by Kody Fairfield

In June 2016, the annual Bilderberg Conference, a meeting of European and North American political elites, experts from industry, finance, academia, and the media, was held in Dresden, Germany. One of its attending members, current sitting member of the Steering Committee and Co-Founder of Paypal Peter Thiel had some very interesting things to say about transparency and the libertarian philosophy, especially given that he is someone who claims to be a conservative libertarian.

Reported by RT.com, Thiel was seen walking out side of the heavily-guarded hotel where the conference is held, and was repeatedly approached for comments on his “libertarian values and the people he is working with,” as well as the perception of the secrecy inherent to the conference taking place. At first he refused to talk to anyone, but eventually he stated that he would make one comment on the issue.

Listen below:

Thiel says, “Libertarianism is not synonymous with radical transparency; that’s often an argument the Stasi would make in East Germany where everything had to be monitored by society.”

A statement that is a bit disturbing, because what Thiel mentions here is that the lack transparency from larger, often government involved players in society against the ordinary people, is akin to the transparency coerced from the people of Germany by their government police forces (stasi).

That thought would be a fundamental misunderstanding of the libertarian philosophy, as it requires that the government adhere to transparency to its citizenry, and that the citizen has a right to privacy against government intrusion.

Now some may argue that though the Bilderberg Conference is not a government agency, and that they should enjoy the same rights as a private citizen, and this becomes a much more difficult issue to defend. As the conference often deals with world politics, and is attended by many who lobby, control, produce legislation, and can create societal changes.

Even looking at the listed topics of the meeting can prove this, check out their press release here.

The key topics for discussion this year include: Current events China Europe: migration, growth, reform, vision, unity Middle East Russia US political landscape, economy: growth, debt, reform Cyber security Geo-politics of energy and commodity prices Precariat and middle class Technological innovation

All of these topics affect the private lives of citizens, and all are conversations or negotiations which are held in secrecy behind close doors.

Do people affected by these decisions or negotiations made in or at this conference have a right to know whats going on?

Ironically, Thiel also sits on the board for directors for Facebook, a company which of recently has been caught censoring and suppressing political discourse it doesn’t agree with.

More worrisome however, is the fact Thiel’s comments are then compounded further, when looking further into more current news, specifically a report by the HuffingtonPost.com coming from in side Thiel’s inner circle, claiming that if GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, is elected president, he could be appointed as a nominee to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Does the American populous want a SCOTUS nominee that believes that, “I believe that you often have the best conversations in smaller groups, where not everything is being monitored, that’s how you get very honest conversation, how you can think about a better future.”

Or one who in the past has said the he no longer believes that “freedom and democracy are compatible.”

While the article about Thiel’s nomination for SCOTUS also states that they haven’t spoken to the Trump campaign about said nomination, and that the talk is all quoted from confidants of Thiel, the agenda pushed by Trump has hardly been one of transparency either.

Notwithstanding, the report on SCOTUS nomination, these statements from Thiel should take into question anything related to his liberty credentials. Is he really a friend of liberty, or someone who uses it to his advantage when it is convenient for him, and when it becomes a handcuff, he is willing to bend the ideas to fit his needs?

Unfortunately for liberty, it sounds like Thiel has answered those questions himself.