Raphael Machado
Thiel's drive to control Brazilian legal relations should serve as a warning about the need to affirm and reaffirm the fundamental importance of human centrality in all institutions and relationships.
The recent escape of the technocratic billionaire Peter Thiel- best known for his company Palantir, involved in the capture of U.S. security and intelligence services - to Argentina has drawn attention to his possible interests in South America. Javier Milei's role in implementing the Andinia Plan (promoting Jewish colonization of Patagonia for the purpose of creating a new Zionist state) has already become notorious, and there is speculation about whether Thiel might play some part in it. Others suggest that Thiel may simply be leaving the U.S. to avoid potential future accountability in a post-Trump American government.
Now, regardless of Thiel's real interests in Argentina, that does not appear to be the main target of the billionaire's operations in South America.
It recently came to public attention that former Supreme Court Justice Luis Roberto Barroso and TV host Luciano Huck - both radical Zionists and representatives of the liberal-progressive establishment - are part of the board of the Brazilian AI company "Enter." This company, "Enter," is developing a system based on models from OpenAI and Anthropic, whose purpose will be to autonomously manage cases for Brazil's major mass-litigation law firms, handling the production of legal filings.
Moreover, it is expected that "Enter" will eventually begin operating within the courts themselves, as the startup's declared goal is to become a monopolistic AI company in the legal sector. By positioning itself at both main ends of jurisdictional relationships (lawyers and judges), "Enter" would essentially dissolve the necessary "separation" that must exist between plaintiff, defendant, and judge in order to concretely preserve the impartiality of the application of the law.
Furthermore, it is important to consider the possibility that, subtly through prompts, "Enter" could harm its own clients in cases where a client represents interests contrary to those of the investors, directors, and advisors behind "Enter."
The issue takes on an international dimension, however, once we discover that the primary investor in the startup "Enter" is the Founders Fund, a venture capital firm created by Peter Thiel that counts among its partners a myriad of magnates and speculators linked to Silicon Valley.
Through the Founders Fund, Thiel has at least partial control not only over Palantir and Musk's SpaceX, but also over Facebook, Polymarket, Spotify, Airbnb, among others - all of them tied to the world of Big Tech and Silicon Valley, projects that appear dedicated to the virtualization and algorithmization of the world in order to control and influence it more easily.
Thus, when Thiel invests in a project whose stated goal is to control the activities of lawyers and judges in Brazil, we are necessarily facing a significant institutional risk. Chiefly because Brazil seems to have become a testing ground for countless liberal projects of all kinds, and the results achieved in Brazil may serve to determine the internationalization of this effort to control legal activities around the world.
The very effort, already underway in Brazil, to make legal activities mediated by artificial intelligence is, in itself, an institutional risk. Judges have stopped reading case files, as well as producing their own rulings. And well-trained lawyers have already begun including disguised prompts in their petitions aimed at manipulating the court's AI to produce favorable decisions. As a result, the human factor is being excluded from the law.
The problem is that all legal conflicts are fundamentally about human interests, and only people can understand the demands of other people - which is why we should practically consider it essential, even a fundamental right, to be defended and judged exclusively by human beings.
Peter Thiel's drive to control Brazilian legal relations should serve as a warning about the need to affirm and reaffirm the fundamental importance of human centrality in all institutions and relationships.
AI cannot and should not replace human beings.