Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, has developed a concerning pattern of using false reversals as a manipulation tactic. By analyzing his public statements across multiple issues, we can see how he weaponizes apparent honesty to advance his interests while building false trust. The following examples suggest a systematic use of false candor and manufactured vulnerability that extends beyond normal strategic pivoting. The key difference is a consistent deployment of emotional manipulation tactics rather than straightforward position changes.

Antisemitism (December 2023)

1. Before: Claimed “antisemitism, particularly on the American left, was not as bad as people claimed”
2. After: “I’d like to just state that I was totally wrong”
3. Framing: Presented as a personal revelation while admitting “I still don’t understand it, really”
4. Strategic Benefit: Aligned with period of intense scrutiny of tech leadership positions on antisemitism, particularly regarding campus responses

Burning Man (September 2024)

1. Before: “Super anti-Burning Man” and dismissed it as “ridiculous, escapism, crazy party”
2. After: Declares it “the most beautiful man-made thing” and model for post-AGI society
3. Framing: “OK, I was wrong to be so negative”
4. Strategic Benefit: Ties directly to OpenAI’s AGI vision and tech industry networking, positioning Burning Man as prototype for AI-enabled future

Trump (January 2025)

1. Before: Anti-Trump stance documented in previous tweets
2. After: “Watching @potus more carefully recently has really changed my perspective on him… I think he will be incredible for the country in many ways!”
3. Framing: Claims he “fell in the npc trap” and wishes he had “done more of my own thinking”
4. Strategic Benefit: Coincides with $500 billion Stargate Project announcement by the White House, positioning OpenAI to receive massive taxpayer funding

The Manipulation Playbook

Altman’s technique consistently follows these steps:

1. False Humility: Uses “I was wrong” rhetoric to appear intellectually honest
2. Complete Reversal: Switches to strong support of whatever benefits current interests
3. Enlightenment Narrative: Frames shifts as personal growth rather than strategic moves
4. Strategic Timing: Each reversal coincides with business opportunities
5. Trust Building: Uses apparent vulnerability to build credibility while actually pushing agenda

What we see with Altman’s pattern is fundamentally different from normal business logic expected of a CEO. Take the Burning Man reversal as an example: He moves from calling it a “ridiculous, escapism, crazy party” to declaring it “the most beautiful man-made thing” and a model for post-AGI society. This isn’t just changing a business position – it’s a complete reversal of a personal value judgment, repackaged with an ideological framework that happens to align with OpenAI’s business interests.

His antisemitism flip-flop is particularly telling because it demonstrates how this pattern extends beyond business headlines. The timing of his reversal coincided with intense scrutiny of tech leadership positions on campus antisemitism. But notice the specific language: “I’d like to just state that I was totally wrong” followed by “I still don’t understand it, really.” This combination of absolute certainty in the reversal while admitting continued lack of understanding suggests the change wasn’t driven by new insights or learning.

The pattern reveals a deeply manipulative approach to public discourse, which shouldn’t surprise anyone who heard the warnings by a board of directors that tried to push out Altman for being extremely deceptive with them. His public appearance of honest self-reflection is in fact evidence of weaponized turns of phrase to bypass critical thought:

1. Builds false trust through manufactured vulnerability
2. Retroactively rewrites his own history
3. Frames opposition to his current positions as “unthinking”
4. Advances business interests while appearing to have genuine changes of heart

This raises very serious questions about leadership ethics in public investments in technology boondoggles that look a lot more like Teapot Dome Scandal than anything else. OpenAI’s unfortunate influential position in shaping AI development is counter-intuitive to others proving them hugely wasteful, opaque and slow compared to actual AI innovators.

…unlike ChatGPT’s o1, DeepSeek is an “open-weight” model that (although its training data remains proprietary) enables users to peer inside and modify its algorithm. Just as important is its reduced price for users — 27 times less than o1. Besides its performance, the hype around DeepSeek comes from its cost efficiency; the model’s shoestring budget is minuscule compared with the tens of millions to hundreds of millions that [OpenAI burned through already, desperate for more].

The consistency of his manipulation pattern across multiple issues reveals not any genuine evolution of thought, but the very opposite in a calculated deception strategy to force his latest pivot past everyone without proper scrutiny. The reversals aren’t just rational or normative business adaptations but complete 180-degree turns with manufactured vulnerability to undermine all opposition. Each “revelation” campaign somehow perfectly aligns with Altman’s immediate interests at that very moment, suggesting these aren’t authentic changes of perspective and instead strategic moves sweetened by Silicon Valley “rapid growth” placebos.

When a leader repeatedly uses false candor to manipulate public trust, it threatens the integrity of crucial discussions about technology’s best path and AI’s real future. The most pressing concern right now may be how OpenAI is meant to be used in targeting civilians with the new “Papers Please” role of America’s elite combat troops being mobilized on domestic soil.

