Chaos Patch (#19)

The weekly free-for-all opens for business.

Amerika has posted an interview with an ‘Internet troll’ that’s well worth a look. Only a year ago, my sense of a ‘troll’ was of an abusive ‘drive-by’ commenter, putting up remarks of no cognitive value, designed entirely to annoy. By early this year, after the most hilarious hoax in history had been executed, my understanding of the word had definitely evolved (swearing solemn oaths on a copy of The Origin of Species does that). I’m now inclined to interpret ‘trolling’ as a subtle art, in the spirit of Swift’s A modest Proposal (a work referenced in the Amerika interview). I’ve not been subjected to a moronic drive-by for months, so the fact I no longer have a convenient name for it doesn’t matter a huge amount. Is ‘goblin’ available?

The Unz Review goes from strength to strength, and now hosts Peter Frost. That’s an opportunity to recall a remark by fellow Unzer Razib Khan, which I would expect to be endorsed by other writers there: “… when Neoreactionaries using [sic] terms like the Cathedral they’re closing off the conversation to outsiders, and creating a group with initiate-like dynamics.” That strikes me as a feature rather than a bug, which suggests that distinct evaluations of ‘public conversation’ are the real topic here. (The Public Sphere is an intellectual-liberty death zone.) While in Unz-territory, this post by Steve Sailer is also notable.

Why Israel will die. Additional racial provocation for the week on Israeli Naziporn, Asian rage, and Weissrein TV.

The crazy productivity levels at TNIO and Anarchopapist are disintegrating my brain.

Some global collapse stuff. (+)

Dampier on digital intrusion.

Cthulhucoin? (It’s hard to quite know.)

July 20, 2014admin 59 Comments »


59 Responses to this entry

  • Was Enlightened Says:

    The comments on that Sailer article are amazing (especially considering it’s the internet):

    “Like other religions, [anti-racists] state the conclusions and then work backwards. You voted for George Wallace? Racist. You voted for Obama? Also racist! It’s like the dual nature of Christ.”

    “I’m genuinely surprised these days when the term “racist” turns out to be a neutral, accurate description — it’s like finding out that a guy everyone calls a “motherfucker” is literally having sex with his mother.”


    Izak Reply:

    Racism is all-pervading and cosmic. It’s almost like a sixth element, the most subtle element of all. Earth, water, air, fire, aether, racism.


    E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Reply:

    Or is it, Hydrogen, Stupidity and Racism?


    Posted on July 20th, 2014 at 4:20 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chaos Patch (#19) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on July 20th, 2014 at 6:03 pm Reply | Quote
  • VXXC Says:


    Wow. I’m exhausted from Twitter this AM or I’d be agglutinating/hyphenating/-fxxing that mad rednexx style.

    UnzbuchKamfer ?

    You dirty Unzer….

    Weak. I’m tired.


    Posted on July 20th, 2014 at 6:34 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    All idiots are trolls but not all trolls are idiots.

    Let me precisely delineate idiot. First, hate the sin, not the sinner. Arguments are dumb, not people. However, some people emit dumb arguments regularly. We really should be agnostic about what exactly causes them to do this, but if it is regular enough to be predictable, we can presume it’s some internal property, which we call idiocy.

    It would be ironic. Israel, a country capable of being equal to modern western countries, is utterly demonized by an ideology that sacralizes equality. Instead it’s entirely predictable based on the game theory of sophistry. The strategy is for the top to be truly out-of-sight, to camouflage themselves (sometimes literally in gang clothes) then destroy potential competitors (because they know they deserve to lose otherwise) by making an alliance with those too dumb to ever see through the trick.


    Posted on July 20th, 2014 at 7:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • ivvenalis Says:

    The “Why Israel Will Die” article is silly. There are a lot of de facto or de jure ethnostates in the world today, and no one thinks they’re going to be spontaneously dissolved over liberal sensibilities. Suffice it to say that the mechanisms by which multiculturalism in the West is enforced are not present in Israel, aren’t being built in Israel, and the Israeli ruling class has enough of a clue to keep it that way. The idea that the secular Jews behind multiculturalism in the West (hey, his words, not mine) are going to turn on Israel is laughable. Any theory that tries to explain why this is going to change in the next fifty years also needs to explain why it didn’t happen in the last fifty years.

    Naziporn: I think the cause is split pretty even between the success of Nazi portrayals of themselves (even in person!) as virile supermen and after-the-fact sensationalism. AFAICT, if the Nazis ever did anything to anyone, it’s very important that we know that pregnant women were also included. Also, nobody remembers Caligula, since history now begins around 1960, so I suppose the ancient Germans from the time of myths and legends will make do as a replacement.

    Arthur Chu makes a pretty good point about the suitability of Bruce Banner being portrayed by an Asian dweeb (with all of the ritual qualifications, reservations, and justifications required for homiletic statements about race) in the first few paragraphs of his article. Of course, the majority of content is about his own personal insecurities, which of course originate from the source of all evil in the universe, white people.


    admin Reply:

    Israel is becoming the iconic target of evangelical-progressive scape-goating though, surely? It’s the new South Africa. As America loses its Christian-Zionist lead culture, under demographic onslaught, how can that not make the Arsenal of the Cathedral into a venomous enemy of Israel? So I obviously found the article a lot more persuasive than you did.


    Posted on July 20th, 2014 at 7:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kgaard Says:

    Hey that Arthur Chu article on Asian rage was pretty good. The early discussion of super-heroes I found annoying … simply on the grounds that I am sick of hearing about super heroes. (When did they become a thing of interest for anyone over the age of about 9? I do not get the appeal of comics and super heroes for adults. It sounds … not “gay” exactly … but incredibly juvenile.)

    Chu gets better when discussing the conditions under which Asians were allowed to stay in the US: That they be nice and pleasant and pursue complex fields and take orders from white guys. By the end of the article I started to see the author’s point. Asian dudes are kind of screwed here in terms of social self-esteem options.

    Speaking of gay-ness … and since this is an open thread … I recommend the new movie about Yves Saint Laurent. I was left with two feelings: a) The scenes of grown men getting all hot for each other were revolting, and b) It was one of the LEAST GAY movies I’ve seen in some time. It took a lot of stones for that guy to start a fashion house in the 50s. And he pursued a noble calling: Making women look beautiful (as opposed to trashy). So it was a very grown-up movie in the ways that matter. Contrast his life with that of millions of grown men today fawning over super heroes (as per Arthur Chu). I’ll take the gay dress designer any day …


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 12:01 am Reply | Quote
  • Bill Says:

    TNIO’s essay is great, and means that: Tim Wise is an accelerationist, and therefore a neoreactionary asset. Land’s idea never sank in until now.

    I never would have found this dark corner of the web if not for Trayvon Martin. I realized something was up, and tried to find ‘real’ news first, but there was none. The only people who reported the truth at first were ‘fringe’ websites. (I also found out about Land through some philosophy grad students talking about Speculative Realism.) Therefore, the leftist propaganda ‘news coverage’ of the Trayvon Martin event acted as a Neoreactionary force multiplier.


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 12:32 am Reply | Quote
  • Aeroguy Says:

    I’ve seen it said before but I think its worth repeating. Altcoins as presently used function as fiat devaluing of crypto currency. While the number of bitcoins that can be mined is fixed, and the technology sound, it’s backed ultimately by processing power. The miners themselves are a critical part of the system, they are the ones who guarantee the security of the blockchain. The miners are the issuers of crypto currency and the temptation for those that mint to devalue their currency is great, our miners are no exception. You can’t make more bitcoin but you can make infinite altcoins, so for the miners desperate to keep their heads above water in the expensive race to keep up with technology find easier money is found in minting altcoins. This isn’t to say that bitcoin is necessarily the best crypto currency there will ever be, as it is likely there will be improvements in crypto currency. However the present altcoins while having variation still represent no significant breakthroughs.

    On a completely different subject I would like to solicit some advise and opinion. The subject is the balance between creating a rightwing counter culture while steering clear of rightwing activism. Like many in their 20s I’m into anime, scify and the general subset of pop culture that is geek culture. Like all pop culture, geek culture must bow to the left but there is also the emerging counterculture with people like Vox. Comic conventions like those in San Diego have been growing in size like wildfire in American cities. They are brimming with both science/engineering types and creatives/artists. Desperate artists, they pay good money for booths to sell prints and accept commissions where they’ll be lucky if they so much as break even, all in the hopes of building their network.

    These conventions are fertile ground for recruiting and growing the rightwing counterculture. I’ve received permission to not only prepare my own set of panels but to even make troll panels at the convention local to me. My question is, exactly what sort of panels should I do? While it might be fun to title a panel, “building the rightwing geek counter culture” which even if I could get away with, I see it backfiring substantially, the networking is going to have to be done at the level of shaking hands. Making a raucous parody of pink geek, on the other hand would be both tremendous fun and would enable me to recruit those rolling on the floor laughing. The trick is making the parody title of the panel obvious enough to attract the right people without getting too much of the wrong attention. Advise and words of caution are most appreciated.


    E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Reply:

    Jonathan Bowden wrote a lot about the right-wingness of comics.

    His speeches are all on youtube I think, good stuff, but perhaps not entirely on the point.


    Scharlach Reply:

    Be for things, not against them. So, yes, troll away, but also create panels that are unapologetically reactionary.


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 2:37 am Reply | Quote
  • zimriel Says:

    Israel might end up as the Western state which saves all other Western ethnostates. Through shame.

    I see a common complaint in the far Right that “Jews are hypocritical because they have an ethnostate and won’t let us have ours”. That’s not true; Europeans should re-read Nietzsche. It’s simply not up to Jews, or to Freemasons or the Lizard People for that matter, what Europeans do. The Europeans *can* have their states back, if they just take them back. Like the Israelis just took theirs back.


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 3:52 am Reply | Quote
  • Erik Says: (for 1969) (for early 1970s)

    I noted in the comments there that Douglas Engelbart showed off a hell of a lot of stuff that we’ve been largely refining. Scott presented a great counterpoint with a list of modern marvels. I could quibble with almost every example (for starters: plasma screens on PLATO 1972, mice were in the MOAD in 1968, mobile phone 1973, Pong 1972, Norman Borlaug 1970) but I wouldn’t find that either productive or convincing. Medicine is looking strong. Admin, did I represent your position accurately in the comment section?


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    This article claims that medical innovation has been slowing for about a decade:


    admin Reply:

    @ Erik — sorry, I couldn’t find your comment.


    Erik Reply:

    “…internal dissent. Nydwracu disagrees with Jim, citing public-key cryptography and the Oculus Rift if I remember correctly. Nick B Steves argues that science is at least advancing far more slowly than various extrapolations would suggest, as there are more humans, more tools and more wealth around than a hundred years ago, so the recent lack of cubically more inventions suggests some limiting factor, and most of the candidates for limiting factors are very worrying. Nick Land is still happily optimistic about bitcoin, which he expects to set off some kind of transhuman machine economy with self-enforcing code-contracts.”


    admin Reply:

    That’ll do.

    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 7:40 am Reply | Quote
  • Akaky Akakievich Says:

    Chaos Patch or Haunted Garage Sale?


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 7:51 am Reply | Quote
  • Antisthenes Says:

    ‘When Plato gave Socrates’ definition of man as “featherless bipeds” and was much praised for the definition, Diogenes plucked a chicken and brought it into Plato’s Academy, saying, “Behold! I’ve brought you a man.” After this incident, “with broad flat nails” was added to Plato’s definition.’

    Trolling is an ancient art, far more noble than literature, science or politics.


    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    trolling is a art


    Erik Reply:

    Don’t you mean “an art”?


    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    that’s the joke

    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 12:03 pm Reply | Quote
  • Foseti Says:

    “That strikes me as a feature rather than a bug”

    Well, that depends. If the whole thing descends into a parody of itself that is readable only by a few, that would strike me a distinct bug. Seems like quite a few modern philosophical movements are prone to the same bug . . .


    admin Reply:

    The cultural environment is controlled by a hugely powerful, venomously hostile apparatus, which has already decided that NRx is “a parody of itself”. Anything that doesn’t fit the narrative is ignored or twisted beyond recognition. The media relies on its own crude denunciations as primary sources, as we have seen. Even an utterly charming and civilized writer and thinker like HBD Chick is denounced as a Nazi. It seems to me entirely wasted effort to try to win a ‘fair hearing’ for ourselves. Instead, we need to concentrate on protection, internal communications, and stubborn mycelial growth.


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 4:26 pm Reply | Quote
  • Scott Alexander Says:

    A question on Gnon. I’m eventually going to write about this, but I want to hear your opinion first.

    As I understand Gnon, it’s about the constraints placed by nature, in terms of being outcompeted if you don’t take the maximally strong action.

    This seems to be why reactionaries want multiple patchwork states – because if any of them deviate from the maximally Gnon-satisfying action, they can be outcompeted by the other states. Thus no one has an incentive to deviate.

    But the exact opposite seems to be the core of the reactionary argument for monarchy. Within a state, leftist attitudes and movements are more powerful and always win in competition (ie are favored by Gnon). This is so scary that the only solution is to suspend the competition entirely by putting the state under the control of an absolute monarch who can “garden” the signaling dynamics at work so leftists don’t inevitably outcompete everyone else with ensuing left singularity.

    This confuses me. Either Gnon is good (we should value strength and winningness in and of themselves) or Gnon is evil (a crazy demon that could potentially cause virulent memetic pathogens to outcompete everything we hold dear).

    If the first is true, everyone should laud the Cathedral and leftist values as a particularly beautiful and powerful example. If the second is true, everyone should run away from Exit like it’s on fire and institute a world dictator before some unexpected signaling dynamic causes a race-to-the-bottom among Patchwork states as destructive as the left-singularity among individual states.

    Anyone want to write up or link me to a resolution of the apparent contradiction?


    admin Reply:

    I’m not seeing a contradiction at all. Competition makes things strong. The Left eliminates competition. Monarchist NRx (I’m only on the edge of this) sees a Monarch as a defender of a competitive order, not its suppressor. The Patchwork is a ‘transcendental’ (ultimate, unsurpassable) competitive environment that cannot be integrated and harmonized.

    Gnon is well-represented by ‘Darwinism’. It cannot be cheated. A social order that suppresses selective processes within itself, for some time, will succumb eventually, as a whole, to the Darwinian necessity that operates as a cosmic conservation law. Suppress creative destruction, as modern capitalism has largely done, and the entire system becomes vulnerable to extinction. This is the forest fire paradox (which I’m sure you know about).

    I think you go wrong in thinking the Left is competitively fit. It is not fit before Gnon (or Darwinian nature). Its utterly predictable historical signature is accelerating dysgenic catastrophe.


    Scott Alexander Reply:

    If the left isn’t fit, that suggests that in a “free market of ideas” it would die of its own accord. But many reactionaries (not necessarily you, but I know Jim feels this way) think that in a free market of ideas, leftism inevitably wins. This seems to be the essence of Moldbug’s definition of leftism – I think he defines it as “the beliefs which, when followed, win you power”. This is most obvious in democracy, but true in a host of other governments as well – hence why all sorts of past governments eventually transformed into leftist democracies.

    I agree it is possible that leftism is virulent but ultimately noncompetitive – that is, it will take over a state, but then that state will die because it was taken over by something unsustainable. Indeed, I agree that is the reactionary consensus.

    But this seems to be a general Law of Gnon. Sometimes systems will, by their internal dynamics, be forced into states that are bad for them (ie prisoners’ dilemma). Internal competition on one level can force a solution which is noncompetitive (or just plain horrible) on a higher level.

    If you’re worried that a single state can be forced by Gnon into a system that eventually destroys it, you should be equally worried that a collection of states (an international order) is similarly vulnerable to such an attack.


    Puzzle Privateer (@PuzzlePrivateer) Reply:

    “I agree it is possible that leftism is virulent but ultimately noncompetitive – that is, it will take over a state, but then that state will die because it was taken over by something unsustainable.”

    Of course it is. They built a Mouse Utopia and it may have been destroyed both by deviant behavior and mutation load:

    “The so-called Mouse Utopia experiment was conducted from 1968 by John B Calhoun

    The idea was that four breeding pairs of mice were allowed to reproduce freely in a ‘utopian’ environment with ample food and water; no predators; no disease; comfortable temperature, conditions and space. What happened is described by the author:

    Phase A – 104 days – establishment of the mice in their new environment, then the first litters were born.

    Phase B – up to day 620 – exponential population growth doubling every 55 days.

    Phase C – from day 620 population growth abruptly slowed to a doubling time of 145 days.

    Phase D – days 560-920; population stagnant with births just matching deaths. Emergence of many pathological behaviours.

    Terminal Phase – the last conception was about day 920, after which there were no more births, all females were menopausal, the colony aged and all of them died.


    The Mouse Utopia experiment is usually interpreted in terms of social stresses related to ‘over-population’ crowding – generating pathological behaviours and a loss of the will to live.

    But Michael A Woodley suggests that what might be going on is mutation accumulation, and deleterious genes generating a wide range of maladaptive pathologies, incrementally accumulating with each generation; and rapidly overwhelming and destroying the population before any beneficial mutations could emerge to ‘save; the colony from extinction.

    So the bizarre behaviours seen especially in Phase D – such as the male ‘beautiful ones’ who appeared to be healthy and spent all their time self grooming, but were actually inert, unresponsive, unintelligent, uninterested in reproduction – are not adaptations to crowing, but maladaptive outcomes of a population sinking under the weight of mutations.


