Chaos Patch (#47)

(Open thread + links)

A cold look at the kill list. Leftists of the right. Singularity skepticism. Why is ‘sexual orientation’ like phlogiston. Social justice and slave morality. NRx and Dixie (also relevant). Not the same people. Fragged Friday. The weekly rounds.

ISIS eyes on Saudi Arabia. Going over the cliff in Greece, and Venezuela.

What religion can do, perhaps. The thin weird line. How atheists lose it. Two religious experiences. SV hipster evangelism.

The Bellcurve, meta-review. More unwanted human biorealism (1, 2, 3). Darwinism and teleology (with vigorous discussion in the comments). The media’s race war. The chan wars. War.

The Machiavelli of India. Dampier reviews Bloom. A contrarian take on Hollywood politics. Philosophers in Starbucks.

It’s not easy to survive from the ‘Net.

Charles I’s speech from the scaffold. “For the people. And truly I desire their Liberty and Freedom as much as any Body whomsoever. But I must tell you, That their Liberty and Freedom, consists in having of Government; those Laws, by which their Life and their goods [?] may be most their own. It is not for having share in government (Sir) that is nothing pertaining to them. A subject and a soveraign are clean different things, and therefore until they do that, I mean, that you do put the people in that liberty as I say, certainly they will never enjoy themselves.”

The Philly Fed’s Charles Plosser stubbornly maintains that reality still exists: “The history is that monetary policy is not ultimately a very effective tool at solving real economic structural problems. It can try for a while but the problem then is that it’s only temporarily effective, and when you can’t do it anymore you get the explosion yesterday in the Swiss market. […] One of the things I’ve tried to argue is look, if we believe that monetary policy is doing what we say it’s doing and depressing real interest rates and goosing the economy and we’re in some sense distorting what might be the normal market outcomes at some point, we’re going to have to stop doing it. At some point the pressure is going to be too great. The market forces are going to overwhelm us. We’re not going to be able to hold the line anymore. And then you get that rapid snapback in premiums as the market realizes that central banks can’t do this forever. And that’s going to cause volatility and disruption.”

Dampier unleashed: “Cthulhu’s music provides the background track to their dreams, pulling them down towards the ancient cities without names, generating an irresistible attraction to forgotten rituals performed according to laws written in incomprehensible runes.”

February 1, 2015admin 18 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , , , ,

18 Responses to this entry

  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    Consider these temporary, but I think you guys should really read the first one. The first neoreactionary is Rudolph Carlyle Evans. Not Mencius.


    Erebus Reply:

    “In my opinion instead of wasting time with what NRx currently does, it would be fruitful to begin a search for this man.”

    Well… It didn’t take five minutes to dig up what seems to be his address.
    The age and the initial are a match, and various sources have said that he resides in Hempshead, NY.

    But I’ve gotta admit that I don’t know what you expect to achieve by contacting him. If he were interested in any of this, I think it’s a fair assumption that he’d be here by now.
    I haven’t read his book yet, so I won’t comment any further on this.


    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    I contacted his owners of his defunct publisher and they said that they didn’t know how to contact him, and a few Less Wrong people sent letters a couple with the same name in Jamaica, so I thought it was a bust.

    Can some one in New York go get this guy?


    Chris B Reply:

    “I think it’s a fair assumption that he’d be here by now.”
    the ‘field of dreams’ approach has it’s limitations. Talent hunting is surely a good thing. Intelligence is a rare commodity.

    Posted on February 1st, 2015 at 5:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chaos Patch (#47) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on February 1st, 2015 at 6:31 pm Reply | Quote
  • Rasputin Says:


    Any chance of some brief thoughts on evolution and teleology? Perhaps via Kant, or something?


    Chris B Reply:

    2nd that. I’m deep into kant 3rd critique at moment.


    Posted on February 1st, 2015 at 6:48 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    Moldbug walks up to the counter and offers several helpful tips about the decor, including a lengthy digression on the proper material for tables, which may or may not have been lampooning an obsession with table material when the things only have to hold up a drink or two. In the middle he slips the barista a call number for a book, found at the local library, which contains his order. The coffee so referenced is quite good.


    Posted on February 1st, 2015 at 9:13 pm Reply | Quote
  • Aeroguy Says:

    I’ve been spending time on pol and something worth noting about the fascists is the lack of discussion on class hierarchy outside of the ethnic. An obsession with ethnic purity the way communists obsess with class purity. A promise of equality, of from each according to his ability to each according to his need upon completion of the project.

    Communists deny the importance of ethnic hierarchy, only the class struggle matters, down with the bourgeoisie. Fascists deny the importance of class hierarchy, only the ethnic struggle matters, down with the Jews. Both are actively hostile to hierarchical structures except the superiority of a broad group they claim is made of equals without hierarchy, the proletariat class and white race.

    This has implications for trolling. Just as data showing the existence of and differences between races causes prog butthurt. Doing the same with class also accomplishes fascist butthurt. Being elitist and emphasizing hierarchy wherever different groups arise seems like a good way to go. If you want to be nice about it, emphasis the importance of different roles for different groups, so long as everyone knows their place.


    an inanimate aluminum tube Reply:

    Our actual, existing class hierarchy is kind of confusing and demoralizing.


