Palantir CEO Alex Karp is sick and tired of his critics. That much is clear. But during the Yahoo Finance Invest Conference Thursday, he escalated his counteroffensive, aimed squarely at analysts, journalists, and political commentators who have long attacked the company as a symbol of an encroaching surveillance state, or as overvalued.Â
Karpâs message: They were wrong then, theyâre wrong now, and theyâve cost everyday Americans real money.
âHow often have you been right in the past?â Karp said when asked why some analysts still insist Palantirâs valuation is too high.Â
He said he thinks negative commentary from traditional finance peopleâand âtheir minions,â the analystsâhas repeatedly failed to grasp how the company operates, and failed to grasp what Palantirâs retail base saw years earlier.Â
âDo you know how much money youâve robbed from people with your views on Palantir?â he asked those analysts, arguing those who rated the stock a sell at $6, $12, or $20 pushed regular Americans out of one of techâs biggest winners, while institutions sat on the sidelines.Â
âBy my reckoning, Palantir is one of the only companies where the average American boughtâand the average sophisticated American sold,â Karp continued, tone incredulous.Â
That sort-of populist inversion sits at the core of Karpâs broader argument: The people who call Palantir a surveillance toolâhis word for them is âparasiticââunderstand neither the product nor the country that enabled it.
âShould an enterprise be parasitic? Should the host be paying to make your company larger while getting no actual value?â he questioned, drawing a line between Palantirâs pitch and what he said he sees as the âwoke-mind-virusâ versions of enterprise software that generate fees without changing outcomes.
Instead, Karp insists Palantirâs software is built for the welder, the truck driver, the factory technician, and the soldierânot the surveillance bureaucrat.
He describes the companyâs work as enabling âAI that actually worksâ: systems that improve routing for truck drivers, upgrade the capabilities of welders, help factory workers manage complex tasks, and give warfighters technology so advanced âour adversaries donât want to fight with us.â
That, he argues, is the opposite of a surveillance dragnet. Itâs a national-security asset, part of the deeper American story. Thatâs what Palantirâs retail-heavy investor base understands: the countryâs constitutional and technological system is uniquely powerful, and defending it isnât just morally correct, itâs financially rewarded.
âNot only was the patriotism right, the patriotism will make you rich,â he said, arguing Silicon Valley only listens to ideas when they make money. Palantirâs success, in his view, is proof the combination of American military strength and technological dominanceââchips to ontology, above and belowââremains unmatched worldwide.
That, he believes, is what critics get wrong. While detractors warn Palantir fuels the surveillance state, Karp argues the company exists to prevent abuses of powerâby making the U.S. so technologically dominant it rarely needs to project force.
âOur project is to make America so strong we never fight,â he said. âThatâs very different than being almost strong enough, so you always fight.â
Karp savors the reversal: âbroken-down carâ vs. âbeautiful Teslaâ
Karp bitterly contrasted the fortunes of analysts who doubted the company with the retail investors who stuck with it.
âNothing makes me happier,â he said, than imagining âthe bank executiveâŠcruising along in their broken-down car,â watching a truck driver or welderââsomeone who didnât go to an elite schoolââdrive a âbeautiful Teslaâ paid for with Palantir gains.
This wasnât even a metaphor. Karp said he regularly meets everyday workers who âare now rich because of Palantirââand the people who bet against the company have themselves become a kind-of meme.
Criticsâespecially civil-liberties groupsâhave accused Palantir for years of building analytics tools that enable government surveillance. Karp says these attacks rely on caricature, not fact.
âPure ideas donât change the world,â he said. âPure ideas backed by military strength and economic strength do.â