Michael Steinberger’s The Philosopher in the Valley: Alex Karp, Palantir, and the Rise of the Surveillance State offers a rare, methodically reported, philosophically alert portrait of a firm whose practical vocation consists in rendering heterogeneous worlds legible to power. Its contribution lies in treating Palantir’s rise neither as a purely technical success story nor as a simple morality play of “surveillance,” but as a historically specific reconfiguration of liberal governance under conditions of data saturation, permanent security anxiety, and platform-capital acceleration. The book’s contribution emerges from an unusually sustained engagement with its central agent, Alex Karp, whose self-understanding as a philosophically trained executive becomes, in Steinberger’s hands, an evidentiary medium for examining how contemporary statecraft, corporate strategy, and ethical language co-produce a new kind of justificatory regime.
The work arrives already framed, and its framing matters because it models the very operation it seeks to describe: an apparatus that ingests disparate materials, assigns them a hierarchy, and proposes a decision-usable pattern. Even before the narrative proper, the outer perimeter signals an industrial-publication ecology that parallels Palantir’s own preference for controlled interfaces: the paratextual gestures of dedication and institutional imprinting, the forward-facing invitation to subscribe to a publisher’s channel of updates, the standardized assurances of a branded reading experience. This is not merely incidental packaging. It constitutes, at the level of the book-object, an early rehearsal of the central problematic: the production of trust through curated access, the conversion of attention into a managed relationship, and the quiet normalization of asymmetries between those who see and those who are seen. The dedication’s domestic address—its directedness toward particular persons—introduces, by contrast, a counter-motif of singularity, attachment, and non-instrumental regard; it stands as a minor but persistent reminder that the moral vocabulary of care and loyalty will later reappear, transformed, as corporate devotion, national service, and factional allegiance.
From its first movement, Steinberger composes the narrative as a deliberate oscillation between scene and system, between embodied idiosyncrasy and institutional gravitation. The prologue establishes this method with an almost didactic clarity. Karp appears jogging in rural New Hampshire, a figure whose outward oddity, material security apparatus, and spontaneous paranoia (expressed in a half-comic, half-revealing remark about a nearby meth lab) compress the book’s conceptual stakes into a single perceptual episode. The encounter with wary locals, the presence of a security detail, the mixture of casualness and threat, all enact a miniature phenomenology of suspicion: the world of ordinary social recognition is saturated by the possibility of hidden intention; the stranger is pre-classified as risk; the body becomes an index of an invisible network. In this opening tableau Steinberger places, with economy, the paradox that will govern the larger account: Palantir’s promise of enhanced clarity arises within a social atmosphere that grows murkier as clarity becomes an object of contestation. The prologue is neither a detachable anecdote nor a simple hook. It is a compositional overture that introduces the work’s governing tensions—public and private, visibility and opacity, security and estrangement—under the sign of a protagonist whose self-presentation continually seeks to convert contradiction into a style of principled necessity.
The book then shifts, by design, into a different register, and this shift itself becomes a philosophical datum. After the prologue’s near-novelistic immediacy, the narrative turns toward policy time and state time, opening with the public chronology of the Afghanistan withdrawal decision under President Biden. The point is not that Palantir “explains” Afghanistan, nor that Afghanistan “explains” Palantir. The point is that certain events reveal what kinds of institutions are authorized to claim competence under crisis. In Steinberger’s rendering, the collapse of a planned exit into chaotic evacuation functions as a diagnostic for the contemporary security state’s informational predicament: the state possesses oceans of data and yet remains vulnerable to strategic surprise, bureaucratic incoherence, and the friction of interagency compartmentalization. Palantir enters here as both symptom and proposed remedy: a firm that offers integration where the state offers fragmentation, pattern-recognition where the state offers document accumulation, a single operational picture where the state offers a multiplicity of incompatible dashboards. The conceptual wager is that such integration, once accepted as indispensable, redefines what it means for a democratic polity to “know” itself and to act upon that knowledge.
Karp’s phrase “Welcome to the schmattes factory,” delivered in Palantir’s Washington office, supplies Steinberger with an emblem whose interpretive yield the book steadily increases. The phrase performs at least three operations at once. It aestheticizes drudgery, presenting the work of intelligence and governance as a craft of sorting rags, making do with messy materials, extracting order from leftovers. It signals insider membership through a culturally coded idiom, thereby producing intimacy as a boundary. It also offers, in miniature, a theory of data: data arrives as refuse and surplus, as fragments whose value depends on their recomposition. Steinberger repeatedly returns to this sort of utterance—Karp’s aphoristic provocations, his theatricality, his rhetorical oscillation between grand moral claim and self-mocking performance—because it supplies a primary evidentiary thread for the book’s larger question: how does a firm engaged in the operationalization of surveillance secure for itself a moral persona that can survive its own consequences?
At the level of method, the book proceeds through a sustained practice of triangulation. Steinberger builds his account from extended access to Karp and repeated conversations, while constantly testing that access against voices with divergent incentives: current and former employees, government officials and contractors, critics and activists, observers of Silicon Valley and of Washington, interlocutors who have loved Palantir’s tools and those who have feared their implications. The narrative evidences an effort to keep the CEO’s charisma from becoming an explanatory solvent. Karp is granted enough space to articulate his own justificatory architecture, yet the surrounding structure continually pressures that architecture with external constraints: procurement politics, classification regimes, institutional rivalries, market imperatives, reputational crises, and the distinct ideological trajectory of Peter Thiel. The book thereby constructs its own internal counterweight to the familiar genre in which a leader’s self-story becomes the story of the firm.
This compositional discipline matters because Palantir itself appears, throughout the book, as an enterprise that makes “integration” into a metaphysical claim. Its products—Gotham, Foundry, and later the AI Platform—are presented as instruments that ingest vast quantities of information and render them queryable across domains. Yet Steinberger insists, implicitly and often explicitly, that integration is never neutral. Integration presupposes a schema of relevance, a grammar of entities, a politics of linkage. The firm’s value proposition is operational, yet its operationality is also epistemic and moral: it proposes that better decisions follow from better pattern visibility, and it proposes that those who possess the tools of visibility bear an elevated responsibility for the collective fate. Here Steinberger’s account acquires its philosophical density: he treats Palantir as a site where a theory of knowledge, a theory of authority, and a theory of virtue are being forged in practice, often without explicit acknowledgment that they are theories at all.
The early historical arc, largely internal to Palantir’s founding mythology and its post-9/11 institutional environment, is narrated as a complex interlacing of fear, ambition, and institutional opportunity. The company’s origin in 2003, its early relationship with the CIA’s venture arm, its role in the War on Terror, and its continuing entanglement with intelligence and defense customers are treated as more than mere background. Steinberger shows how the War on Terror provided a justificatory horizon within which exceptional measures could become normal, and within which the promise of preventing catastrophic surprise could legitimate expansive data practices. Palantir’s initial self-conception as a builder of tools that “connect the dots” emerges here as an answer to a specific political trauma: the narrative of pre-9/11 failure, the charge that agencies had information yet lacked synthesis. Yet Steinberger is careful to show that such synthesis is not merely a technical deficit. It is also a question of institutional trust, jurisdiction, and accountability. The desire for a unified view confronts the reality that democratic governance has historically relied on fragmentation as a safeguard: separations of function, limits on information flow, procedural barriers designed to prevent any single node from possessing total vision. Palantir’s rise thus develops within a contradiction: what appears as inefficiency from the standpoint of operational urgency appears as a constitutional virtue from the standpoint of liberty.
This contradiction deepens as the book shifts from the national-security origin story toward the broader arena of domestic governance and commercial expansion. Steinberger composes this shift as a gradual displacement of one justificatory center by another. In the early movements, “counterterrorism” and “war” function as primary legitimating terms. As time progresses, the narrative shows these terms being supplemented and sometimes superseded by a rhetoric of generalized problem-solving: immigration enforcement, fraud detection, public health, supply chains, corporate risk, critical infrastructure, climate-related modeling, and the emerging language of AI-enabled decision support. The displacement is not total, and Steinberger’s account gains force by refusing any simple periodization. Rather, the older justification remains as an ever-available reserve of seriousness, while the newer justifications provide breadth, revenue, and a pathway to normalization. What begins as exceptional necessity becomes, through accretion, a general administrative paradigm. Palantir’s tools, originally entangled with secrecy, become increasingly marketed as the backbone of “modern operations” across sectors, and the moral aura of national defense is repurposed as a halo around corporate governance itself.
Karp’s personal biography is positioned to mirror this structural transformation, and Steinberger’s compositional intelligence consists in making the mirroring feel neither forced nor coincidental. Karp is introduced as an outlier within the Valley: severely dyslexic, biracial and Jewish, raised amid family complexities and a father whose entrepreneurial drive and emotional distance become formative reference points. He lacks the canonical background of a Silicon Valley CEO, and this lack is repeatedly converted into an interpretive advantage. His philosophical education—most notably his doctoral work in Germany, at Goethe University Frankfurt, conducted in German and completed in 2002—functions in the narrative as a resource he draws upon to style himself as a moral reasoner within an industry stereotyped as amoral. The book does not treat this as mere branding, even when it attends to the possibility that it operates as branding. Instead it examines the conditions under which philosophical language can become executive language.
Particular weight attaches to the content and reception of Karp’s dissertation, described as a study of in-groups, out-groups, and the rhetoric of fascism. Steinberger’s attention to this detail is not antiquarian. It establishes that Karp’s intellectual formation involved a sustained engagement with the dynamics of exclusion, identity, and political language, precisely the domain that later reappears in controversies over immigration enforcement, policing, and the categorization of populations by risk. The book’s account of Karp’s interactions with Jürgen Habermas—his admiration, the critical feedback, the doubts expressed about linguistic competence, the texture of academic judgment—serves as a second-order meditation on legitimacy. Karp’s later insistence that Palantir operates as a defender of liberal democracy is shadowed by a formative experience in which legitimacy was conferred through rigorous critique and institutional gatekeeping. Steinberger thereby prepares a philosophical question that recurs throughout: what happens when the standards of legitimacy that govern scholarship, public reason, and democratic deliberation are displaced by the standards of legitimacy that govern venture-backed enterprise and classified contracting? The dissertation becomes, in effect, an early model of Karp’s later stance: the attempt to speak about democratic danger while occupying an apparatus that can intensify democratic danger through its operational capacities.
The narrative’s middle movements increasingly stage Palantir as a firm whose essence lies in boundary-work: between government and market, secrecy and publicity, engineering and ideology, ethics and power. Steinberger’s reporting depicts a company that cultivates a sense of mission among employees, often through the rhetoric of serving the nation and protecting liberal civilization. At the same time, the firm confronts the reality that mission language becomes combustible when the mission’s operational consequences are politically polarized. The use of Palantir tools by agencies such as ICE becomes an especially charged site where this combustibility is tested. Steinberger presents these disputes neither as external misunderstandings nor as purely internal moral dramas. They are treated as moments when the integration logic of Palantir collides with the legitimacy logic of democratic society. When a tool can merge datasets and accelerate targeting, the question of who defines the target ceases to be marginal. The tool’s neutrality becomes a contested claim, and neutrality itself appears as a political posture rather than an engineering fact.
Here the book’s conceptual architecture grows deliberately complex, and productively so. Steinberger repeatedly shows how Palantir’s defenders and critics share a structural assumption: that the decisive matter is capability. The defender frames capability as protection; the critic frames capability as threat. Yet Steinberger’s account also suggests, by accumulation of cases and voices, that capability is inseparable from institutional embedding. A system used within a particular agency, under particular legal regimes and incentive structures, becomes a different moral object than the “same” system imagined abstractly. Palantir’s insistence that it builds platforms rather than outcomes, that it supplies tools rather than policies, is thus shown to function as a practical strategy of moral insulation. The insulation is never complete, because the very act of customizing for an agency, integrating with particular datasets, and training operators toward particular workflows expresses an orientation to outcome. Steinberger’s narrative, attentive to the mundane realities of deployment, renders this orientation visible without needing polemical assertion.
The book’s chapter titles—invocations of stones that see, prying eyes, war against an army, a “commercial break,” the “Peter problem,” proof of concept, the “batshit-crazy” CEO, survival, rebellion—operate as a secondary compositional layer that signals the sequence of thematic transmutation. Steinberger moves from an early emphasis on state crisis and organizational necessity toward an increasingly explicit confrontation with politics and personality. The effect is cumulative. Early on, Palantir appears as an answer to bureaucratic failure. Then it appears as a firm that must learn to sell, to translate mission into revenue, to insert itself into corporate supply chains and administrative budgets. Later it appears as a firm whose fate is inseparable from the ideological battles of the United States and its allies, and from the interpretive battles over what “democracy” means when its defenders cultivate tools of surveillance and prediction.
A central mechanism of textual reposition is the way Thiel gradually comes to occupy the book’s foreground, and then, in another turn, becomes displaced again by the broader field he helps shape. Steinberger introduces Thiel initially as cofounder, intellectual catalyst, and friend—an early presence whose influence is structural rather than episodic. Over time, Thiel’s political activism, his role as a sponsor of particular candidates and movements, and his association with an explicitly anti-consensus posture intensify into what the narrative names as a problem: a reputational and moral complication for a company that wishes to present itself as a defender of liberal order. Karp, who positions himself as a patriot of liberal democracy, is bound to a partner whose political interventions often appear as insurgent against mainstream liberal institutions. Steinberger does not reduce this tension to personal betrayal or simple hypocrisy. He treats it as a symptom of a deeper contradiction within the post-9/11 technology-security nexus: the same entrepreneurial class that supplies the state with advanced tools can also seek to remake the state’s ideological composition, and can do so while claiming to act in the name of freedom.
The “Peter problem,” as the narrative develops it, is thus more than a public-relations headache. It becomes a philosophical test case for corporate moral identity. Can a firm claim to embody a set of political values when its founding structure includes actors who contest those values? Can a CEO claim to represent an ethical conscience when his institutional success is entangled with alliances he cannot fully govern? Steinberger’s reporting depicts Karp’s repeated efforts to differentiate himself, to affirm his own commitments, and to insist on the company’s alignment with a civilizational mission. Yet the narrative also shows the limits of differentiation. In a firm built on tight networks of trust, shared origin stories, and cofounder mythology, disentanglement becomes both psychologically and institutionally costly. The result is an unstable equilibrium: Karp’s public philosophy functions as a stabilizing discourse, while Thiel’s political interventions function as destabilizing events that force that discourse to become more explicit, more combative, and sometimes more brittle.
The book’s later movements intensify the focus on public performance, precisely because Palantir’s power increasingly depends upon public legitimacy. Steinberger portrays Karp as a CEO who embraces theatrical speech and confrontation, who oscillates between vulnerability and provocation, who cultivates an image of eccentric candor. This image is itself treated as a technology: a means of converting secrecy into charisma, of converting suspicion into fascination, of persuading audiences that a company criticized as a pillar of surveillance can be understood as a bulwark of freedom. The narrative’s attention to Karp’s rhetorical style is never mere color. It serves as evidence for a broader claim: in a world where technical systems exceed ordinary democratic comprehension, the moral persona of the system’s representatives becomes part of the governance apparatus. The CEO’s speech becomes a proxy for transparency. The CEO’s declared anguish becomes a substitute for institutional accountability. Steinberger’s account pressures this substitution by returning, again and again, to concrete deployments and concrete controversies.
A further transposition occurs as the narrative’s geopolitical horizon widens. Ukraine, Israel, and the broader theater of contemporary conflict enter the account as arenas where Palantir’s tools appear as operational assets and moral symbols at once. Steinberger describes how war and crisis can intensify the demand for integration platforms, and how success in such contexts feeds back into valuation, market authority, and political capital. The moral language of defense becomes again available, now attached to newer conflicts and alliances. Yet the philosophical complication deepens: a tool that helps an ally defend itself also participates in the general acceleration of warfare’s informationalization. The boundary between defense and domination becomes harder to stabilize when the same integration logic can be used for targeting, surveillance, logistics, and influence. Steinberger’s method here is to keep the analysis anchored in the book’s reported scenes and claims—events, conversations, and institutional relationships—while allowing the conceptual implications to unfold without rhetorical excess. The reader is invited to recognize that “security” functions as a migratory justification that can attach itself to almost any deployment, thereby expanding the domain in which surveillance capacities become normalized.
The epilogue provides the most explicit compositional closure, and it does so by staging a final displacement of earlier balances. Set in early December 2024, a few weeks after the presidential election, it describes Palantir hosting an AIP event in its New York office, in a political atmosphere shaped by the anticipation of a second Trump presidency. Here the book’s earlier tensions—between liberal-democratic self-description and the realities of power—are forced into sharper relief. Steinberger reports a claim that Trump had won “a massive mandate,” and he presents the company’s environment as one in which proximity to power is pursued with increasing frankness. The epilogue notes that Palantir’s stock price had nearly tripled since the election, and it frames the firm as uniquely positioned to profit from the political turn. This is not offered as a simplistic accusation. It is presented as an observable alignment of incentives: a surveillance-and-integration company benefits when governance becomes more security-driven, more administratively aggressive, more willing to treat populations as risk fields. The epilogue thereby returns the narrative to its prologue’s mood of suspicion and estrangement, yet now the estrangement is no longer localized in a rural road encounter. It is institutionalized as a national trajectory.
What is displaced, at this point, is the reader’s ability to treat Karp’s philosophical self-understanding as an adequate mediation between capability and legitimacy. Earlier in the book, Karp’s insistence on grappling with moral questions can appear as a genuine attempt to inhabit responsibility within an ethically fraught domain. The epilogue’s political horizon renders that stance more precarious. It presses the question whether reflective speech can counterbalance structural incentives. It also presses whether the very form of “grappling”—publicly performed seriousness, executive moralizing, civilizational rhetoric—becomes an instrument for stabilizing what would otherwise be experienced as intolerable contradictions. The book does not resolve this; it clarifies it. Steinberger’s most consistent achievement is to show how moral discourse can be both sincere and functional, both an expression of inner conviction and a technology of institutional survival.
Throughout, Steinberger’s narrative sustains a double vision regarding secrecy. Palantir is described as secretive, and the book itself must navigate the limits imposed by secrecy: the constraints of classification, nondisclosure, proprietary systems, and the company’s strategic reticence. Yet Steinberger’s reporting also demonstrates that secrecy is never merely absence of information. It is a positive social form that produces hierarchies of access, shapes who can speak credibly, and structures what counts as evidence. The book’s own evidentiary strategies—its reliance on multiple voices, its careful attribution of claims, its presentation of scenes whose details carry institutional meaning—operate as an implicit response to this form. One could say that the work builds, within the genre constraints of narrative nonfiction, an alternative integration: it integrates human testimony, institutional documents, cultural observation, and political chronology into a legible pattern that can be judged by readers. The book thereby mirrors Palantir’s promise while reversing its direction: it seeks to render the powerful legible to the public.
The conceptual center, however, remains the surveillance state, treated neither as a monolithic entity nor as a purely governmental phenomenon. Steinberger’s account suggests that the surveillance state in the twenty-first century is a hybrid formation: state agencies, private contractors, venture capital, cloud infrastructures, and elite ideological networks. Palantir’s role is emblematic because it sits at the nexus of these forces. Its software integrates data across agencies and departments; its contracts embed it within decision cycles; its personnel circulate between technical, military, and policy worlds; its public rhetoric seeks to align the firm with a civilizational mission; its valuation and market success depend upon the continuation of the very conditions—permanent crisis, institutional anxiety, geopolitical confrontation—that justify its tools. The surveillance state thus appears less as a centralized Leviathan than as an emergent order produced by mutually reinforcing incentives. Steinberger’s narrative provides abundant warrants for this view through the accumulation of reported episodes: the firm’s entanglement with counterterrorism, its work with immigration enforcement, its pursuit of commercial customers, its engagement with AI branding, its public events and executive pronouncements, its internal cultural dynamics, its management of dissent and loyalty.
A further tension concerns the moral economy of employees. Steinberger pays sustained attention to how individuals inside Palantir interpret their own labor. Many appear motivated by a belief in public service and technological necessity; others become uneasy when deployments implicate them in contested policies. The book treats such unease as more than personal drama. It becomes evidence for a broader claim about contemporary moral agency under complex systems: individuals operate within infrastructures whose consequences exceed their direct intention, and the firm supplies interpretive narratives that help stabilize their sense of participation. Mission language, patriotic rhetoric, and the promise of protecting democracy function as moral solvents that can dissolve the friction of particular cases. Yet friction returns, and the narrative shows moments when employees rebel, when internal debate becomes public controversy, when the firm’s identity is contested from within. These moments are significant because they reveal that the surveillance state is not simply imposed; it is also assembled through the consent, enthusiasm, and disciplined labor of persons who require a moral vocabulary to inhabit what they do.
Karp’s own moral vocabulary is thus treated as an especially concentrated form of this phenomenon. His philosophical formation, his fascination with democratic fragility, his insistence on seriousness, and his readiness to speak in civilizational terms together produce a persona that can be read as a defense mechanism for both self and firm. Steinberger records Karp’s willingness to confront ethical questions, yet he also shows how such confrontation can coexist with strategic aggression, with the pursuit of power, with close alliances to contentious political actors, and with the economic logic of a publicly traded colossus. The persona becomes, in effect, a site of condensation where contradictory imperatives—profit and mission, secrecy and publicity, liberalism and coercion—can coexist without immediate collapse. The philosophical question that follows is less about Karp’s sincerity than about the social function of sincerity in late-modern governance: sincerity can be a genuine inner posture and a stabilizing public technology at once.
If one seeks a single conceptual thread that the book repeatedly weaves and then allows to be shifted by broader themes, it is the idea of “seeing.” Palantir’s promise is to let institutions see patterns otherwise invisible. The book’s counter-promise is to let readers see the institution that builds the seeing-machine. Yet seeing, in both registers, is bound to power. Seeing selects, categorizes, and orders; it creates objects of intervention. Steinberger’s narrative therefore continually returns to the relation between epistemology and authority: who has the right to define the pattern, who bears responsibility for action, who is accountable when a pattern becomes a target. The surveillance state, in this light, is a regime in which knowledge is operationalized at speed and scale, while the normative structures that once governed public reason struggle to keep pace.
The closing effect of the work is a clarified unease, achieved through compositional discipline rather than polemic. Steinberger’s outer framing—ending with acknowledgments that present the book itself as a labor supported by editors, colleagues, readers, and friends—quietly reasserts a model of accountability rooted in public communication and communal critique. That model stands as a counter-image to the proprietary, classified, and contract-bound circulations that characterize Palantir’s world. Yet the narrative’s final political horizon, shaped by the second Trump presidency and the firm’s enhanced market position, refuses any comfort that critique alone can reverse structural incentive. The reader is left with a sharply articulated problem: modern liberal societies, seeking security and efficiency under conditions of complexity, may increasingly delegate their practical reason to integration platforms whose success depends upon the expansion of governable visibility. The philosopher in the Valley becomes, in Steinberger’s hands, the emblem of this historical moment: a figure who speaks the language of democratic seriousness while standing at the operational center of a machinery that can redraw the boundaries of democracy itself.
Simon Gros 
Leave a comment