    The reason why mouse utopia might produce so rapid and extreme a mutation accumulation is that wild mice naturally suffer very high mortality rates from predation.

    Therefore, because wild mice are so short-lived, mice are not ‘built to last’ and have the reputation of being unusually-prone to produce new deleterious mutations (and are therefore extremely prone to cancer, and susceptible to carcinogens – which is why mice are used to test for carcinogens).

    Thus mutation selection balance is in operation among wild mice, with very high mortality rates continually weeding-out the new mutations (especially among males) – with typically only a small and relatively mutation-free proportion of the (large numbers of) offspring surviving to reproduce; and a minority of the most active and healthy (mutation free) males siring the bulk of each generation.

    However, in Mouse Utopia, there is no predation and all the other causes of mortality are reduced to a minimum – so the frequent mutations just accumulate, generation upon generation – randomly producing all sorts of pathological (maladaptive) behaviours.


    To test whether mutation accumulation is the real explanation for the demise of Mouse Utopia, the original experiment should be repeated but with genetic controls. Woodley is hoping to do this himself.

    Also, a variant experiment could perhaps be conducted, which maintained utopian conditions but without allowing overcrowding (e.g. by continually splitting-up the growing community, and creating more and more small colonies).

    In other words, the social conditions of Utopian mice would be held constant, while mortality rates would be kept low for multiple generations.

    My prediction would be that the Mouse Utopians would go through phases A, B, C, D and terminal to become extinct even without increased population density/ overcrowding, and due purely to cumulative genetic damage.


    admin Reply:

    … but a single state is forced into that trap precisely because it is integrated. Hence support for disintegration at all levels, so that competitive dynamics can process out Leftist entropy.

    E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Reply:

    The key is simple: permit local failures, avoid long term, catastrophic failures. The Cathedral is a system that attempts to bargain with Gnon by offsetting the pain of local failures into a distant, undefined, catastrophic failure. Gnon permits this the same reason why batteries store energy; therefore they have not bargained with Gnon at all, merely shifted the consequences from a defined, localized point to an undefined, regional or global point.

    It is possible to hack the patchwork too, and it will be tried. The point here is not to emerge into an ideal system, merely a sane one. That sane one could always again become insane, but I would not trust an ‘insanity proof’ system.

    nydwracu Reply:

    But many reactionaries (not necessarily you, but I know Jim feels this way) think that in a free market of ideas, leftism inevitably wins.

    “Free market of ideas” isn’t the operative structure, unless Jim thinks leftism would win even under Fnargl. The operative structure is “system that can be captured by a faction, which can then go on to claim the spoils of the system, and which may be displaced by another faction and therefore has no incentive to be concerned with the long-term health of the system”.

    The difference between a ruling structure and an international order is that a ruling structure is one single thing in a way that an international order isn’t.

    Porphy's Attorney Reply:

    The “political economy” of leftism, progressivism, can be simplified to a program of redistributing consequences and responsibility. It (relatively) easy to “sell” such a program to both high (i.e. incumbent big firms that see regulation and progressive “public-private partnerships” as a means of preventing them to be weeded out by market competition) and low and middle.

    So such schemes “win in the market place of ideas” because they are able to gain widespread appeal (even among a certain faction of Rx’ers who favor state management of everything – which will reproduce these mechanisms). (Gabriel Kolko is a decent, if flawed, introduction to how this dynamic works and the appeal it has for insiders. See also the Swope Plan, submitted by Swope to Hoover, which evolved into the NRA – no, not that one; the other one, which Swope then helped administer, &tc. Point is the redistribution of responsibility & consequences isn’t solely “help the po’ – not nearly. It’s a comprehensive machine of social management).

    So yes it wins out in the “marketplace of ideas” but driven to it’s ideal, is it really “better for everyone?” NRxers (among some other belief factions) don’t think that ultimately this kind of thing will turn out well, though it’s greatly tempting for those with short-or-medium time horizons to adopt (thus Keyenes’ recommendation of it. Of course, now he and everyone he cared about is long dead, so arguably we are entering that “long run.” In any case societies – which contain future people – outlive any lifetime. So those “long run” impacts that Keynes and those who have followed his argumentive tradition dismissed with a sneer eventually arrives and lands on someone other than themselves and those they care about. Again, redistribution of responsibility & consequences onto future suckers, the “we” who “owe it to ‘ourselves'” – the “ourselves” who gained from redistributing the consequences & responsibility away from themselves.

    N.B. “redistribution of income”/material redistribution is only a subset of the redistribution of responsibility & consequences. Once you see the whole thing as a machine for redistributing responsibility, it clarifies the downside – but also illustrates why a large number of people would find the idea attractive in “the marketplace of ideas,” especially if it is wrapped within appealing rhetoric. Which the progressive left has always been exceptionally skilled at. (Like many NRx-ers, I grew up among them and learned, having lived most of my life in Madison Wis – the birthplace of course of “The Wisconsin Idea”, natch).

    Xavi' Reply:

    “If the left isn’t fit, that suggests that in a “free market of ideas” it would die of its own accord. But many reactionaries (not necessarily you, but I know Jim feels this way) think that in a free market of ideas, leftism inevitably wins.”

    You are ignoring a crucial dichotomy, either willfully or through absent mindedness. Why does the Left always win? Why?

    The Left could not win, if the thoughts and actions necessary to infact, be, a participatory Progressive were not seen as ideally virtuous thoughts and actions. It is this perversion that gives the Progressive memetic mutation its animus. Therefore this “market place of ideas” can only peddle in apocryphal wares. Trinkets of promises. In an actuality where morality itself has been hijacked by potent metaphysical viruses, even the attempt to act moral is a bastardisation.

    In this bazaar, this market place. The Thaumaturge deceptively posits a way to allow the “less fortunate to live decent, worthy human lives.” and of course, being a conjurer offers solution.

    The reasoned man says, “there must be better ways to salvage the gifted from the rabble without allowing pathologies to multiply.” Out shrieks the righteous, “Monster! Do wish people to die!?” The reasoned man now stands an isolated condemned figure in a sea of bodies that only draws cold.

    The crux of the matter no one wishes to appear evil. So even if the action will produce an evil outcome, the disintegration of the values that allowed the evil itself to be perpetrated, Enlightenment thinking, ones appearance to the “other” holds the person hostage, the fear of judgement, no correct course of action can be taken and man with gnashing teeth, wringing of hands, manic, sweat drenched prayer, will contort himself, find all manners of alternate solutions, twist reality itself to stave off the mere accusation of wickedness.

    That is why the Progressive is dominant and will remain so for quite the foreseeable future, if we are to say we have such a thing.

    Gnon however is unfathomable horror and attempts of human rationalisation are futile. Gnon may or may not allow this flagrancy; for a time. This arrogance.. Yes you can allow the dim to multiply through subsidy, yes you can allow the detritus of civilizations laid to waste congregation, yes you can conceal woman’s true, inherent nature as an entropy engine from herself, yes you can emotionally paralyze an entire European peoples that their thoughts or non-thoughts, actions or non-actions are evil, a form of ensorcellment. Gnon will oversee, the outcome to be determined at his leisure.

    It has been postulated that civilisation which took centuries to refine, had escaped Gnons gaze, only momentarily, for him a blink of an eye. That this, what we are doing, corresponding across distances, infact is a colossal accident, a fluke. However Gnons attention has been affixed upon man again and time for foppery is limited.

    Michael Anissimov Reply:

    >The Patchwork is a ‘transcendental’ (ultimate, unsurpassable) competitive environment that cannot be integrated and harmonized.


    admin Reply:

    The Singleton is THE worst thing that could possibly happen, IMHO. Due to the competitive disadvantage of integrated viz distributed systems, however, it won’t.

    James James Reply:

    Does the forest fire paradox have a more common name? I’m guessing the idea is that little forest fires prevent really big ones. Sort of the opposite of the stability–instability paradox.


    Puzzle Privateer (@PuzzlePrivateer) Reply:

    “Either Gnon is good (we should value strength and winningness in and of themselves) or Gnon is evil (a crazy demon that could potentially cause virulent memetic pathogens to outcompete everything we hold dear).”

    My understanding is that Gnon is neither good nor evil, Gnon is indifferent.

    Could truth & beauty win? Sure. Could a virulent memetic pathogen outcompete everything we hold dear and destroy us all? Sure. That’s because if Gnon is enforcing any sort of morals on the universe it’s certainly not a human morality. My POV is that the universe / Gnon enforces no morals at all on the world we live in.

    Look a natural human health: could you do everything right to stay fit and healthy and still get cancer? Of course. Do actual pathogens ever invade a healthy host and kill it? Of course. Does this mean the pathogen is stronger than the healthy host? Yup, sure does.

    There is no appeasing Gnon, there is no serving Gnon, there is no escape from Gnon either. But just like physical health we can accept Gnon for what it is and work with it the best we can so we don’t succumb to pathogens or cancers.

    “Listen, and understand. Gnon is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.”


    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    I assume you’ve read my “Capturing Gnon” post on MR?

    Gnon isn’t the kind of thing you can attach moral valence to. Gnon is the neutral rules about what sort of things get to exist and what do not. If you naively change from the sort of thing that Gnon allows to exist to the other sort, Gnon will destroy you. Gnon is neither good nor evil.

    The major processes within Gnon have all been useful to us, but can also destroy us. Economic competition creates massive wealth and production, but strips away anything that does not contribute to that. Evolution created us, but can as easily uncreate us if fertility goes dysgenic or population gets too small. War tends to weed out dysfunctional sociomilitary groups, but also burns a lot of wealth and causes a lot of trouble.

    We like patchwork *in particular* not because it’s Gnon-tastic, but because it selects for being a nice place to live and puts appropriate market value on quality of people. We dislike left singularity *in particular*, not because it’s Gnon-tastic, but because ideas selected for virulence seem to be really dangerous ideas that displace carefully honed good ideas.

    Gnon will be obeyed. This is something to be aware of, but not something to attach valuation to.


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Admin recognized the problem earlier. He called it the “scale” problem.

    It’s been discussed a lot. Here are two examples:

    I didn’t see any good answer. The scale problem isn’t the principal reason why I think a wholly sovereign monarchy is unlikely and is a bad idea, or why a patchwork wouldn’t work without an emperor who kept it going, but it is a reason.


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Never mind. I misread Scott’s question.


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 4:46 pm Reply | Quote
  • Erik Says:

    “…As I understand Gnon, it’s about the constraints placed by nature, in terms of being outcompeted if you don’t take the maximally strong action.

    This seems to be why reactionaries want multiple patchwork states – because if any of them deviate from the maximally Gnon-satisfying action, they can be outcompeted by the other states. Thus no one has an incentive to deviate…”

    This is new terminology without a dictionary, so I can’t assert objective truth, nor can I speak for all of NRx, but to me ‘Gnon’ represents something slightly different: the constraints placed by nature, yes, but that will leave you crushed if you don’t reach a certain level. Perhaps objectionable, but not exactly evil, and objections are largely ineffective. Much of the concept is similar to what Yudkowsky says in the Beyond the reach of God sequence: “…What can a twelfth-century peasant do to save themselves from annihilation? Nothing.” but scaled up from the individual level. Avoiding the wrath of Gnon is more a matter of satisficing than of maximizing, but the constraints are in part set by other agents, which does encourage (but not quite require) maximizing. It is possible to build up a margin of error.

    Nature or Nature’s God has thundered from Sinai: “This is the Law” and left little room for debate, but the patchwork states can certainly find room to maneuver concerning how they shall abide by the Law. In that maneuvering room I would like for the states to deviate and find niches, which need not outcompete one another, but could well do so.

    “…But the exact opposite seems to be the core of the reactionary argument for monarchy. Within a state, leftist attitudes and movements are more powerful and always win in competition (ie are favored by Gnon). This is so scary that the only solution is to suspend the competition entirely so leftists don’t inevitably outcompete everyone else with ensuing left singularity….”

    I’ve said that it’s not exactly competition which Gnon represents, but even if it were, I think you would be equivocating here. Competition before the Cathedral is a different thing to competition before Gnon, and the former is subordinate to the latter. Showing piety in the struggle session, vehemently booing racists, having the most intersectional identity, being the most supportive of QUILTBAG rights, cheering the loudest for women getting jobs and abortions, et cetera. is (are?) all subject to Gnon’s veto.

    The Cathedral attempts to enforce a uniformity on the world which may get vetoed. If the Cathedral’s desired pattern eventually attracts Gnon’s ire, and if the Cathedral takes control of the world in less time than it takes to exhaust the stored moral capital, the margin of error, and so forth, the Cathedral may call down a global veto by Gnon. Which makes the idea of Patchwork attractive to me by not putting all its eggs in one basket. Some Patches will undoubtedly collapse as they experiment, but surely not the world.

    That is the first of two objections to the work of the Cathedral that I have, which only incidentally overlap, and I think it is worth distinguishing them for the possibility of further conversation on that tangent: the Cathedral is tiling the world with a monoculture and that’s risky, and it is tiling the world with a not-my-culture and that’s hostile. A significant fraction of Rx holds only to one. Zippy Catholic in particular has condemned the Patchwork as a form of liberalism.

    “… If the second is true, everyone should run away from Exit like it’s on fire and institute a world dictator before some unexpected signaling dynamic causes a race-to-the-bottom among Patchwork states as destructive as the left-singularity among individual states.”

    Yes. This is quite a serious concern. Exit leads to race-to-the-bottom. Exit also leads to overgrazing the commons. What commons? People, as seen in the earlier discussion on the IQ Shredders. An IQ Shredder attracts world talent and extracts a lot of work from the talent at the cost of not reproducing the talent (Singapore draws in clever people and they fail to have kids), leaving less talent for everyone else initially, and less talent for the IQ Shredder next generation. Thinking back to your Non-Libertarian FAQ, I seem to recall you said that competing private entitities didn’t solve this with [extremely clever and well-thought-out privatization scheme] and resulted in some collapse before the problem was eventually solved by regulation from on high – so yeah, institute a world dictator.

    No easy answers here, are there? 😉

    (and even without instituting a world dictator, an extremely clever privatization scheme as applied to this tragedy of the commons would be privatizing people. Oh dear.)


    Erik Reply:

    Dang, that should have been a reply to Scott above. It also shouldn’t have botched the link ending at “IQ Shredders”. Edit feature, please!


    admin Reply:

    Scott’s used to 300+ comments threads — I’m sure he’ll find you. (I’d fix the link, but WordPress is a PITA for editing linky comments — it screws them all, so they need plugging back in. It would probably do more harm than good.)


    Blogospheroid Reply:

    The key really is intelligent predation or husbandry. Currently there is no one, even in hypercapitalist singapore who will gain by maintaining a high iq population as opposed to just poaching it from future neighbors. Similarly, there is no cathedralist alive today who will have to face the end result of their policies. The feedback loop is simply not closing.


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 6:19 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    @Puzzle Privateer

    Fascinating. But also deeply flawed.

    The founder population would have been deeply traumatized. While mice don’t have the same capacity for trauma that humans do, they’re still mammals. They likely have a cycle of violence the same way humans do, though to a lesser degree.

    The complete lack of entertainment and ‘enrichment’ would have driven the mice mad all by itself.

    Rather than mouse utopia, it’s mouse asylum/penal colony.


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 6:42 pm Reply | Quote
  • Akaky Akakievich Says:

    Anyone know where I can source some Steve Sailer film criticism? Perhaps I’m wrong, but I can’t imagine a more frustrated, unhappy, and almost certainly unintentionally hilarious individual than an extremely right-wing movie critic.


    Akaky Akakievich Reply:

    Apologies for the lapse into Americanism at the end there.


    admin Reply:

    Should be easy to Google — it’s good. His stuff on Neill Blomkamp and on Mike Judge especially recommended.


    Akaky Akakievich Reply:

    Taki’s Mag! Dearie me …


    admin Reply:

    It’s a whole brave new world you’ve wandered into, isn’t it?

    Akaky Akakievich Reply:

    Where even the caviar is psychotic, apparently.


    Akaky Akakievich Reply:

    He used to get the piss ripped out of him along these lines quite a bit: “Cypriot waiter Taki-George, currently a chalet boy in the Swiss Alps, treats us to one of his popular streams of consciousness” …


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 7:39 pm Reply | Quote
  • fotrkd Says:

    Samantha Power: “If Russia is not part of the solution it will continue to be part of the problem.”

    Sweet Jesus. I’m in a time-warp, no?

    RE: Darkness – Children are our future, btw.


    Posted on July 21st, 2014 at 7:58 pm Reply | Quote
  • Lesser Bull Says:

    Childishness is our future.


    Posted on July 22nd, 2014 at 1:34 am Reply | Quote
  • Blogospheroid Says:

    Not sure if this was already talked about here. An old link about

    Tragedy of the commons/incentive issues in the Bitcoin universe.


    Posted on July 22nd, 2014 at 8:14 am Reply | Quote
  • Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » AAA … Says:

    […] Chaos Patch (#19) […]

    Posted on July 22nd, 2014 at 4:01 pm Reply | Quote
  • AAA… – Outlandish Says:

    […] dentro da NRx. Nenhuma análise do conflito cultural na Internet pode evitar uma referência à trollagem, e nenhuma compreensão da trollagem é está mais completa sem referência a AAA. Isso eleva a […]

    Posted on April 9th, 2017 at 3:42 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment