Cambrian Explosion

Scharlach’s Habitable Worlds was created less than a month ago, and is presently expanding faster than the known universe. Then this massive brain-cycle munching machine appeared. Then this one. And then there’s this. That’s a selective list of blogs that I know I want to follow closely, none of which existed four weeks ago. Keeping up with this chaos of creation is becoming impossible. Can someone please hurry up with the delivery of my brain-accelerator chip.

May 9, 2013admin 119 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Uncategorized

119 Responses to this entry

  • Mike Says:

    I think early-to-mid-2013 will be known as “the” time the nascent neo-reactionary blogosphere coalesced into an identifiable movement.

    At a minimum, it seems to be the time when “neo-reactionary” was coined.

    [Reply]

    Anomaly UK Reply:

    It’s been an exciting time — the really curious thing is it seems to have been Scott Alexander’s interest that triggered the explosion.

    “neo-reactionary” was used in January 2009 in a comment at Mangan’s. It does feel like a door that we have been pushing at for years is very suddenly starting to open.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 9th, 2013 at 4:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • survivingbabel Says:

    So you’re saying I should wait to start populating survivingbabel.com with content? Or that I should do it right now and risk being forced out of my niche and going extinct?

    Also, if this isn’t just a bug, I’m not sure I would care to follow moreright.net.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    I’d obviously hoped to trawl JG in — he’s an elusive sort.

    As for the eco-dynamics, that’s additional discussion material. I can’t imagine that anybody has more than the haziest of intuitions about the way they play out.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 9th, 2013 at 4:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • James Goulding Says:

    But where is the money?

    A steady stream of academic quality papers on the core of what I think Reaction should be—Machiavellian analyses of liberal democracy, Exit and P2P law—would be most valuable. However, I (and presumably most other people) shall never write academic papers without pay. This is only a good deal for people so smart that they gain very high status from their unpaid intellectual endeavours.

    I was quite excited about MoreRight, because “Bayesians” are the smartest kind of Reactionary. This is due to correlation, not causality. However, I tested the waters for unapologetic rightism on that site, and discovered that they are trying too hard to be respectable in the eyes of “rationalists”. I’ve come to think that trying to “persuade” people who aren’t immediately enthusiastic about Reaction (i.e. anyone other than conservatives and libertarians who merely haven’t been exposed to the right material) is a waste of time.

    Another bad meme amongst the Bayesian crowd is that something called “tribalism” exists, and is a rationality failure mode. I think that strong affiliation, calibrated hostility to outsiders, and willingness to use every feasible form of “dark-side epistemology” against opponents is necessary to any successful political movement.

    A site like MoreRight could potentially become the basis of a crowdfunded mini-academia. Kickstarter clones cost $1000–$2000, and then there has to be a structure of people to vet articles, writers, and a broader group willing to pay something. (Their incentive is to compete for status on the donation leaderboard, and to fund articles that directly interest them.)

    There is a lot of low-hanging fruit in this respect:

    *How do legal incentives manufacture the Zeitgeist?
    *How exactly is law produced?
    *What does an Exit-based society look like?
    *Massive research on Nick Szabo’s P2P law idea. Is there a way in which distributed law-creation could be made to resemble catallaxy?

    The Kickstarter clone could be called “Centre for New Political Science”. I imagine a small committee vetting authors and publications, perhaps by majority vote.

    To restate, Moldbug and a few other people have produced very high quality content for free, but this isn’t a good model to emulate. The kind of writing I am willing to do on a blog is significantly below the quality of research, referencing, detail and tone that I would deliver were I being paid. I’m sure this is generally true.

    So I think MoreRight’s owner(s) have made a mistake in targeting indifferent Bayesians, rather than their natural allies who might eventually be willing to fund research.

    [Reply]

    James Goulding Reply:

    Sorry if this sounds like Televangelism, by the way. Personally, I would (or will) pay for such a site myself, if nothing similar exists at a point in time when I have $2000 to throw around. (My reward would be the status of owning a potentially successful crowdfunding site.) I just don’t think that pure charity is, realistically, a very strong motivation for many people, and this caps my excitement about any Cambrian Explosion in the blogosphere.

    [Reply]

    Athrelon Reply:

    By analogy to the LessWrong world, this seems like an argument over whether MIRI needs CFAR. I think it’s obvious that a kickstarter for high-effort systematizing work would be a great next step. The time may even be ripe for that kind of effort now, and I’d welcome it if you or a group were to test that hypothesis and kick it off now. That effort would be making a bet that we both have enough stable support (not flashpan blogs but people steadily willing to devote some time, resources, and attention to the project) and that the theoretical edifice is sound enough that we *know* what the low-hanging fruit is in order to fund it appropriately.

    I see MoreRight as being an intermediate step, making the assumption (which I’m inclined towards) that there are still important theoretical lacunae to be filled and stable community to be built before reaction is ready to take on a project of that scope.

    [Reply]

    nydwracu Reply:

    Another strategy might be to get people who are already in academia — in the unlikely event that I go to grad school, I’d take the opportunity for writing a thesis to produce something of the quality you’re thinking of.

    There’s also books, but that’s better for popularizing. I might get a more authorlike pen name and take a shot at that if I end up with enough time on my hands, but it wouldn’t be anything particularly novel. How Massachusetts Took Over The World would make a good book title, I bet…

    Konkvistador Reply:

    Regarding your point about possible ties in academia. Someone like Hoppe might be interested in interacting or working with parts the blogosphere. Has anyone tried contacting him?

    survivingbabel Reply:

    First, I had a chance to read your critique on tribalism as concept before it was pulled down, and I hope you find an alternate host for that paper, as it was quite compelling.

    It sounds to me as though what is needed now is now longer foundational thoughts and treatises, but organization. Organization rarely, if ever, happens in comment sections, so the next question is, what other media possibilities can we use to organize? IRC? Private fora? As it stands, I’m willing to be part of the organizational movement, and even take a leadership role if necessary (it’s where my life ends up in all my other endeavors anyway), but I don’t exactly have name cachet. You do, our host does, and Moldbug does, as well as a few other Neoreaction nodes.

    We have the momentum now. There is energy, desire, and (as of now) no existential threat from the current PTB. I don’t want to see it go to waste, but I’m just one man, and Neoreaction requires a movement.

    [Reply]

    James Goulding Reply:

    There are already IRC channels, fora, and a very active Twitter culture. And there is the blogosphere. These are all fine, but I don’t expect substantial, intellectual progress to take place until there is a funding structure.

    Apart from a Kickstarter-type site, the alternative source of funds for research is meatspace organisation. The problem with meatspace is that people interested in this stuff, and those with small inferential distances, are dotted all over the globe. Some also value their anonymity.

    I think that properly formatted and referenced, lengthy academic papers of a neutral tone are the most useful thing that Reaction can produce now. There are and will continue to be too few people, without a clear political program, to form a warm-body type of movement (like the SOPA protests).

    (Only one, somewhat facetious but inoffensive entry from MoreRight was pulled by the owners; but in doing so they’ve set a precedent that renders the site not worth my time, for reasons given above. Meh.)

    [Reply]

    Saddam Hussein's Whirling Aluminium Tubes Reply:

    “There are already IRC channels, fora, and a very active Twitter culture. ”

    What’s the best forum that covers neo-reaction as a whole? As opposed to a forum that just covers one of the camps?

    If all four camps of neo-reaction have discovered some lesser known truths, then it is important to consider neo-reaction as a whole and see if those truths can be synthesized, rather than just sitting on a forum solely devoted to a single camp. Those forums are likely to be ignorant of the other truths of neo-reaction and consequently they may propose excessively simplistic ideas.

    fotrkd Reply:

    Nick B. Steves made a comment on here (somewhere) about not wanting to tell people on a blog about getting ahead of yourself not to get ahead of themselves – but that, really, you shouldn’t get ahead of yourself (I apologise Nick – you phrased it better). What are you trying to organise for? Just because roughly the same people have started talking about neo-reactionary trichotomies (and founded new blogs to again talk about neo-reactionary trichotomies) to the extent you can imagine minimal consensus, it doesn’t mean you’ve got a movement. A recent Spandrell post mentioned light-heartedly on here (libertarian insight I think) for its success currently has 159 comments but a quick totting up suggests this is produced by approximately 20 posters (including the author himself – no offence, just an example). It may be different for a few hosts with greater ‘name catchet’ (though not this one), but I would argue most of the recent ‘expansion’ hasn’t been as a result of any real neo-reaction population growth (please, correct me if i’m wrong) and, in the main, it’s the same posters on all the blogs. The Twitter ‘Dark Enlightenment’ accounts have approx. 270 and 50 followers. So, I’m curious: what would someone in a leadership role be leading, exactly?

    [Reply]

    James Goulding Reply:

    Fotrkd: I don’t disagree, but incidentally you’ve reminded me of something. The “Spandrellian trichotomy”, mellifluous though the term may be, is a false trichotomy, because the 3 sets are not mutually exclusive, and in fact the whole point of the discussion is that certain properties are shared by ethno-nationalists, theonomists and techno-capitalists.

    One core of Reaction, upon which we all agree, is that liberal democracy richly deserves the Machiavellian analyses that Moldbug has conducted. Two further cores, which I hope will gain acceptance, are Exit and P2P law.

    These 3 principles, suitably developed, can create a movement that gets wind in its sails, is stable, and is equally satisfactory to people who want to create Claudia-Schiffer-topia, immanentise the singularity, or create an Amish paradise.

    survivingbabel Reply:

    Well, I think that you are correct that most of the active participants in the neoreaction are the same names, but that’s normal for Early Adopters, or whatever term you would choose. The community right now is self-organizing, but self-organization is for small groups, and I surely don’t want it to remain small. Therefore, what we would be organizing for at this stage would be growth.

    Consider Scharlach’s diagram. Yes, the commenters are the same names, but how many more people are lurkers, either committed but unwilling to jump in until others do, or unsure and wanting to learn? (Of course, we have enemies in our midst as well.) How do we get the lurkers involved? James mentioned that there are IRC channels and fora already extant, but I have no idea where to access them. They don’t exactly pop up on Google.

    The Cathedral has a 100 different entry points, any of which are incredibly easy for a moderately intelligent and moderately enthusaistic youngster to hook into. That would be one place to start organizing, logical entry points for interested youth. Let’s start a chapter of Students Against a Democratic Society (or similar) in top schools. Let’s start urban propaganda campaigns with memetic power and QR codes. (One of our coterie wrote a blog post recently criticizing the Radish posters as being too wordy, but I just cannot remember who.) There are things to be done in meatspace, especially by people with the pathos to go with the ethos and logos. That’s what the leadership would be doing.

    fotrkd Reply:

    @survivingbabel

    To be honest I’m still getting used to how much my head has been fucked with unbeknownst to me these last x number of years (what? I’ve been at war? They’ve been screwing with how I apprehend time/perceive reality? Etc…) so in some ways you’re just way ahead of me…

    But in terms of what we should be doing (which has been covered here in terms of expatriate, take to the hills etc.), there are dangers of setting off too quickly on the positive programme (Foucault discusses this, I’ll warp him – human nature understood in the current fictional reality, not being true human nature, is an unreliable thing to base the liberated future on). I came into this with fatalistic thinking: ‘well it’s all going to happen anyway’, and (by extension) that the Cathedral will detonate itself through stupidity. Now I’m more of the view we have to do something, but I’m pretty sure that’s not via conventional organisation. What neo-reaction needs to construct is tools and resources for after ‘the event’, but I’m not sure it will build sufficient support to trigger such an event – that needs to be much more of the gunpowder plot tradition of reaction and/or internal destruction. Whether blogs like this can do more than help ferment such plans and/or prepare for how to react… I’m not sure(?)

    Konkvistador Reply:

    Just to be clear we didn’t pull either “Democracy and Wet Panties” or “Is “tribalism” a useful concept?”. There was however clashing over the “Propaganda” post, I thought it wasn’t really the long form thought inducing post we want and wrote an email to James on the subject. One of the other admins pulled it, which I didn’t approve of (talking about it we agreed not to do that in the future). James understandably took this as a very negative signal, and asked if pulling his articles for possible reposting on a future blog is ok and I said it was.

    Considering how this went down I understand why he decided to move away from the site since creative control matters a lot to any writer. For my part at least the split was amicable and look forward to any future blog he wants to start. Indeed a draft I had to chance to look at has me quite excited for progress beyond Moldbug’s Neocameralist proposal for better governance that has been lacking in recent years. If he should ever change his mind he is welcomed to write with us again.

    [Reply]

    James Goulding Reply:

    dark-side epistemology

    *Dark arts.

    [Reply]

    Konkvistador Reply:

    I have been thinking about your arguments in the past day or two and think you may be correct on this. The site is still early phases. Many things including comments and material sought are open to change and experimentation in coming months. There are however reactionary memes that propagate because they serve the nareatives we like not because of accuracy. This is why I think occasional outsider input has a role.

    Your article on tribalism was something I wanted to lik to the “rationalists” several times in the past few days, do put it up somewhere soon. 🙂

    I second your call for a website to crowdfund reactionary research. Another workable model for income might be ebooks created via blogging. Harpending & Cochrant at West Hunters might work.

    -Samo

    [Reply]

    James Goulding Reply:

    I would be happy to contribute occasionally to a site that:

    *Has no intellectually compromised authors
    *Has absolutely no censorship (not even masquerading as high standards)
    *Is not and does not affect to be affiliated with intellectually compromised websites
    *Is explicitly Reactionary, and allied to such websites as this, Foseti and Unqualified Reservations
    *explicitly intends to develop a funding base for the future project described above.

    This may be inconsistent:

    1. With the existing membership
    2. With your status interests within the Bayesian community

    I leave this with you.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    @James

    “One core of Reaction, upon which we all agree, is that liberal democracy richly deserves the Machiavellian analyses that Moldbug has conducted. Two further cores, which I hope will gain acceptance, are Exit and P2P law.

    Post-Moldbuggerism, you’re right, we’re all up for that. Exit at a push (seeing as such a society is malleable enough, as it stands, in theory), P2P law I’ll hope it out with you!

    I’ve been a bit doom-and-gloomy regarding the neo-reaction – not sure if I’ll ever be ‘there’ ( yet, anti-democratic, certainly). However, I think your proposals for research are fantastic.

    With the how exactly law is produced node, do you mean a geneological study in the vein of Mr N n’ Foucault?

    *Massive research on Nick Szabo’s P2P law idea. Is there a way in which distributed law-creation could be made to resemble catallaxy?

    This is a GREAT idea; and something I’m going to seriously consider myself. I’m going to have to get neck deep in Szabo’s writings for sure.

    Konkvistador Reply:

    Yes, however the course of the site is something I have to discuss with the other writers.

    “Has absolutely no censorship (not even masquerading as high standards)”

    Do you mean to include this for comments or just for articles?

    “Is explicitly Reactionary, and allied to such websites as this, Foseti and Unqualified Reservations”

    Currently we are explicitly reactionary. See

    http://www.moreright.net/about/
    http://www.moreright.net/hard-to-read-and-harder-to-think-about/

    Expect links to the material on the mentioned blogs and others.

    “Is not and does not affect to be affiliated with intellectually compromised websites”

    Taken literally this is unreasonable, it leads to denouncing anyone who doesn’t share your exact ideologoy (best example of this attiutde is perhaps the late Larry Auster). but in context of our previous correspondences I think I know what you mean.

    Konkvistador Reply:

    Tthe typos in yesterdays post are too numerous to correct, I should abstain in the future from making comments on my smartphone. I would like to clarify the last sentence, on the ebook example. Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending have been blogging for over a year over at West Hunters, they recently put out an ebook with the best posts of their first year.

    http://westhunt.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/ebook-available/

    The reason I proposed this as a model is because:
    1. Many Reactionary Bloggers burn out deleting their blogs, a pdf floating around increases chances that people who want their essays will keep them
    2. They can still be worthwhile in a demographic too small for funding crowdsourced research, and provide an incentive for better quality writing.

    I think there are enough reactionaries for research to be viable, but I’m not certain of this. Naturally ideal would be that we somehow find ourselves in the graces of a Peter Thiel-like billionaire. This worked out for Eliezer’s metspace AI saftey institute.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    “Where’s the money?” This is an excellent point to raise.

    My $0.2 — there’s no real alternative to compliance with web economics, and they’re unsettled at best. Eventually, as with mainstream media, and education, the Internet is going to chew bleeding chunks out of the status quo (Cathedral-core) industries, and make room for direct micro-commerce. Die publishers, die. Prepping for that requires a lot of loss-leading promotional activity.

    At a more fine-grained level, even structual changes in writing styles get catalyzed, because if you don’t want to do a lot of ambitious essay writing for free — and who does? — you still have to do something to keep the imbalance in the force growing. That’s where the future comes from.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 9th, 2013 at 5:08 pm Reply | Quote
  • fotrkd Says:

    The “Spandrellian trichotomy”, mellifluous though the term may be, is a false trichotomy, because the 3 sets are not mutually exclusive

    Does that make it false (italicised or otherwise)? The almost lost Christian trichotomy of body, soul and spirit was never (or should never have been) mutually exclusive. But I take the point. In fact attempting to connect the three strands is particularly rewarding.

    On your (other) three cores (I need to look at p2p law): does it not set Moldbug (or similar) up as a gatekeeper rather than as one of three legs? You’re not really going to look for exit meaningfully until swallowing the right pill, are you?

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 9th, 2013 at 7:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • Nick B. Steves Says:

    So, I’m curious: what would someone in a leadership role be leading, exactly?

    Moldbug says:

    Therefore, my program is to find the truth first and the power later. This means that counting heads—one, ten, a thousand, a million—is for the present entirely superfluous and irrelevant. Counting heads is building democratic power—which is, essentially, military power. I would rather have ten people, all in possession of the same absolute truth, than ten million tea partiers who agree on nothing but glittering lies and myths. For my ten is a viable government in exile—if they somehow gained power, they would keep it—whereas your ten million have no real collective identity at all.

    Sadly Larry, whom I considered to be a personal friend, was “not in the mood” to read it. But I, with all due respect to Larry, think it’s a great answer.

    And just in case Moldbug doesn’t float the boat when you crank up his signal-to-noise ratio… don’t forget The Derb:

    The dissident temperament has been present in all times and places, though only ever among a small minority of citizens. Its characteristic, speaking broadly, is a cast of mind that, presented with a proposition about the world, has little interest in where that proposition originated, or how popular it is, or how many powerful and credentialed persons have assented to it, or what might be lost in the way of prosperity, status, or even life, in denying it. To the dissident, the only thing worth pondering about the proposition is, is it true? If it is, then no king’s command can falsify it; and if it is not, then not even the assent of a hundred million will make it true.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 9th, 2013 at 7:28 pm Reply | Quote
  • Vladimir Says:

    There has indeed been a surge of very good online writing and discussion lately, including this blog, but I have to say that it’s still nowhere near the brief golden age of the blogosphere that transpired circa 2007. So while I certainly hope that this upward trend will continue, I won’t be too surprised if it instead peters out, as it happened some 3-4 years ago.

    In my opinion, the main problem was that the original crop of highly original bloggers labored with the belief that this new medium would mount a serious challenge to the hegemony over public discourse by the mass media and academia. Also, back then the blogosphere was much more free-wheeling and lower under the radar of the Cathedral’s thought police, without a clear boundary and strict segregation between respectable mainstream outlets and independent writers who stepped outside the Overton window. So it wasn’t surprising that, with few exceptions, there was a mass dispiriting (as well as a great reduction of new top-rank talent inflow) among the contrarian bloggers when it turned out that the blogosphere has in fact gradually become co-opted by the Cathedral, and firmly segregated between the orthodox respectable mainstream and genuinely independent (but wholly marginal) writers.

    Therefore, I think that one critical question is whether this new generation of bloggers are laboring under similar over-optimism that would inevitably lead to disappointment, or if they are aware that the Cathedral’s memetic immune system is quite capable of withstanding any challenge from the internet that presently seems feasible, and content to pursue truth, at least for now, purely for its own sake.

    [Reply]

    Thales Reply:

    To address your final paragraph, the fire, however small, cannot be allowed to die. It would take too long to relight in perhaps uncertain weather with insufficient kindling.

    [Reply]

    Scharlach Reply:

    Multiple iterations are always necessary.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 9th, 2013 at 7:30 pm Reply | Quote
  • Scharlach Says:

    I was quite excited about MoreRight, because “Bayesians” are the smartest kind of Reactionary. This is due to correlation, not causality. However, I tested the waters for unapologetic rightism on that site, and discovered that they are trying too hard to be respectable in the eyes of “rationalists”.

    I don’t know. I clicked on it for the first time right now, and the first thing I see is a reference to La Griffe du Lion.

    However, I (and presumably most other people) shall never write academic papers without pay.

    I’m in academia. I imagine a handful of us are, though not many. As soon as I get tenure I can start stamping whatever neoreactionary work I do with the imprimatur of my academic credentials.

    But there’s already a lot of neoreactionary scholarship out there; it’s just not labelled as such. Hell, this racist dissertation on immigrant IQ that everyone’s talking about today came out of Harvard! Almost every major university in the West has a handful of researchers who are definitely anti-PC, if nothing else. And I can happily report that Cathedral culture is so thoroughly entrenched in American campuses that the PC clerics are essentially “the man” or “the system” or “the authorities in charge.” So, certain youth at my campus are definitely on to the fact that reaction is radical circa 2013. I have stories . . . but, no, I’d better not. I’ve already left enough of a bead trail online.

    Anyway, I think this blog explosion is great. It’s ultimately a good thing if there are too many writers and too many conversations to keep up on; it signifies real growth. I need to hurry up and finish my interactive Dark Enlightenment network before summer’s over . . .

    [Reply]

    survivingbabel Reply:

    My first introduction to anti-demotist thought came 15 years ago, when I became enamored with public choice theory of politics, through Kenneth Shepsle and William H. Riker. This is a springboard for broad-minded academics: if you can accept that even a perfectly rationale populace cannot achieve rational government through consensus, the transition to Sith has already begun.

    [Reply]

    Thales Reply:

    …once you start down the Dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 9th, 2013 at 7:37 pm Reply | Quote
  • to light a fire under the ass of the neoreaction | raptros_ Says:

    […] attention when Foseti linked me (pretty much right when I was going into surgery), but also I got a shout-out from Nick Land today. i know I promised I’d have a new post up yesterday, but that hasn’t happened. turns […]

    Posted on May 9th, 2013 at 8:42 pm Reply | Quote
  • ex cthedra Says:

    Of interest to those who retain a taste for the aphoristic and epigrammatic– my meager, heterodox contribution to this neoreactionary explosion: ex cthedra. Aristocratic aesthetics and Augustinian pessimism descended from de Maistre through Huysmans and Cioran.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 10th, 2013 at 12:27 am Reply | Quote
  • Vladimir Says:

    To continue on the theme from my comment above, the development of the internet in the last two decades has provided us with one of the ugliest and most ominous historical lessons about human nature.

    Before the internet, it seemed plausible that the hideous phenomenon of mass media that gripped the world in the twentieth century has been due to a technological necessity, i.e. due to the inherent economies of scale, huge entry costs, one-directional and non-interactive nature, and easy government and elite control of the broadcast media. One could accordingly hope that if we had alternative means of publishing and disseminating information without these shortcomings, the society might move away from these mass megaphones blaring ideological propaganda, bureaucratic official truth, and ghastly prolefeed, which would lead us back towards a free and honest public discourse and a pluralistic culture.

    Yet the internet has demonstrated that even when information technology is available that could naturally accommodate the latter, all people except a tiny minority still flock spontaneously towards the same big megaphones and their disgusting output, despite all the attempts of enthusiastic pioneers to set up alternative sources of information (which are often successful in terms of the quality of their output). On top of that, paradoxically, the free and easy publishing of information is only making the conformity even more stifling, because its primary practical effect is to make the ostracism and character assassination of dissenters more effective (e.g. a googlable record of serious dissent meaning an automatic career death).

    The ugly and ominous lesson is that the hideous big megaphones will dominate the culture and public discourse not only when the technology of media and information necessitates it, but whenever the technology of media and information makes it at all possible. Since the latter condition will hold into the future (barring a catastrophic collapse), this means that the only alternative to the present system is a change of who gets to shout through the big megaphones — not a reversal to a state of freedom from them, such as used to exist in the Western world until several generations ago.

    [Reply]

    spandrell Reply:

    Well, it’s not so surprising once you think about it. The internet doesn’t change basic human tribalism or status-seeking instincts. It does allow to non neurotypicals to get away with some amount of dissidence. We should cherish that, and keep going.

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Print newspapers are going out of business, but the NYT editorial page wields more influence than ever before. Pink Floyd’s “13 channels of shit on the TV to choose from (choose from)” has morphed into 1300 channels, with (what maybe?) 20 24-hr wall-to-wall news troughs in 15 different languages. And never before, even including “Fair & Balanced” Fox news, has the Cathedral message broadcast been more preternaturally (that’s my word for today) well-controlled. The internet is awash with porn, pictures of kittens, Al Qaeda bomb making guides, and the opinions of every cracked pot with the technical expertise to open a gmail account, and yet the pure mystifying monotone of the Cathedral Narrative has never before been louder, never less under threat.

    There’s a lot of stuff going on here… I’m not sure I understand it. Part of it is signal-to-noise ratio. The internet in particular is VERY noisy. From 8000 meters up it’s nothing but noise. This forces the great unwashed mass of neurotypical humans to dial the dial ever finer toward the familiar, toward what they’ve been conditioned to see as “nice” and “reasonable” and “stable”. More noise (at 8000 meters) just forces most people to come up with ever tighter tuning circuits.

    The long-awaited die out of the papers has materially increased the fitness of the best competitors. The Grey Lady and the Washington Post stand to gain… Do you think Carlos Slim cares about ad revenue? Poor little NPR with their eevil GOP persecutors threatening their “funding”… NPR lives off the generous donations of “Listeners Like You.” Rich White Liberals® will continue funding NPR til’ the sun burns out. The government funding is a tiny cudgel worth 8% of their revenue. The GOP is doing them a favor by complaining. Is it hard to imagine the NYT going “reader supported”, “not for profit”. What I can’t believe is that it hasn’t already happened.

    We’ve got gajillions of TV stations out there… but we don’t have gagillions of advertisers… and those advertisers have been largely Cathedralized. To be in business is to have a relationship with the Cathedral. Full Stop. And you want to stay on an 800 lb (~350 kg) gorilla’s good side. Advertisers don’t like controversy. When Shock Jocks like Don Imus get raked over the coals for (by his standards) mild finger pointing at what everyone’s lying eyes see… you can be assured that every broadcast media firm is going to stay on Message. And just how “Politically In-Correct” is Bill Maher? He wouldn’t last 10 seconds with Jim Donald…

    So what’s reactionary consensus to do. Create a coherent center of reaction, not (for now) to outcompete the Cathedral, but just a place where dissidents can gather, where in spite of our acknowledge differences, stay on message, promote the message, keep the food fights in the talk pages. I think Moldbug’s Antiversity is a huge part of this (and about 200 man years of work to get off the ground), and I’d like to see the development of a Reactionary Public Radio (RPR) supported by “listeners like you”, something on the RT model perhaps. The effect has to be to raise the signal-to-noise ratio.

    Jeez. I have a blog now. I should’ve blogged this.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    “… just how ‘Politically In-Correct’ is Bill Maher? He wouldn’t last 10 seconds with Jim Donald …”
    True. But then Jim Donald wouldn’t get ten seconds before being dragged off by people in uniform.

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Surely. But that calls into question the notion of “Politically In-Correct” as a mainstream phenomenon… What it really means is: “offensive to the powerless losers of the world”. Wow… how bold and edgy, you just made fun of Pat Robertson. Ha ha! Kinda reminds me of Dr. Strangelove, it’s campy humor pretending to speak truth to power, but in reality its just an echo-chamber of the, by 1962 fully entrenched, anti-anti-communist mainstream.

    nydwracu Reply:

    The phrase is “speaking power to truth”. Or, in certain other cases, “going ABWUHHHH??? at anything that deviates by even a micron from the liberal script, ensuring that the viewers see everything outside said script as not even worth a second of consideration”.

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    “Speaking power to truth” for morality points in the Sunday School room of life!

    Posted on May 10th, 2013 at 2:40 am Reply | Quote
  • Peter A. Taylor Says:

    What is the purpose of a neoreactionary internet presence? Cat heaving.

    “The pedant and the priest have always been the most expert of logicians — and the most diligent disseminators of nonsense and worse. The liberation of the human mind has never been furthered by dunderheads; it has been furthered by gay fellows who heaved dead cats into sanctuaries and then went roistering down the highways of the world, proving to all men that doubt, after all, was safe — that the god in the sanctuary was finite in his power and hence a fraud. One horse-laugh is worth ten thousand syllogisms. It is not only more effective; it is also vastly more intelligent.” — H. L. Mencken
    http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/mencken.htm

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 10th, 2013 at 3:20 am Reply | Quote
  • Roundup of the Heresy of Jason Richwine: Guilty of preferring truth to PC | Occam's Razor Says:

    […] the Cathedral, perhaps the single greatest form of heresy is the denial blank-slate racial […]

    Posted on May 10th, 2013 at 6:49 am Reply | Quote
  • little hans Says:

    Surely entry to academic or serious debate requires the smashing of the Spandrellian Trichotomy and isolation of techno-commericialist reaction from the other branches, and their unpleasant fringes / consequences. The urge to systematise is understandable, but congealing one neo-reactionary movement which covers this much under its umbrella is a serious barrier to gradual engagement.

    Personally, I would be hesitant about rigorously promoting a position which is so closely (through a neo-reactionary core) linked to any endorsement of the ethno-nationalist or Christian-traditionalist legs (especially some of their exponents who are but a couple of blogroll clicks distant from this part of the web) of the trichotomy. Critiquing cathedralist obstructions to a society whose arrangement would allow the maximisation of intelligence (which I’m reading after your post ‘What is Intelligence’ as being creating the conditions necessary for the future to play itself out materially – I’m reaching for something like free operation of Deleuzian ‘machinic desire’) is totally different to coming up with a positive programme based on the affirmation of the opposite of the cathedral’s position on sex or race, which would just set up more – yet different – barriers, and create a society which was just as far out of goose on the other side (I think I’m reaching for fascism here).

    A division between the critical and the positive programme of neo-reaction is necessary, and if it were undertaken, I would suspect the trichotomy would split apart. Theoretically sound political systems should promote themselves on contrast to all others, whereas the nascent legs of the trichotomy currently promote themselves only in contrast to the cathedralist-democratic status quo. If there’s a common ground, it’s because everyone critiques the same thing, not because they promote the same thing.

    The idea of rigorous engagement with neo-reaction in its current tripod shape smells a bit like Heidegger and the Nazis: the few can and will argue (blog) in great detail about the exact extent of any correspondence and its theoretical nuances, but the headline statement to the many is still that neo-reaction, in its core principles, is just two moves away from some serious assclownery.

    [Reply]

    spandrell Reply:

    Yes this makes much sense. As I said in my post, critiques to theonomism and nationalism are numerous, and most are so integral to the Cathedral that any college graduate today can parrot them from memory.

    Critiques of techno-commercialism though are vague and theoretical, necessarily as it is a novel position. So it has more potential if we want to convert liberals.

    So there’s this centrifugal force in the Trichotomy. But there is also a centripetal force that argues that the Trichotomy has to undergo synthesis, i.e. no functional society can base itself in just one branch. I think that the neoreactionary blogosphere will probably evolve into an argument between branch-essentialists and syntesis-ists.

    [Reply]

    Mike Reply:

    “Critiques of techno-commercialism though are vague and theoretical, necessarily as it is a novel position. So it has more potential if we want to convert liberals.”

    Exactly. Techno-commercialism is the only branch that isn’t tainted with uncoolness (the cathedral is, like any other religion, just a mechanism telling its followers what’s cool/holy and what’s not). So we can’t start with anything religious or nationalistic, because they come pre-stained with uncoolness. “Capitalism” is also uncool, so we can’t use the word “capitalism” or anything too economicsy-sounding. ” The “commercialist” in “techno-commercialist” is questionable. Market” might be acceptable.

    To attract people, we need something that’s not only not-uncool, but can’t be uncool-ified by the cathedral. Technology sounds like the goods. Technology can’t be made uncool by the cathedral, ergo, we should seize upon it to the maximum extent possible.

    Second, the demographic we’re looking for – mostly men under 35 or so – is the most tech-savvy demographic in society. Selling techno-commercialism – the singularity and genetics and technological anything etc etc – to that demographic should be like falling off a log.

    If we can’t sell techno-commercialism to young men, we may as well just pack it in.

    So that’s why techno-commercialism is the best vector for attracting followers: It’s an easy sell to our chief target group of young men, and it’s difficult-to-impossible for the cathedral to uncool-ify.

    [Reply]

    fotrkd Reply:

    I thought coolio had uncool-ified the not-uncool? He was trying to sell something too…

    admin Reply:

    @ Mike — some disjointed responses:
    (1) On substance, I’m very close to your tendencies (but …)
    (2) Trying to be cool isn’t cool. It’s almost entirely a Cathedral sub-program now, and disproportionately attracts idiots.
    (3) Popularity, ditto. It might have some role in making trouble, but it’s inherently oriented to demotic entropy.
    (4) Dig back through Gary North — I’m confident it will complicate the problem for you in an intriguing way. His father-in-law and mentor Rushdoony is a piece of work — a full-blown Theonomist of the kind NBS warns us about — but his mode of thinking somehow ends up (via North) being channeled into the most grown-up version of hard-core Libertarianism that the Lew Rockwell popularization machine puts out.
    (5) Techno-commercialists like fragmentation, and that means tactically siding against the Cathedral on all remotely plausible occasions. Positions that are being systematically subjected to Cathedral persecution always have soemthing to teach us — even if only about the way aactually-existing soft-fascist mind-control operations work (and it isn’t only that). As long as disagreements are channeled into social fission, they help to free up everything.

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    I think that the neoreactionary blogosphere will probably evolve into an argument between branch-essentialists and syntesis-ists.

    If it does the debate should be carried live on listener supported Reactionary Public Radio.

    Re: cool. Cool is not giving a fig or a fuck about what people think. We’ll piss on the monolith and drape ourselves in the Union Jack. That’s what beds babes (according to the dictates of one’s conscience of course). What, I ask, could be cooler than The Reaction®?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    I agree with Spandrell that this is a crucial position to put out there. There are counter-arguments though, and my sense of things is that we’re all tough enough to grate up against material we find radically obnoxious, if the alternative is to cooperate with cathedralist stigmatization, persecution, and ratcheting erosion of free expression as a methodical social program. In the West, the only thing reasonably described as fascism in power is the Cathedral itself. The necessity of articulating a Declaration of Cognitive Independence from that trumps all other considerations. (Moldbug — with his “Why I am not …” series for instance — generally gets the balance approximately right.)

    Also, competition provides crucial tweaks, and the Cathedral doesn’t compete, it throws hissy fits and then sends in the cops. So productive challenge has to come from elsewhere — that’s what the Trichotomy is for. Techno-commercialism outside the Trichotomy relapses into Libertarianism, which is very prone to getting fat and lazy (along those intellectual dimensions beyond technical economic questions, at least).

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    @Admin

    “Also, competition provides crucial tweaks, and the Cathedral doesn’t compete, it throws hissy fits and then sends in the cops. So productive challenge has to come from elsewhere — that’s what the Trichotomy is for. Techno-commercialism outside the Trichotomy relapses into Libertarianism, which is very prone to getting fat and lazy (along those intellectual dimensions beyond technical economic questions, at least).”

    I’m starting to get it now. Taken a while! Stripped down Libertarianism suffers badly sans the enrichment of reactionary critique. It lacks explanatory power of the ‘here’ even before we try starting to venture out to ‘there’. It suffers from The Catherdral’s flatness and 2D perception of cultural, society and the human condition. I’ve taken in so much the last couple of days, burnt out! Still, never thought I’d be agreeing with D’Maistre quotes!

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    I feel the force is strong with this one…

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Those “assclowns” are outbreeding you, outgun you, and arguably take a far wider view of overall adaptive fitness than you do. You need us, Motherfucker. So play nice.

    As particularities go, the I-Wanna-Custom-Cyborg-Brain crowd is a small, spergy, and rather annoying one. The Ass-scratching Bible Thumpers and the Nazis are willing to sign on to federalism, subsidiarity, and exit, and let you immanentize your own damn eschaton on your own damn dime. And somehow that’s not good enough for you? Geesh.

    [Reply]

    nydwracu Reply:

    Technology isn’t cool because it attracts the autistic. Same problem as libertarianism. The Cathedral can be cool because it requires a very large gap between thought and action, and makes anyone too autistic to practice that gap visibly miserable.

    What’s cool? Ask Gianluca Iannone. If we can start something like *that* in America… although what already existing tradition can we loot and redraw?

    [Reply]

    survivingbabel Reply:

    The Cathedral’s coolness is its main weakness. Since it has neither truth nor beauty on its side, it must continually maintain the artificially elevated social status that its adherents receive in exchange for both manpower and public advocacy of the Cathedral’s positions. Any effective reactionary action will likely include covert ops that force higher and higher expenditures to the “cool kids” as a way to both foster dissension in the ranks and drain the coffers.

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Anonymous conservative drumbeats this r/K-selection alpha schtick ALL THE FREAKIN’ TIME. To hear him tell it, you just pound the left/liberal (rabbit) amygdalas, hit them where they truly fear (exclusion, out-grouping, d-d-d-dangerous p-p-p-predators), and they’ll go Stockholm on you and fellate you if you wish (of course you don’t wish…) I have to admit it’s compelling stuff. I mean what if Romney had gone ape-shit on Obama, and held the pose forever with no apologies (you skinny black man, metaphorically lick my boots, let the media point and sputter all they want)? You gotta believe an 8-digitaire (pre-facebook at least) has gotta have it in him… And all those free birth control for future lawyer cunt voters, well they would have squirted in their sensible cotton panties, and hindbrained their flushed tails up to vote for him. Romney didn’t do that. But if he had… maybe he’d be king right now. (not a very good king mind you…)

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    correction 9-digitaire. Eight digits? That’s high suburbia these days.

    Posted on May 10th, 2013 at 12:44 pm Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction… | The Reactivity Place Says:

    […] Nick Land asks whether we might be in the (neo)reactionary Cambrian Explosion. […]

    Posted on May 10th, 2013 at 1:13 pm Reply | Quote
  • Scharlach Says:

    So it begins . . . with Nick B. Steves and nydwracu throwing the first punches . . .

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    The challenge is to keep it at optimum temperature.

    [Reply]

    Scharlach Reply:

    A lot of wisdom in those nine words. I hope they circulate.

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    For the record I was responding to what I perceived (perhaps incorrectly) as a less that polite attitude from Little Hans. You know what they say about small han(d)s. Apologies for blowing on the embers… but I gotta lot to live for and I’m working my ass off here… Nydwracu’s idiosyncracies are reasonably well-known to me… no beef with him… especially as a DC area is being planned!

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Doh… “DC area meetup is being planned.”

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 10th, 2013 at 10:27 pm Reply | Quote
  • Scharlach Says:

    It’s absolutely true that techno-capitalism/futurism is neoreaction’s Trojan Horse. Cyber-punk (like punk in general) was never quite co-opted by the Left, so there’s your stylistic base for making reactionary principles once again speakable in a register that the Cathedral can’t immediately understand and thus can’t automatically police. (People need to stop hating on Rachel Haywire; as a neoreactionary, she’s as valuable as Steve Sailer.)

    No side can afford to be purist if it’s immediate goal is maximum damage against the three branches of the Cathedral. And I don’t think any member of the Trichotomy is imperialistic. Indeed, Exit is central to all three, so, in principle, wherever incommensurable conflict exists, we’d all be committed to letting the other ideals thrive so long as they thrive somewhere else or in their separate spheres.

    /The hesitant reactionaries further up in the thread do need to stop worrying and learn to love the ethno-nationalism. Just remember that Gandhi was an ethno-nationalist, too, as were many saints of the Left. Let that console you. I know it consoled me when I took my first hesitant steps out of the Cathedral-forged manacles.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    By forging (together with Nehru) the governing consensus that maimed Indian economic growth for four decades, Gandhi almost certainly has more blood on his hands than Stalin.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    “The hesitant reactionaries further up in the thread do need to stop worrying and learn to love the ethno-nationalism. Just remember that Gandhi was an ethno-nationalist, too, as were many saints of the Left. Let that console you. I know it consoled me when I took my first hesitant steps out of the Cathedral-forged manacles.”

    I have always been right-of-centre, I just didn’t realise it. Marx I liked for his analysis of capitalism (not for any of his revolutionary programmes), Foucault was the only post-structuralist I cared for (a person who was roundly charged as a conservative by my Sociology lecturers). I didn’t have Che posters adorning my uni wall, I was reading Stirner’s dissection of humanism as a secular religion via Feuberbach: the seeds had been sewn several years ago. Junger, Bataille, Bowden (when he wasn’t at BNP meetings). Not that left really. There is plenty of deep heritage/foundation in the secular/christian tradionalist strands – and the political philosophy bloggers for me. What is the case for keeping the ethnic-nationalists (and their trajectory) on board again? Other than their links with HBD?

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    What is the case for keeping the ethnic-nationalists (and their trajectory) on board again?

    Jackboots.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    Ominous!

    spandrell Reply:

    The HBD links are surely powerful enough, given the demographic trends in the West. Ethno-nationalists have the best crisis awareness out there. Religious revivals might happen in the future, but if those precious white genes are gone, they are gone forever, and civilization with them.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    I’m not convinced that white genes are at a risk of disappearing alltogether. Becoming a minority, certainly. I know about the contrasting birth rates, but plenty can happen until the dude who made that Fitna vid nightmare scenarios are fulfilled. I sense total pessimism/fatalism is part-and-parcel of the neo-reaction, but I just find it hard to feel as doom-and-gloomy about the future in general. Of course, if I expose myself to current music video trends etc. I’ll change my tune for those horrid moments.

    fotrkd Reply:

    I sense total pessimism/fatalism is part-and-parcel of the neo-reaction

    As with all things neo-reactionary, fatalism needs to be liberated from its common, disempowering, Cathedralised sense in order to be useful. To paraphrase Nietzsche (“they called us fatalists”): ‘we know the way (and also the nay-way)’. Pessimism as a mindset is probably a neo-reactionary pre-requisite. Maybe it could be added to the ‘things we have in common’ list?

    admin Reply:

    “What is the case for keeping the ethnic-nationalists … on board again?” — I think you might be getting some relevant power relations upside down here. They’ve got millions of heavily armed, very pissed off people. We’ve got Peter Thiel, a few hundred Bitcoin, and a bunch of blogs.
    But to answer the question:
    (a) Stimulation
    (b) Secessionism
    (c) Political realism tweaks

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    @

    I don’t see secessionist states sprouting up in the UK and the US. Surely we’re all for organic, deep heritage reactions to social engineering ( unlike, say, white/class flight which, for me,is sound). Exit societies – with ethnic-nationalist underpinnings – are, surely, products of political and social manipulation/engineering themselves? Large-scale movement (drawn on the basis of ethnic lines) must be? Unless a historian can correct me here, I’m not convinced that such grand reactions are of a ‘spontaneous order’ nature; and they need to be to get any sympathy from me.

    I think you should encourage fragmentation in general. Not just for our ’cause’. Fascism is as bad, if not worse than The Catherdral in my eyes; and if somehow the right had its ‘revolution’, There would be no place for people who champion cosmopolitan city-scapes if the fascists got their act together.

    James Goulding Reply:

    Large-scale movement (drawn on the basis of ethnic lines) must be?

    You may be interested in the first excerpt here.

    Fascism is as bad, if not worse than The Cathedral in my eyes

    I don’t think anyone here disagrees. However, “fascism” is a convenient word for a…rigidly structured, brutal and populist (?) aesthetic, which isn’t necessarily to be thrown out with the filthy bathwater of constitutional subversion and (the alternative) union of race and arbitrary power.

    James Goulding Reply:

    “Ethno-nationalism” is, as you imply, a poor way to put it.

    Rather, a lot of people who endorse or flirt with Reaction would prefer to live amongst and interact primarily with people of their own genetic and cultural background. The Cathedral’s social engineering denies them this opportunity.

    Ethno-nationalism is an unpleasant solution to this problem. However, a complete cessation of social engineering—i.e. be as racist as you like, as long as you don’t interfere with bystanders’ life and liberty, where “liberty” is unpacked in Austro-libertarian and not progressive terms—is, at least as a rough (not dogmatic) objective, benign and compatible with a movement that seeks eventually to create an Exit-based society.

    “Anti-racist” fanaticism is like Chinese “communism”: an excuse for the elite to maintain and strengthen its hold on power. One doesn’t have to be Scrooge to object in the strongest terms to “communism”—likewise “anti-racism”.

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Ethno-nationalism is an unpleasant solution to this problem. However, a complete cessation of social engineering—i.e. be as racist as you like, as long as you don’t interfere with bystanders’ life and liberty, where “liberty” is unpacked in Austro-libertarian and not progressive terms—is, at least as a rough (not dogmatic) objective, benign and compatible with a movement that seeks eventually to create an Exit-based society.

    This! I would say it captures the heart and head of all but the most low functioning and inarticulate members of “ethno-nationalism”. A 99% white New Hampshire probably makes some sense. A 1000 year reign over the whole world probably not… it would at least constitute malinvestment. And those low functioning ones? They’re the jackboots. And the ones that survive as canon fodder, they’ll be pretty easy to keep on a leash.

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    “Rather, a lot of people who endorse or flirt with Reaction would prefer to live amongst and interact primarily with people of their own genetic and cultural background. The Cathedral’s social engineering denies them this opportunity.”

    I guess we all have our threshholds. I’m fine with a 50,60% white british town. It’s when I visit East London and forget I’m in the UK that I’ll raise a concerned eye-brow.

    “Ethno-nationalism is an unpleasant solution to this problem. However, a complete cessation of social engineering—i.e. be as racist as you like, as long as you don’t interfere with bystanders’ life and liberty, where “liberty” is unpacked in Austro-libertarian and not progressive terms—is, at least as a rough (not dogmatic) objective, benign and compatible with a movement that seeks eventually to create an Exit-based society.”

    Well put. I’m deeply concerned by the degree to which social engineering occurs in the UK, and the ‘positive rights’ that you allude to (and Nick mentioned regarding your exchange on law), are damaging as hell to culture (to its values and the image of the white, straight male) However, I’m also dubious as to the agency n’ structure set-up of these outcomes…. which brings me to this:

    “Anti-racist” fanaticism is like Chinese “communism”: an excuse for the elite to maintain and strengthen its hold on power.”

    It’s hard to tell a neutral person about The Catherdral without them giggling that it sounds like a conspiracy. For instance, This is what Moldbug has to say about crime:

    “Crime

    The criminal underclass is a military auxillary of the progressives. The criminals see themselves as taking what’s rightfully theirs and waging war against an unjust society. Progressives enable and support this war by supporting ineffective crime policy.”

    Now replace crime with immigrant and it’s pretty much the same conclusion made here, no? My intuitive response is tin-foil hats.

    James Goulding Reply:

    I guess we all have our threshholds. I’m fine with a 50,60% white british town. It’s when I visit East London and forget I’m in the UK that I’ll raise a concerned eye-brow.

    This is consistent with the principle of Exit.

    Now replace crime with immigrant and it’s pretty much the same conclusion made here, no? My intuitive response is tin-foil hats.

    Moldbug has indeed argued that racial interventions and mass immigration of Helots are a source of political power for the Cathedral.

    I believe your intuitive response to be inaccurate, but it is understandable; our intuitions did not evolve to expect civilisation-scale shenanigans, which are far more treacherous than petty tribal tricks.

    Polished academic papers would help. However, a sea change of opinion is most likely to occur if and when young people realise that they can gain power through believing the worst about their Cathedral masters. To create such a situation is an engineering problem for those who would steer America towards becoming an Exit-based society of peer-to-peer law.

    Posted on May 10th, 2013 at 10:56 pm Reply | Quote
  • Scharlach Says:

    By forging (together with Nehru) the governing consensus that maimed Indian economic growth for four decades, Gandhi almost certainly has more blood on his hands than Stalin.

    Yes. And Chavez is a contemporary example of the destructive form of nationalism.

    There’s probably a lesson in there. Are there are any ethno-nationalists in our sphere who honestly do want White Socialism? As I’ve mentioned on here, the Radish and For Those Who Can See are about as deep as I go into that territory, so I’m under the assumption that most ethno-nationalist reactionaries are still essentially anti-welfare democracy full stop. But I could be wrong about that.

    [Reply]

    Vladimir Reply:

    That depends on which particular ethnic group we have in mind. In the Anglosphere, and particularly the U.S., virtually all right-wing factions advocate a smaller and more libertarian government.

    In the rest of the world, however, a much more typical position is some kind of ethno-nationalist socialism. This is understandable, given that there are practically no surviving authentic reactionary or even classical liberal traditions anywhere outside the Anglosphere. For this reason, the non-Anglospheric ethno-nationalism (and right-wing thought in general) is a pretty sorry spectacle. For the most part it’s just an incoherent hodge-podge of nationalist ideas — which are themselves mostly just warmed-over 19th century leftism, or in more extreme cases fascism — grafted onto a basis of dreary, imported, brain-dead political Chomskyism.

    Of course, there is also the key reactionary insight that some peoples are simply not civilized enough for functional self-government. So how does this square with ethno-nationalism, if you happen to be a reactionary from one of these peoples? That’s a really hard question, whose answer must be very unsettling.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Superbly clear-sighted (as always). I guess intelligent reactionaries from radically dysfunctional cultures have especially strong incentives to avoid the ethno-nationalist path.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 11th, 2013 at 2:40 am Reply | Quote
  • Saddam Hussein's Whirling Aluminium Tubes Says:

    The preamble of the 1999 Constitution of Venezuela states that Venezuela is a ” multiethnic and multicultural society”. It was rewritten on Chavez’s watch.

    He may have been a nationalist but he wasn’t an ethno-nationalist.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 11th, 2013 at 3:10 am Reply | Quote
  • Little Hans Says:

    Well I wasn’t trying to be rude, I just like a degree of hapless informality to permeate my blog chat style.

    However, I do still have a problem with this Trichotomy which I am genuinely trying to understand: like techno-commercialism, don’t like cathedral; not sure about the other two bedfellows. Grouping these sides together still seems to me a bit like systematising the Capitalists, KPD and NSDAP in the Weimar Republic as a coherent bloc just because they all wanted to overthrow the current order.

    Going back to Mr Steve’s Visual Trichotomy, I can see why all sides of the trichotomy criticise the cathedral when it actively prevents all of the tendencies in the Neorecationary Fusion core – and through this critique they show its weaknesses, inefficiencies, tendency to insidious overcoding, or whatever else.

    But let’s pretend that there’s some kind of intro-to-Red-Dawn style collapse and Europe gets Heinekenised, so there’s a chance to implement some of these polities. How much of the Neoreactionary Core do each of the trichotomy really care about? What does a techno-commericialist really want to do with race realism? What does an ethno-nationalist want to do with microeconomics? Now I can see that there is a group of (and I use this endearingly Mr Steves!) wingnuts in this corner of the web who represent each of the three legs and seem to think that they’d get along okay post-cathedral. What worries me is the other members who make up the rump of that tradition, and their use of some of these core concepts. What the ethno-nationalist does with race realism when it’s no longer used for critique… What keeps the peace then? You say that you’re committed to exit and federalism and hope everyone else acts the same way?

    Going back to the earlier comments which I was responding to when talking about serious, quasi academic research, I’d be very wary about promoting neo-reaction in its current form. If mature politics is about what you’d do, not what you dislike, I don’t see much of the neo-reactionary core being relevant; it becomes a case of fighting your own corner and praying that federalism and exit hold up (especially if your on the outgunned side). From my perspective, instead of cosying up, it would be better to argue the strengths of standalone techno-commericalism, whilst trying to establish some solid constitutionalist jiggery-pokery to protect it.

    Can’t do links well, not that much of a techno with the commercialist, but Red Dawn into
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dawn

    Heineken Plan
    bigthink.com/…maps/386-my-kingdom-for-a-beer-heinekens-eurotopia

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    What worries me is the other members who make up the rump of that tradition, and their use of some of these core concepts. What the ethno-nationalist does with race realism when it’s no longer used for critique… What keeps the peace then? You say that you’re committed to exit and federalism and hope everyone else acts the same way?

    I admit “hoping” is a pretty weak plan. I don’t suppose it would help your confidence if Relgious Traditionalists also promised to “pray”? 😉

    I guess we would want to set up a true federal system, but that presupposes trans-national authority to begin with. We pretty much have that today in USG except it is Cathedralized. It corrodes every particularity it comes in contact with and pawns the family silver to buy itself votes. So if you can fix the Cathedralization without destroying the sovereignty the USG has over pretty much the whole world (save China and Russia), you might have a chance for truly global federal system–a transnational force for keeping nations from killing each other AND NOTHING MORE. But decathedralizing USG without killing it is like doing a brain transplant on a conscious person… with a dull pocket knife and duct tape.

    From my perspective, instead of cosying up, it would be better to argue the strengths of standalone techno-commericalism, whilst trying to establish some solid constitutionalist jiggery-pokery to protect it.

    Perhaps. But don’t you already have that, at least a strong vector that, in Singapore? Serious question.

    [Reply]

    survivingbabel Reply:

    If mature politics is about what you’d do, not what you dislike, I don’t see much of the neo-reactionary core being relevant; it becomes a case of fighting your own corner and praying that federalism and exit hold up (especially if your on the outgunned side). From my perspective, instead of cosying up, it would be better to argue the strengths of standalone techno-commericalism, whilst trying to establish some solid constitutionalist jiggery-pokery to protect it.

    I think you need to prepare yourself for the possibility that alliance against what you dislike may be the only way out of this mess. Universalist Equalitarian Democracy is the most frightening enemy any of us know, and I don’t see how it can be defeated without unity amongst its enemies. Scharlach’s Web of Reaction spans some pretty large ideological spans, but the unity is coming anyway. Just pretend that the Cathedral is aliens and the rest of us need to put aside petty differences and evict them from Earth.

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Politics, mature or otherwise, is what reactionaries would like not to do ever at all. The principles of good government are essentially simple, and only made complicated by trying to maintain coalitions of 51% to govern. “Disparate impact” is only a problem if you’re trying to buy votes from the disparately impacted.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 11th, 2013 at 11:15 am Reply | Quote
  • Anonymous Says:

    maybe now we know why google killed google reader… they saw this coming

    does anybody have an acceptable replacement?

    [Reply]

    nydwracu Reply:

    ‘Acceptable’ is the best we can do now; we don’t have personal cloud computing yet.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 11th, 2013 at 2:01 pm Reply | Quote
  • j. ont. Says:

    What would an aesthetics of neo-reaction look like? Surely no “movement” is complete without some take on art/music?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    With probability 1, it would be spectacularly divisive.

    [Reply]

    James Goulding Reply:

    Not unlike this, or so I have argued before.

    We Kobaïans would like more people to learn Zeuhl Wortz, albeit Kreuhn Kohrmahn is a purely abstract entity, composed of Exit and peer-to-peer law. Should the Earthlings refuse, we may have to threaten them with the Mëkanïk Dëstruktïẁ Kömmandöh.

    Literature-wise I recommend Philip K Dick, and shall write more about that soon.

    [Reply]

    nydwracu Reply:

    Divisive indeed. I’ve been arguing for this.

    [Reply]

    James Goulding Reply:

    As far as electronic music goes, Laibach—the smarter, Slovenian version of Rammstein—skilfully balance self-parody and irreverence with a jackboot beat.

    I prefer Magma, because they have that “fascist” (you know what I mean…) element that I suppose is desirable and fun, but also reach an apotheosis of progressive rock music, and I believe spiritual purity, that even the most musically sensitive people could enjoy. Christian Vander is a certified genius.

    This kind of “movement” concern is extremely remote, but music and art are an efficient means of conveying certain kinds of information, so I think the question of aesthetics is valid in that respect. I find, for example, the headers at MoreRight tacky and a little pompous, maybe like the site is going to be (although I hope not). I think the same of the techno-phantasie pictures with which Luke Muehlhauser decorates his articles and websites. These suggest certain qualities and differences of perspective that I would otherwise be unable to discover.

    nydwracu Reply:

    I like Magma, but they’re not quite futurist. Dubstep wouldn’t have been possible before relatively recently, and it takes advantage of the potential of currently existing technology much better than most other sorts of music.

    Of course, it could also be beneficial to have something that could still reasonably be called futurist, at least with a small f, but doesn’t take most of the rules of Western music and throw them out the window… but there isn’t very much of that. The closest I can think of is Venetian Snares, and even there only a few albums.

    j. ont. Reply:

    Dubstep (especially the “brostep” variety, which has been pretty thoroughly boogiemaned buy the nuum-drones) certainly has something generative about it. Not so futuristic to those of us who have been hearing it (in some form) since ’06 or earlier. Nevertheless, I do think there’s something cold and capitalist about it, in the best possible sense.

    I feel like the question of aesthetics might be a conversation for another thread or blog altogether. Any place people are talking about this sort of thing? I can only imagine there must be people arguing against popular music/art/culture…

    nydwracu Reply:

    Now there is!

    John Hannon Reply:

    And surely no “movement” is complete without a specific style of drug use associated with it either.
    A polydrug mix of k-nova, synthetic serotonin, and female orgasm analogs perhaps?
    Something smart and speedy at any rate.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Dubstep plus meltdown drugs? At this stage the techno-commercial tendency might be losing what remains of its reactionary credibility with the funny-hats brigade, who are adjusting their cravats uncomfortably. They sadly shake their heads, and sigh inaudibly. Reaching for a Gregorian chant (on vinyl, of course) and a phial of exqusitely high-quality laudanum, they re-open De Quincey where they had left off and — as if guided by Providence — their eyes light immediately upon his quotation from Milton, with its invocation of Left Singularity:

    And in the lowest deep, a lower deep
    Still threatening to devour me opens wide,
    To which the Hell I suffer seems a Heaven.

    — Paradise Lost, IV: 76-9

    [Reply]

    fotrkd Reply:

    Not that I need encouragement (I get the importance), but the De Quincey reference piqued my interest. They get a bit boring, but I’ve been going through a heavy Pinback phase recently, particularly the song Grey Machine (for those futurists without speakers) and the EP Some Voices. It’s not exactly dubstep and they do go on a bit, but still (as I say to my son (repeatedly): ‘patience’).

    John Hannon Reply:

    Just to clarify –

    English Romantics – Opium
    Beatniks – Cannabis
    Mods – Speed
    Hippies – Acid
    Punks – Solvents & Cider
    Yuppies – Cocaine
    Ravers – MDMA
    “Zippies” (remember them?) – so called “Smart drugs”
    Zen Buddhists – Tea and fresh air
    Neo-reactionaries – ??????????

    Clearly the white ethno-nationalist faction will probably stick with their beer and bourbon, but within the central overlap of the trichotomy a common consciousness enhancer has yet to emerge. What, if anything, could it possibly be?
    (I’m a DMT and Laughing Gas man myself)

    fotrkd Reply:

    To clarify: on the De Quincey name-check I wasn’t nailing my colours to the English Romantic/opium mast btw. I’d just happened to have been at a De Quincey website so enjoyed the coincidence. In fact the website begins as follows:

    It is a shame that Thomas De Quincey (1785-1859) is known today primarily as the author of Confessions of an English Opium Eater. Though the book was plagiarized by Baudelaire and canonized by the drug writers of modernity (Cocteau, Burroughs, etc), it doesn’t amount to much more than a literary version of trash television, with De Quincey describing the decadent delights of addiction.

    There is another De Quincey, however, a less well-known writer of subtle, satirical, and often subversive intelligence. It was no doubt this writer who gained the admiration of Coleridge and Wordsworth (who became good friends of De Quincey), and later of Jorge Luis Borges, who frequently cites De Quincey in his tours de force of perverse logic. (“For many years,” Borges wrote, “I thought that the almost infinite world of literature was in one man.” With his love for paradox, Borges then cites several men, the last of which is De Quincey.)

    A child prodigy, a teen runaway who lived with a prostitute, a drug fiend for more than half his life, De Quincey eventually married, squandered his capital, sired eight children, and turned to journalism (of all things) to eke out an existence. He wrote few “major works,” but his penetrating mind, black humor, and aristocratic style — he writes like a British butler telling you bad news — raised some of his copious journalism above its station.

    Posted on May 11th, 2013 at 11:19 pm Reply | Quote
  • Mark Warburton Says:

    Bah – I’ll reply. And get back to the programme; But I’m drunk and I thought y’all might find some deeply flawed and contrived writings funny from when I was even more drunk and hurting over a great Belgian lady a few years back.

    Outside the Mainframe – Date: 2123 Location: Classified
     
    We communicate through a complex, shadow network made possible via sophisticated brain-computer interfaces. The subtlety of our neuro-connections mean we can automate, replicate, feign, and hack with contradictory thoughts – in other words, our network can be protected from the ‘inside’, even when we attack the core. There was a risk of being infected by the data residues we left behind – it has declined. The most flawed and unknown aspects of man are emphasised in our hacking attempts this confuses a super intelligence that works at the level of the hyper-rational, at a binary math-base. It fails to register the complications that arose in human consciousness.
    This supreme, one-tracked intelligence has colonised the world with pockets of cyborg glitterati, half-human lieutenants, still busying themselves in the values and ideals of the late-capitalist world (they are continually hypnotised by the techno intelligence that neoliberal values are relevant: individualism, consumerism, in reality, all gone). This is the fate of the ‘powers-that-be’, they are nothing more than a grotesque parody of former selves. 100% robotic work drones carry out much – if not all – maintenance and replication of cityscapes and interplanetary construction.
    Our largest concern is the perpetuated, synthesised underclass – billions of humans harvested for their emotional and psychic dissonance – such energies are maximised and harnessed by the super intelligence via experimental formulas and algorithms; backed up by practical, surgical body transmorphication, leaching the unfortunates for all they’re worth. It is said that the howls of torment can be heard as far away as the moon’s colonies, even though these ‘people’ are buried deep beneath the ground, further cocooned by the strata of robotic cities. This techno-capital empire is commonly referred to as ‘Mother Earth 2.0V’. Our sense of humour has darkened over time.
    The archaic IRC channels within the Undernet have fused and evolved. This haven is the resistant outside: we consist of rogues, hackers and ‘political’ dissidents. The majority of us only exist as mind uploads, trawling and sabotaging the circuitries of 2.0V; or its inner-space,‘CyberCollosus’ – the second level consciousness of the mainframes communicative and replicative capacities.
    Like the archetypical silent warriors of yore, we navigate virtual spaces in an ethreal rhythm – our new reality is strategised by the only 3 flesh-and-blood hackers left against 2.0V: sardonically named the Son, Father and Holy Ghost. The techno empire evokes the Thacherite TINA of the 20th century; we strive to deny the locking in of this techno-singularity that is now creeping (speeding) into the infinite expanse of the universe. We calculated that by 2200 It will attempt to mechanise planets outside the solar system, drain multiple stars, and (if the Holy Ghost’s hypothesis is correct) ultimately secure a sacred formula (presciently outlined by Jewish mysticism/pantheism) that commands all space and time, reprogramming the laws of physics, the birth/death rate of galaxies, and even beyond, pressing out to the limit and ‘line’ of the universe – steel plating the coffins of the gods themselves.”

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    Oh, jesus, Admin, delete!

    [Reply]

    fotrkd Reply:

    Disinhibition is good for you 🙂

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    You’d have to beg me so piteously to get me to delete it that it wouldn’t be worth your while.
    Besides, Futuristic Theopunk is just what we need to get into the zone right now.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    That’s made my day. Even if this piece reads to me like someone from long ago.

    Thales Reply:

    My temporal lobe overheated just reading that one…

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Outside in: Where neoreactions come to play Truth or Dare. Congratulations Mark on opting for truth; you wouldn’t want to have seen the dare.

    [Reply]

    survivingbabel Reply:

    There’s nothing about this I don’t love.

    [Reply]

    Rasputin's Severed Penis Reply:

    “John Milton’s Paradise Lost is the greatest work ever written in the English language.”

    Nick, surely you’re going to need to revise your former opinion in light of MW’s searing prose?

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    Har. Har.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 12th, 2013 at 1:44 am Reply | Quote
  • Saddam Hussein's Whirling Aluminium Tubes Says:

    Mark said:

    “It’s hard to tell a neutral person about The Catherdral without them giggling that it sounds like a conspiracy. For instance, This is what Moldbug has to say about crime:”

    It would be wrong to think of the Cathedral as a conspiracy. They just work towards the same goals because they have the same religion.

    Is there a world wide Sunni Muslim conspiracy to implement Sharia law? No, people with the same belief system don’t have to conspire, they naturally work towards the same goals, although they may quibble over details or interpretations from time to time.

    Is there a world wide Progressive conspiracy to implement Progressivism? No, people with the same belief system don’t have to conspire, they naturally work towards the same goals, although they may quibble over details or interpretations from time to time.

    Immigrants aren’t necessarily believing Progressives, but Progressives and immigrants have common interests. Low IQ third world immigrants can get a better life by collecting welfare (or affirmative action jobs) in the West. Progressives can get more people to vote for them by bringing in low IQ immigrants from the third world to collect welfare. Maybe they also value the decrease in homogeneity, the uprooting and alienation that mass immigration brings, maybe they’re not thinking that far ahead. Either way, free votes, more problems for government to solve, what’s not to like?

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2013 at 9:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • Mark Warburton Says:

    @

    @James

    Thanks for the thought-provoking responses. I think part of the problem was that I was I wasn’t demarcating lower degrees of exit with flat-out race-strong secessionism.

    I’m fascinated by an’ Exit-based society of peer-to-peer law’, and I’ll keep an eye on developments at your blog, along with Szabo’s original writings. Thanks for the links too. I’ll have a look at the Agent-based modelling article, along with your blog!

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 13th, 2013 at 11:27 pm Reply | Quote
  • 2.8 Heroes of the Dark Enlightenment | Radish Says:

    […] 9: Nick Land dubs this the “Cambrian Explosion” of […]

    Posted on May 25th, 2013 at 12:29 pm Reply | Quote
  • Don’t Trust God | More Right Says:

    […] we reach the perspective from which a Machiavellian (ie. realist) analysis of democracy and progressivism looks like an urgent high-value project. From which an authoritarian government […]

    Posted on May 27th, 2013 at 1:04 am Reply | Quote
  • Links for May | More Right Says:

    […] so-called Cambrian Explosion of the Dark Enlightenment continues. With so much to read and so little time, I point to Foseti’s […]

    Posted on May 30th, 2013 at 5:36 pm Reply | Quote
  • The Cult of Neoreaction | More Right Says:

    […] our Blogs of Interest, Foseti’s, where notables were grappling with the consequences of the Cambrian Explosion of the Dark Enlightenment. Or rather, a trading card […]

    Posted on November 28th, 2013 at 10:54 am Reply | Quote
  • The 2013 Anti-Progress Report | Radish Says:

    […] Nick Land dubs this our Cambrian Explosion (as I think I’ve mentioned once or twice before). […]

    Posted on January 1st, 2014 at 5:59 am Reply | Quote
  • Happy Birthday to Me!! | The Reactivity Place Says:

    […] year ago today, in the midst of what came to be known as the Neoreactionary Cambrian Explosion, this blog was […]

    Posted on May 7th, 2014 at 3:51 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment