The people controlling Palantir are openly anti-democratic. They see technology as a means of controlling and ruling the common folk. They said so, repeatedly, in public, of their own volition.

Alex Karp is a deeply unlikable human who talks about how his software is used to kill people, and that he wants to drop a lot of fentanyl-laced urine across all the negative reporters.

Hating Palantir without having any idea of what they are is the trendy thing to do. Their leaders are toxic which doesn’t help the case, but the core issue really is just that in this political climate, people all over the western world don’t trust their governments, and it’s also trendy to distrust anyone making money, as well as tech companies - especially those involved in data and AI related businesses - so the fact that Palantir makes these distrusted actors more competent while making money doing it, is seen as siding with the devil.

So it’s a trust problem, if the government were seen as effective and worthy then I want them to be effective, which includes using the data they collect effectively. In this climate trendy people would prefer that their corrupt government is also fully incompetent to limit the effect of the corruption.

Their founder is a lunatic giving a lecture tour about the anti-Christ and the need to move beyond national-states. The CEO is on some bizarre PR tour where he comes off like a Bond villain.

It’s obvious all your questions are not authentic and you have a motive and this thread is clearly being astroturfed but I will entertain.

They build immigrant databases and help ICE (a corrupt agency performing illegal, unethical and unamerican agenda) find people to deport.

Hopefully people here can see past this aloof act you’ve got going on.

Your point is well taken, though it's worth pointing out that literally yesterday Palantir was co-awarded a contract for building orbital weapons systems [0].

The broader point is Palantir's specific confluence of:

- access to granular, non-anonymized data across industry silos

- its chairman's specific pro-authoritarian mission (so pointedly so that the Catholic Church felt the need to make a specific rebuke a few days ago [1])

- a regulatory environment in which its monetary risks are arguably minimized if it takes the broadest possible reading of e.g. HIPAA's law enforcement exceptions that mention "written administrative requests" [2]

- documented concerns about governance [3]

Those concerned with this confluence are far from conspiracy theorists, and may be quite rationally interested in protecting e.g. the public reputation of their hospital networks, and ability to service - to say nothing of their desire to protect the privacy of their patients.

[0] https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2026-03-24/and...

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/17/world/europe/peter-thiel-... - https://archive.is/2EOXa

[2] https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/faq/505/what-doe...

[3] https://comptroller.nyc.gov/reports/letter-to-palantir-techn...

Saying they have ‘conservative values’ is the death blow to conservativism, given their explicit anti-democratic, and fundamentally extremist leadership

Look into Peter Thiel, the current administration and how it all ties back to Palantir. No conspirations here, just openly known facts.

>No, but I am curious why this one company gets some much hate.

Mostly because hating Palantir is a trendy leftist virtue signal. Defund ICE being another one. Defund the police was trendy five years ago, but is no longer popular.