    Posted on February 1st, 2015 at 10:58 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kgaard Says:

    This seems odd: Australia’s Tony Abbott apparently is suffering a plunge in popularity. The only logical explanation I can think of is that it’s blowback from the plunge in commodity prices, which may have been the impetus for the right wingers to cut spending in various places (breaking promises they’d made not to do so).

    Any Aussies out there? I would hate to see Abbott go down …


    Posted on February 1st, 2015 at 11:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • diffuse Says:

    Interesting commentary on the ‘Arthashastra.’ Continue with the subversive IR literature, please. Eventually I will be working in that sub-branch of the Cathedral, and want to soak up as much as possible in preparation.


    Posted on February 2nd, 2015 at 4:03 am Reply | Quote
  • soapjackal Says:


    you dont have anywhere to contact you privately on your blog.

    if you could send an email to soapjackal at gmail dot com I would appreciate it


    Posted on February 2nd, 2015 at 9:06 am Reply | Quote
  • Aeroguy Says:

    Moldbug puts it at about the 1920s when the moral leaders became holier than God. How wrong would I be if I suggested that it was about the second century when Rome’s moral leaders became holier than Jupiter?


    Erebus Reply:

    2nd century? Far too late, I think. The religion was strongest when the Decemviri Sacris Faciundis was a relatively independent, meaningful institution. Once the Senate overstepped its bounds & the decemviri became the quindecimviri, the religion entered a very slow and subtle period of decline. Once the Republic fell, the religion’s debasement was no longer slow nor subtle.

    (Let’s not forget that all religious offices, apart from the decemviri, were traditionally held by the upper echelons of the Roman elite. As soon as the Republic fell, the “upper echelons of the Roman elite” came to mean the Emperor, his family, and a handful of old noble houses who happened to be in the Emperor’s good graces. It may be a bit of a simplification to say that all official religious and moral authority came to rest in the hands of the Emperor — but, by and large, that’s how things seem to have been, in practical terms.)

    It’s interesting to note that under the Republic, the worship of Isis was violently and officially suppressed; by 43 BC, the Triumvirs were vowing temples to Isis in Rome.

    Also interesting to note that by the second century, half of the new temples being built were dedicated to deified emperors (divi). In 42 BC, Octavian started the trend, with a temple to divus Iulius right in the Roman Forum.

    …And so on and so forth. Is it any wonder that Eastern religions and mystery cults flourished under the Empire? By the second century, many Emperors were of provincial origin — so much for a “Roman” religion, then, when the Roman pantheon means nothing to the pontifex maximus! By the third century, the Pantheon and Jupiter were completely degraded; the Syrian-born Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was known as “Elagabalus”, after a Syrian God whose worship he introduced to Rome. Elagabalus-Emperor had Elagabalus-Diety replace Jupiter at the head of the Pantheon. This didn’t last long, but it illustrates how far the religion had fallen by then.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    Nice info. My thought process was that Octavian with his title of Augustus but not being deified until after death was comparable to but still inferior to Jupiter. The practice of linking genealogy to a particular god was alive during the Republic. Octavian who was linked to Venus celebrated it which implies that the Gods were still held in higher esteem. Caligula was the first to declare himself a living god (and defaced the statues of Republic Heroes Octavian had revered as a source of his own status), but since he was assassinated, I didn’t think he should count. Imperial rule did appropriate the glory that used to be shared with the Senate into itself, like how only the Emperor was allowed to have Triumphs, it’s influence was pretty much absolute. So I’m going to revise to the first century AD. Thanks for the detailed response.


    Posted on February 3rd, 2015 at 12:16 am Reply | Quote
  • pseudo-chrysostom Says:

    gentlemen, behold.

    [quote]What is ClickHole?

    ClickHole is the latest and greatest online social experience filled with the most clickable, irresistibly shareable content anywhere on the internet.
    What is the goal of ClickHole?

    Let’s be honest: Today, the average website carelessly churns out hundreds of pieces of pandering, misleading content, most of which tragically fall short of going viral.

    At ClickHole, we refuse to stand for this. We strive to make sure that all of our content panders to and misleads our readers just enough to make it go viral. You see, we don’t think anything on the internet should ever have to settle for mere tens of thousands of pageviews. We believe that each and every article—whether about pop culture, politics, internet trends, or social justice—should be clicked on and shared by hundreds of millions of internet users before they can even comprehend what they just read.

    ClickHole has one and only one core belief: All web content deserves to go viral. [/quote]


    Posted on February 4th, 2015 at 1:21 am Reply | Quote
  • Raymund Eich Says:

    A data point in the “It’s the J*ws!”/”No, it’s the Puritans!” debate:

    Professor Lancy calls the American way of [childrearing] a “neontocracy,” in which adults provide services to relatively few children who are considered priceless, even though they’re useless. …

    We take our cultural practices as a timeless given, but I was fascinated to read the historical origin of our modern neontocracy: 17th-century Netherlands. Wealthy and urbanized, the Dutch middle class began treating their children as inherently valuable, not as future labor. Birthrates dropped because more children survived infancy; the pampered offspring could be trained at an early age. We can blame the political philosopher John Locke for our current child-rearing preoccupations. He carried Dutch ideas back to England in the 1680s, where Protestant radicals like the Puritans and Quakers picked them up. We, and our “godlike cherubs,” as Professor Lancy calls them, are their heirs.


    Posted on February 6th, 2015 at 10:44 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment