, Network States could enable the mark of the beast by creating digital enclaves where buying and selling is controlled
via blockchain—Thiel’s investments in crypto make this a direct link.
Connections and Analysis: Threats to the West and Constitutional Republics
These three concepts overlap in tech-influenced circles, particularly Silicon Valley, where figures like Peter Thiel bridge them
(e.g., funding NRx-related projects and supporting network state ideas).Dark Enlightenment explicitly seeks to dismantle democracy,
proposing techno-authoritarian alternatives that could align with network states’ opt-in models—some analyses suggest a network state
could adopt Yarvin’s CEO-monarchy for governance, creating “opt-in monarchism.” Game B shares themes of alternative civilizations but
focuses on cooperation, not hierarchy; it’s less directly connected but could be seen as complementary in critiquing “Game A”
(Western capitalism/democracy).
Regarding the claim that all three aim to “take down the West” and create a techno-authoritarian empire: This is substantiated
for Dark Enlightenment, which overtly attacks democratic institutions and has influenced U.S. elites like Vance and Musk, posing
risks to constitutional governance. Network States propose secession-like exits, which could erode national sovereignty and enable
authoritarian tech fiefdoms an area over which someone exercises control as or in the manner of a feudal lord
The Seigneur could not sell his fiefdom without approval from the Queen). Though proponents frame it as voluntary innovation.
Game B is the least aggressive, positioning as an evolutionary upgrade rather than destruction, but critics might argue its
decentralized utopia indirectly undermines established republics by diverting energy from reforms. Overall, while not a unified
conspiracy, their convergence in anti-establishment tech narratives could contribute to fragmented, elite-controlled futures if
unchecked—sources from across the spectrum (e.g., leftist critiques, libertarian defenses) highlight this as a real, if debated, risk.
This Phoenix conspiracy, as I’ve called it, ties directly to Revelation’s merchants of the earth profiting from Babylon’s fall.
Thiel’s paradox—warning of the beast while building it—should wake us up. We’re in the season; watch and be sober.
by Tom Coffee