Critics have suggested the Israeli President Netanyahu defending use of Nazi salutes at U.S. political rallies is indicative of an historically ignorant extremist right-wing alignment with U.S. leaders overtly planning mass ethnic cleansing.

“@elonmusk is being falsely smeared,” [Netanyahu] wrote. “Elon is a great friend of Israel. He visited Israel….”

That logic is so impeccable, where do I even begin.

Do you know who else visited Israel?

Hamas.

Do you know who else adopts and promotes Nazi symbolism?

Hamas.

Somehow we are supposed to believe however that Elon Musk is totally different and a friend because what… his grandfather was so anti-Semitic and racist that after Hitler lost WWII he ran towards South African apartheid to raise Elon on blood money?

That kind of friend?

Let’s all just admit Netanyau is a politician notorious for saying whatever gives him power in the instant and erasing accountability for it soon after. There’s been a pattern of selective historical memory and inconsistent application of standards by him when assessing threats.

He’s obviously no historian, in other words. And perhaps more importantly he has zero credibility left on the topic of threats to Israel, that’s for certain, given Hamas invaded on his watch while he directly undermined the political independence, authority and judgment of the Israeli military.

And now this:

“You’re talking about a million and a half people, and we just clean out that whole thing,” Trump said… an analyst with Israeli network Channel 12 News, cited Israeli officials and reported that the move was “not a slip of the tongue….”

An ethnic cleansing plan? Let’s run that one up the flag pole and see who salutes it.

Israelis must be thinking “first they came for“… because that’s what is going on now.

Americans are also seeing it on home soil for very similar sounding Trump plans, where large populations allegedly will soon be confronted by combat troops demanding “papers please” like the 1930s.

Have a nice house? Papers please.

Successful business? Papers please.

Sandy beach access to the sea? Papers please.

Practically speaking, as a matter of national security extended into interventions/invasions abroad, the American GOP has forever (since at least my time in the early 1990s on Capitol Hill meetings with Senator Bob Dole) complained they have been blocked as foreigners from rapidly acquiring and owning property in Israel. The American eminent domain (eviction for profit) aspiration in foreign policy being reported is not really news on that note, but this marks a substantial pace change. The sloppy “grab them by the glaciers” bombast replaces decades of norms that meant more orchestrated diplomatic whispers behind closed doors.

The current situation should thus be framed more accurately beyond a political crisis of the moment in Gaza. It’s the abrupt unstable convergence at the White House of historical patterns of racist displacement, economic interests in foreign value extraction, and the normalization of the worst extremist rhetoric by high-profile American politicians.

We’re in a particularly dangerous moment because various strands of extremist ideology, economic interests, and weakened institutional protections are amplifying each other without sufficient evidence of safety from resistence let alone impedance.

The very instant Netanyau said the obvious Nazi salute by a man with a long documented history of Nazi affinity isn’t a threat to Israel, the shock should have been registered appropriately. An Israeli leader should face full accountability for endorsing Nazism in 2025, such as surrendering his seat and authority to lead. It’s much more clear-cut than America, and so ethnic cleansing statements there represent a bellweather of what’s likely coming for America. The lack of immediate consequences after such clear breaches in integrity, blowing past historical lines, suggests a catastrophic weakening of institutional safeguards against violent extremism.

Update: Israelis mock Trump.

At this rate Trump is likely to propose that Gazans be launched ‘voluntarily’ into space and settle Mars, in the spirit of his promise in his inauguration speech: ‘And we will pursue our manifest destiny into the stars, launching American astronauts to plant the Stars and Stripes on the planet Mars’,” the editorial board wrote.

“Why not the Palestinian flag too? It’s possible his partner Elon Musk is already working on it.”

Chaim Levinson, a columnist at Haaretz, wrote: “I’m sorry, but I must disappoint you. After checking with a number of officials, both in Israel and in the relevant countries – along with diplomats involved in the negotiations – it seems this is the vision of an experienced real estate tycoon, and no such concrete plan of action exists.”

The rapid militarization of America’s immigration response this week represents the military deployment for domestic population control that experts and officials long claimed could never happen here.

Within 48 hours of Trump entering the White House, the Department of Defense has established a dedicated military Task Force under U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM), increasing active-duty ground forces by 60% with combat troops, helicopters, and military intelligence analysts. This represents a stark departure from traditional National Guard border support – for the first time, we’re seeing the 82nd Airborne’s “forcible entry” troops under direct federal military command, signaling wartime operations rather than law enforcement assistance.

The scale already is staggering: the Department of Defense has deployed combat troops to forcibly deport over 5,000 people with military aircraft just from the San Diego and El Paso sectors alone. The barrier between civilian law enforcement and military operations – a norm and cornerstone of democratic society – has been shattered. Their initial simplified operating plan (Level 3) is unmistakably focused on combat units, traditionally reserved for global crisis response and warfare, preparing to land on U.S. soil using explicit wartime rhetoric. The Acting Defense Secretary has already directed both U.S. Transportation Command and Northern Command to begin operations, moving far beyond traditional support roles into direct military action. The administration’s executive orders literally frame immigration as an “invasion,” deliberately invoking military response authorities. This isn’t happening gradually – deportation flights by the U.S. military into remote detention centers are underway and ramping up towards Level 4 (full scale), with thousands more troops preparing for deployment.

…officials have struggled to articulate many of the details that are normally a fundamental part of any military deployment, even as this one reportedly could ultimately swell to as many as 10,000 troops and as service members were already beginning to head to the border. …all 500 Marines were being pulled from the Federal Emergency Management Agency mission to support California’s wildfire response.

As the Acting Secretary ominously warned, “This is just the beginning,” a nod to something even more alarming. The new Defense Secretary overseeing this domestic military operation was previously flagged as an extremist threat to American citizens, openly opposed rules of engagement in combat zones, and worked to minimize the role of military members in the January 6th attack. His extremist rhetoric to “restore warrior culture” signals a planned purge of anyone who might resist unlawful orders against civilian populations.

This isn’t some minor policy adjustment or temporary measure, as Trump himself brags. This is the American dam abruptly breaking. The administration is constructing the complete legal framework for treating civilian movement as warfare. This is precisely the constitutional crisis that the founders tried to prevent by separating military and civilian power – and why Congress passed the Posse Comitatus Act banning federal troops from domestic law enforcement after seeing military power abused against civilian populations during Reconstruction.

By falsely declaring immigration an “invasion,” the administration is exploiting Article IV Section 4’s promise to “protect” states to override Posse Comitatus. The January 22nd executive order uses this constitutional provision to authorize immediate military action while stripping civilian protections like asylum. The deliberately bogus recasting creates legal cover for deploying combat units to raid businesses, homes, schools, and churches to expedite deportations at gunpoint – exactly what these laws were meant to prevent.

Combined with a Defense Secretary who opposed rules of engagement and celebrates “warrior culture,” this creates the complete disaster: legal framework, military infrastructure, and command structure for civilian populations suddenly becoming military targets, explicitly justified in rushed official documents. The administration is slamming these pieces into place faster than courts can respond, meaning a strategic erosion of the barriers between military and civilian law enforcement that were meant to protect democracy.

History shows us with chilling consistency that militarizing response to civilians while fraudulently describing them as militant “invaders” precedes mass human rights violations. From Guatemala’s 1982 disappearances (“Ronald Reagan’s ‘Special Unit’ Soldier Sentenced to 5,160 Years in Jail for Mass Murder“) to Indonesia’s 1965 killings to America First’s 1919 deployment of combat troops against Black farmers to America First’s 1916 gas chambers for Hispanics and burning them to death – each followed the same documented playbook: first comes false invasion rhetoric, then military deployment for “population control,” then mass detention infrastructure to abruptly disappear civilians.

In 1925, Sharpe Dunaway, an employee of the Arkansas Gazette, alleged that soldiers in Elaine had “committed one murder after another with all the calm deliberation in the world, either too heartless to realize the enormity of their crimes, or too drunk on moonshine to give a continental darn.” … anecdotal information suggests that U.S. troops also engaged in torture of African Americans to make them confess and give information.

Today, we’re seeing these exact initial stages: combat units, military transport, and leadership that illegally targets civilian populations as military threats.

The headlines now will describe rapid, systematic construction of militarized infrastructure for mass detention and deportation, being built piece by piece in plain sight. Recognizing this as a warning sign of something far worse isn’t alarmist enough by any measure; it’s a moral imperative based on historical precedent. What’s different today is how Palantir and their domestic surveillance offshoot Peregrine operate opaque unsafe targeting algorithms, as if Wall Street read “The Trial” by Kafka and thought it was a guide for unicorn startups.

The time to sound the alarm was before the election, before the executive orders, before the Senate confirmation. Some critical oversight mechanisms still do exist, but who knows if anything left will hold: Congressional oversight committees can demand answers about troop deployments and military operations on U.S. soil. Soldiers can refuse unlawful orders. State attorneys general retain authority to challenge federal overreach. Civil rights organizations can still file legal challenges against military detention. Journalists still have First Amendment protections to document and expose these operations.

History will ask what we did when we saw the clear signs. “America First” has for over 100 years meant widespread domestic terrorism, a political front for the KKK.

And yet here it is again on the federal stage as if everyone forgets everything.

What oversight we demanded, what challenges we filed, what stories we documented, what resistance we mounted. The answer can’t be that we looked away while the infrastructure for racist mass human rights tragedy was built in plain sight, again.