Chaos Patch (#58)

(Open thread + (a few) links)

Reading Jouvenal. The religions of Earth. The leftist lure. An AmerikaDampier debate (related). Deleuze and Guattari in #HRx format. Fragments. New blog. Weekly roundups.

Time for Exit?

Dark Net trawlers. A half-century of Moore’s Law. Brain taming.

Our friends the Saudis. Fictional Islamo-distributism. Popcorn from SoBL (plus relevant).

A balanced review of Mister.

Exoplanets in context. Influence-editing in action. Sexed-up statistics. Random hate facts.

April 19, 2015admin 89 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Chaos

TAGGED WITH : , , , , ,

89 Responses to this entry

  • Chris B Says:

    Any chance of some comments on the very obvious collapse of NRx into a shrieking, dumb as a rock talking shop about the latest completely pointless SJW act of degeneracy? Not to forget the complete and total expulsion of any concepts raised by MM such as the structural nature of Leftism, Universalism, the superior Power cybernetics of eastern traditions and the uncoordinated combine harvester that is the modern state/ society in favor of esoteric retardation and identification of rational actors (Jews/ marxist/ cultural marxists) “poisoning” our beautiful Christian wonderland?

    In addition, can everyone (all maybe half a dozen of us) that has bothered to read MM and are engaging with his arguments drop the NRx bullshit and reorganize somewhere else on a formalized basis, this time with set limits on what is acceptable?

    Can we also drop the trike nonsense now? Reading de Juvenel has confirmed my suspicion that nationalism is utterly incoherent from a MM derived neoreactionary direction in every possible way. Add in the fact that the Christianity part makes no sense as well, and MM neoreaction is not actually post libertarian – it is something far more interesting and dark.

    [Reply]

    Brett Stevens Reply:

    Any chance of some comments on the very obvious collapse of NRx into a shrieking, dumb as a rock talking shop about the latest completely pointless SJW act of degeneracy?

    In my view, this is a side effect of lack of direction. Without something to point toward, we become REACTIVE to whatever outrage the Other has perpetrated.

    [Reply]

    Chris B Reply:

    “In my view, this is a side effect of lack of direction. Without something to point toward, we become REACTIVE to whatever outrage the Other has perpetrated”

    No it isn’t. It is the result of a bunch of alt right emotionally angry people bringing their baggage and demanding that their ethno-nationalist based on “feels” be incorporated into any thought process linked to anything MM raised. All that is possible with these people is anger and lack of thought . They are closely followed by the religious reaction cohort who have better manners but make just as little sense and rail on about the same crap. You can’t mould anything with this material. The only saving grace is that these people have kept out the mindless libertarians screeching about liberty. Either way, NRx is pretty much done as an attempt at elite ideology formation or intelligent right wing intellectualising.

    [Reply]

    Orthodox Laissez-fairist Reply:

    Well, your mistake was to think that the actual count of theoreticians of Neoreaction number more than fingers of one hand. Most is just commentary, but if you don’t like it just ignore it and do your own thing. It’s not like anyone is forcing you to read anything you don’t want to… no one is even stopping you from inventing your own school of philosophy and naming it however you like.

    Chris B Reply:

    @Orthodox Laissez-fairist “It’s not like anyone is forcing you to read anything you don’t want to… no one is even stopping you from inventing your own school of philosophy and naming it however you like.” Thanks
    for proving my point.

    This type of passive aggressive “if you you don’t like what we have done with the place you go sod off” is what I have been hearing for some time. More offensively from the eth-nat goons, but all the same at the end of the day.

    NRx was made an open house pretty quickly, and this was solidified with the trike. I’m way past bored now.

    Orthodox Laissez-fairist Reply:

    @Chris B
    “Thanks for proving my point.”
    You’re welcome. I used to thing that such a stance on life was just an average behavior.

    “This type of passive aggressive “if you you don’t like what we have done with the place you go sod off” is what I have been hearing for some time. More offensively from the eth-nat goons, but all the same at the end of the day.”
    Most of the “goons” are already leaving on their own, whether WNs or Orthosphereans. Combined together with other alt-righters they all seem as if they hate Neoreaction even more than the Left (based on the amount of criticism mounted at NRx lately), so I fail to see what is your problem.

    “NRx was made an open house pretty quickly, and this was solidified with the trike. I’m way past bored now.”
    I have never seen the trike as representing a “white nationalist libertarian theocracy” as you seem to imply. Sure, it could have been formulated in a way that doesn’t require careful interpretation of it in order not to end up in wankery, but hey it can always be scrapped – where there is a will, there is a way. Seems to me that one can find much truth in Pascals words that “all of humanity’s problems stem from man’s inability to sit quietly in a room alone.”

    Sam Reply:

    Chris,

    NRx elevates exist above voice, even to the exclusion of voice. Rather than suggesting Laissez-fairist is being “passive aggressive” when he tells you to just do your own thing, you are the one being non-passively aggressive by pleading NRx to abandon the Trike in favor of some amorphous distilled Moldbuggianism. Which is somewhat ironic, because Moldbug was not allergic to White Nationalism, whereas you seem to be. You are not content with doing your own thing – you want NRx to change so it will suit your tastes. I think we all know what to call this, but in the interest of not being “passive aggressive”, I’ll spell it out: entryism.

    NRx is under attack by the alt-right not so much for its philosophy, as much as for the personae that constitute its Core. NRx is perceived as a conglomerate of incels, Jews, homosexuals, vain millennial edgelords, and autists. Sounds familiar? That’s approximately what they say about libertarians. NRx would do good to differentiate itself from libertarianism by actually incorporating better, and synthesizing with, those very elements you rail against: ethno-nationalists and theonomists. Unless, of course, you actually desire to see NRx regress to libertarianism 2.0, in which case, ignore everything I said. I doubt that’s what Moldbug had in mind.

    Now you are welcome to call me “goon” for typing “Jews”, whatever the context.

    Rasputin Reply:

    This has happened in accordance with the predictions of Vladimir and Goulding in 2013, but, just like the ravagings of democracy itself, it takes a while to register just how degenerate things have become. I can’t stomach the inanity of Twitter, but even on the blog front the decline has been precipitous. It’s almost as though each high end contributor has been replaced by 100 morons…

    [Reply]

    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    The worship of the old members is equally as bad as anything else. I’m sure they would disagree with how that sentiment is positioned as well.

    [Reply]

    forkinhell Reply:

    He-hey! Vladimir and Goulding are what..? NRx’s Romulus and Remus? David and Jonathan? Everytime NRx feels sorry for itself they get wheeled out as the Golden Age. Shit gets worse. That’s the ratchet. That’s NRx theory. And the cure? Rx = pining for the golden age; NRx = entropy dissipation. If you can’t rise above it, you deserve to drown. Not complicated for cockroaches. Dark Enlightenment has a few skins to shed just yet…

    [Reply]

    Rasputin Reply:

    Well, it was a golden age of sorts. The discussion between NL, V & JG which took place here circa 2013 was on a similar level to what took place between MM and NS a few years earlier on their respective blogs. And they did lay out a theory of open comment entropy, which has played out pretty nicely, so credit where it’s due.

    forkinhell Reply:

    Admin has a Kill button – we’re not borderless just yet. But I’m still curious (see below) what’s set off this current worry?

    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    Stuff like this is still odd and I’d prefer to just let things go unsaid. If you really think it was the absolute pinnacle then fine.

    Izak Reply:

    “The fundamental problem is that the recent explosion of the “neoreactionary” internet meme is a grave danger to the whole loose community of quality thinkers and writers who fall under this moniker. It will attract large crowds of people — too tiny to matter in real life, of course, but still far more numerous than the number of people who can contribute usefully to this discourse — who will be attracted by its symbolism and image, or just by the vain desire to air their uninteresting opinions, and who will drown all interesting and worthwhile discussion. (Witness the gradual decline of Moldbug’s comment section from dazzling heights to a hideous cesspool, as his readership expanded and he didn’t bother policing it. Or the similar decline of Less Wrong, as hordes of newbies poured in, attracted by the prospect of building a “rationalist” image.)

    Furthermore, as a more immediate concern — which is relevant even now, before a serious decline has taken place — we’re facing a situation where the “neoreactionary” meme, along with the key terminology that we use as a shorthand for our shared insights (e.g. “the Cathedral”), will acquire a particularly ugly and low-status “nerd porn” connotations, as a result of the newcomers’ efforts to express their new-found image in ways they mistakenly believe are cool and witty. “Reactionary” was a wonderful name to co-opt, but the recent trends of this sort (culminating in those “magical hero” cards) have already made it somewhat embarrassing for me to be identified and associated with this word. The progress that we’ve made in inventing useful theoretical vocabulary will be negated if the use of this vocabulary becomes embarrassing because it will inevitably invoke this sort of image.”

    -Vladimir

    This comment makes me think that the smartest thing you can possibly do is be boring. Intentionally as boring as possible.

    nydwracu Reply:

    Twitter is obviously harmful. It needs killing.

    [Reply]

    Brett Stevens Reply:

    What form of computer-aided communication is not susceptible and, perhaps more on point, what form of group communication is not susceptible?

    [Reply]

    vimothy Reply:

    In addition, can everyone (all maybe half a dozen of us) that has bothered to read MM and are engaging with his arguments drop the NRx bullshit and reorganize somewhere else on a formalized basis, this time with set limits on what is acceptable?

    Why not drop Moldbug altogether and go full-throttle Deleuzian hyper-capitalist singularitarianism?

    [Reply]

    existoon Reply:

    Because only Moldbug wrote something that even compiles ?

    [Reply]

    Izak Reply:

    There are a few reasons for NRx no longer producing anything great and becoming a target for goons on 4chan, or 8chan, or whatever chan, and other message boards, not to mention twitter.

    I will try to elucidate them here, adding to a comment I left on Brett Stevens’s Amerika blog (his first post “What is neoreaction”)

    1. The trike hasn’t done much. As soon as it was introduced, people should have seen their specific ideological branch as primary to their sociopolitical identity, and NRx as secondary. Instead, the trike turned NRx into a somewhat goofy war in which people fight for supremacy over the semantically vague term “neoreaction.” From my perspective, this looks completely silly, because any single word is cheap because language is infinitely recursive and conventional. The wise people have scrapped “NRx” altogether, and yet they still exist and can continue to put out good work. But in scrapping the term, they have contributed to “neoreaction” looking weak as a brand.

    2. NRx’s attitude toward “acceleration” seems to imply immediately going along with whatever doofy technological or social media trend is happening. Everyone got on Twitter, naively. If NRx should be aware of anything, it should probably be the dangers of technology and its effects on day-to-day life. I have noticed that this is a broader problem with the entire outer-right (for instance: people will identify rational actors as a big reason for some degeneracy when technological development or popularization provides the better explanation). I actually think NRx is admirable for trying to accept technology as an irreversible process and one that ought to be adapted to rather than fought against — but even then, there is some naivete in terms of how it, and the media associated with it, affects people’s sensibilities.

    3. Not recognizing that good work takes time; expectation of high quality content constantly. Lack of patience. The wheels of intellectual cogitation turn very slowly.

    4. Too much navel-gazing, attempts to construct self-fulfilling prophecies. Anarchopapist would write a lot about structures acting as sovereign individuals. He would say stuff about how society is an individual, and then Kantbot would show up in his comments section to disagree. I also recall AP strongly agreeing with the suggestion that corporations are people. Nick Land also wrote about how capitalism should be seen as an individual, and even AP had issues with this. (If there’s something I’m missing here about the theory, please correct me). So anyhow — if structural units/organizations can act or be seen as sovereign individuals, then how does that reflect on NRx? One would have to conclude that NRx has recently been a blustery dude who talks about himself a whole lot and tries to rest too much on his laurels.

    5. Failure to sufficiently identify Moldbug as the primary thinker in the brand-name itself. The core NRx guys have done this in their writing, definitely, but it would have been better for them to specifically say outright, “Moldbug’s thinking is our thinking.” I remember one guy suggested NRx be renamed Mencianism or something like that. That would make some sense. Furthermore: if NRx is primarily about endorsing Moldbug’s concept of sovereign corporate rule, then it may help for NRx to be a little more corporate itself. Having one of those goofy SWPL corporate mission statements might help. I’m dead serious.

    For the record, I don’t consider myself NRx, and I have no use for sovereign corporate rule — I am likely part of the shitty coffee shop you’re describing. I also think I appreciate some of the “esoteric retardation” you’re against, because I think that these irrational ideas have a huge impact on society. So you can’t really ignore esoteric retardation without failing to understand to some extent what provides the impetus behind people’s behavior, including the “rational” work they do, since rational thinking is often guided by a highly irrational husk of suppositions. But I’m digressing. My point is, I would like to see Moldbug’s proposition take off in a somewhat organized manner and continue to attract semi-mainstream attention, if only because it would be interesting to see.

    So the solution I think best from the perspective of an outsider, in the most basic terms, would be for people to ditch the “big umbrella” act and become as specific as possible. This implies recognizing that “neoreaction” is a more or less empty signifier and it should be gladly scrapped if it means having a richer and more structurally coherent body of work. If people are too attached to names and labels for themselves, they reveal vulnerability.

    [Reply]

    grey enlightenment Reply:

    it didn’t help that Moldbug called it quits just as things were gaining steam

    [Reply]

    forkinhell Reply:

    *sob*

    forkinhell Reply:

    *blub blub*

    gromboolian Reply:

    It is worth thinking about the communist revolutionaries of the late 19th/early 20th century. After Marx the majority of their written work regarded how to put his ideas into practice, rather than obsessive creation of new ideas just for the sake of it. They held Marx’s work as the foundation stone of their faith, and sniped at each other, rather than at Marx.

    [Reply]

    grey enlightenment Reply:

    I support whatever ‘movement’ is the most logically consistent . This quest for knowledge and understanding is my motivation, not trying to create a whole movement from the ground-up. It’s interesting how Berkeley, of all places, is the origin of DE. It seems like ‘moldbugism’ peaked in early 2014 or so. The media isn’t covering it anymore.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 8:09 am Reply | Quote
  • Exfernal Says:

    Re: dark web trawlers.
    Well, for every measure is a countermeasure (or it will be, if it isn’t yet). I wonder how a Bitcoin wallet snooper (a countermeasure for, say, PRISMicide) would look like.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

    [Reply]

    Brett Stevens Reply:

    I think we’ve come full circle to the old BBS days: code your own system.

    The “official” darknet is Tor; no one trusts it.

    Everyone who is anyone is using highly specialized systems with end to end encryption and internal traffic redirection. This beats both plaintext reading and profiling (to a degree).

    [Reply]

    SVErshov Reply:

    No enough. Today everyone who is anyone is designing their own chips and manufacturing their own hardware cloudflare for example.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 11:14 am Reply | Quote
  • Chaos Patch (#58) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 11:42 am Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    I found this interesting from the More Right article:

    Conservatism has been a blatant failure for decades, even centuries. No matter how much traditionally-minded people try to hold back “Progress,” it keeps on “progressing”.

    But then:

    In the AltRight, it has become somewhat alarming the extent to which the general flow of activity has been pushback against NRx.

    Reading between the lines, what is the resaon for the pushback? We recognize the same disease that has afflicted mainstream conservatism.

    NRx, New Right and Alt Right walk a dangerous path between the rabid underground-far right represented by the JQ line, and the mainstream right which accepts egalitarianism and multiculturalism as a premise.

    Assimilation is the most likely pitfall.

    Great collection of links.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 12:28 pm Reply | Quote
  • Rasputin Says:

    In the UK the mind numbing pre-election build up is in full swing. Obviously, anyone that has read MM knows that the elections are a farce and real power resides with the Cathedral, which is non-elected and permanent. But what is OI’s position on the act of voting? MM suggests the following possibilities:

    1. Don’t vote. It legitimates a corrupt system and can have no positive effect got a reactionary.

    2. Vote for the party most likely to win (the media will tell you which this is) as a form of tribute.

    3. Vote for the most rabidly Leftwing option on the ballot box and hasten the Left singularity.

    4. Do NOT vote for the outer party / the tame opposition (although there is much less light between them in the UK – the conservatives are Cathedralised to the marrow).

    5. (Not MM) Vote for UKIP and send a signal via the democratic process (I think we all know why this one doesn’t work, but thought I would include it anyway).

    [Reply]

    Erebus Reply:

    #1 and #4 are not incompatible.

    #2 seems rather nonsensical, given the entire “inner-party/outer-party” premise. You pay tribute simply by voting.

    #3 probably won’t hasten anything, as the most rabidly left-wing options tend to be on the unelectable fringes. In this case it’s, what, “The Respect Party”? If you want to accelerate the leftist singularity, you’d be best off with a (quite plausible) Labour victory, which would indicate that you should vote Labour.

    …As for #5: Send a signal by voting for a populist party that seems like nothing more than a media scapegoat and a new addition to the outer party? No thanks…

    IMO it’s best to abstain from this sort of farce altogether. Go with #1.

    [Reply]

    nydwracu Reply:

    6) Don’t even think about voting. If it takes less effort to vote than not to vote, vote. If it takes less effort not to vote than to vote, don’t vote. But don’t devote any brain cells to it.

    [Reply]

    Xoth Reply:

    How to vote? A write-in for Julius Malema might be just the thing.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 1:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • woods Says:

    Re: influence editing

    “…Christianity, democracy, and socialism are now, even historically, merely three forms of one idea” – Henri De Man, “Au-delà du marxisme” (1927)

    Somebody send a copy of this book to Moldbug =D

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 1:23 pm Reply | Quote
  • nydwracu Says:

    Cockroach reaction: “The collapse will come and there’s nothing anyone can do about it other than develop the skills to survive by any means necessary — whether that’s survivalism or just learning to techcomm hard enough to make enough money and develop enough competence to be able to bug out. What matters is turning crackers into cockroaches, so that those who are worthy of survival survive, and accelerating the collapse, so that the unworthy ones don’t.”

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 1:45 pm Reply | Quote
  • Barry O'Bamaugh Says:

    Can an industrial civilization arise after readily available fossil fuels are exhausted?:

    http://aeon.co/magazine/technology/could-we-reboot-civilisation-without-fossil-fuels/

    [tl;dr – maybe, but not easily, no matter how smart they are]

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 2:08 pm Reply | Quote
  • kgaard Says:

    Regarding the FEE piece on voice vs exit (and the growing movement toward exit) … I find it rather uninspiring. The problem is that the examples he cited: Scotland, Catalonia, etc, are really just smaller versions of the places they want to split from, with fractional differences in policies. They are more an exercise in ethno-pride than actual change in governance structure.

    I just don’t see a way democracy with 100% voter participation is going to lead to anything categorically different or outside of the range of options on offer now: Tax rates in the 20s to 40s, bureaucratic controls of varying degrees, and all manner of speech codes and don’t-injure-the-dignity-of-the-sensitive codes.

    The one semi interesting development has been the special economic zones, but for the most part these are just giant sweatshops and not real communities.

    For a real reactionary community to exist, it would need some sort of inherently reactionary charter laid out from day one — a charter as offensive to the Cathedral as Saudi Arabia’s legal system. Yet where do you get the turf for such a place? Would Honduras be willing to carve out a piece of its terrain with SOCIALLY reactionary policies as well as giving a corporate charter to the new owner-king? Why would the poor of Honduras allow such an alternative social structure to exist within its own borders.

    The virtual world seems the most likely place for new social orders. The geeks can sense this, which is why they fought back so hard in Gamer Gate.

    [Reply]

    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Right. The fractionation of the modern world is an effect of it becoming more uniform, not a cause of it becoming more diverse.

    [Reply]

    Xoth Reply:

    Colonialism led to Hong Kong, one of the most promising examples to my mind. (Moldbugs pointer to TIME about Congo under Belgian rule in the 1950s was also intriguing, wasn’t it?)

    Combine it with the complaints about NRx now attracting the riffraff and the next movement is obvious: neocolonialism. How to start without a base though? Commence the ouroborous by self-colonialism.

    (Not entirely trolling.)

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 3:34 pm Reply | Quote
  • Erebus Says:

    Speaking of books… I’ve just finished reading Neal Stephenson’s new book Seveneves. It’s nearly as good as The Diamond Age was. It’s worth mentioning that the second part of the book is all about human biodiversity — at one point in the book’s future the different human races are compared to different dog breeds, so obviously real are the differences between them — and racial tension is one of the major plot-drivers. (The future nations of Seveneves are all, without exception, organized on the basis of race — very strongly eth-nat — so conflict between nations becomes essentially the same thing as racial conflict.) It’s also worth noting that, at least to a certain limited and superficial extent, the races of the book reinforce existing stereotypes.
    …The “race is a social construct” people are probably not going to be happy with the none-too-subtle messages contained in this book. HBD-aware folks may get a kick out of ’em.

    [Reply]

    Kgaard Reply:

    Read the review on Amazon and looks interesting. Love how these incredibly non-PC ideas are oozing into the popular consciousness from every angle via books and movies (Diistrict 9, Game of Thrones, Rome series on HBO, etc etc etc).

    But damn 1,000 pages is long. I am always put off by that kind of length. Seems like one should be able to get the ideas he is putting forth in LESS than 1,000 pages, no? Like maybe 300? Collapse each paragragh down into 1-2 sentences. The only 1,000-page work of fiction I can ever recall reading was Atlas Shrugged, though it was worth it. (I don’t know why people say Ayn Rand was a lousy writer. I thought she was a great writer.)

    [Reply]

    Erebus Reply:

    This is essentially two books in one. The first part describes the desperate attempts of humanity to survive an impending global collapse. Total collapse, that is, as the Earth’s atmosphere gets set alight & the biosphere burns off. The second part, which is shorter, starts 5000 years after that. It focuses on the future of humanity, which has been shaped and molded by events and choices made 5000 years in the past. (It’s kinda similar to “A Canticle for Leibowitz” like that.)

    …You can drop the book after 550 pages, give it a few weeks, then pick up Part II whenever you feel like getting back into it. To reiterate, it’s not really one story — it’s more like two books welded together. The second part is the more interesting of the two, but they’re both good.

    As for the length: Seveneves is, emphatically, a Hard-SF book, so Stephenson goes into detail pretty often. This makes for a slower-paced story, and a longer story, but one which is ultimately more sensible and believable. It’s worth a read.

    [Reply]

    existoon Reply:

    Try “The Island” by Peter Watts, it’s short, open access http://www.rifters.com/real/shorts/PeterWatts_TheIsland.pdf

    Why ?

    a) soul-crushing reality check for protagonist who is thinking (as if taken from recent Jacobin mag article)

    “”
    Darwin is an abstraction here, an irrelevant curiosity. This Island puts the lie to everything we were ever told about the machinery of life. Sun-powered, perfectly adapted, immortal, it won no struggle for survival: where are the predators, the competitors, the parasites? All of life around 428 is one vast continuum, one grand act of symbiosis. Nature here is not red in tooth and claw. Nature, out here, is the helping hand.
    “”

    I won’t spoil the ending …

    b) governance on interstellar asteroid-ship bears some resemblance to neocameralist ideas. Keep mission going, no voice, free exit (to cold storage)

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 3:38 pm Reply | Quote
  • Nyan Sandwich Says:

    @chris B

    We’re working on it. NRx is going to retreat from the cesspool that is twitter into private invite only much more formalized fora for general discussion. Details still need working out. Hadley and I have been busy with other stuff, but we’ll get on it more solidly real soon now.

    High quality xenosystems commenters and other neoreactionaries whose names we will recognize as attached to insightful comments are welcome to email me at nyan.sandwich@gmail.com for details.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 8:28 pm Reply | Quote
  • an inanimate aluminum tube Says:

    Maybe that Lord Humongous avatar guy was an entryist, but MPC and /pol aren’t entryists, they’re your competition.

    [Reply]

    Lucian of Samosata Reply:

    /pol/ is satire + idiots that don’t know any better.

    [Reply]

    pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    /pol/ is alot of things that resist casual categorization, like anonymous imageboards in general.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 8:42 pm Reply | Quote
  • forkinhell Says:

    Aside of Bryce’s nullification, would somebody be able to explain to me what the current we’re doomed panic is all about? Was this some Twitter shit (the whole HRx thing?)? Or a collective, prolonged bloggers’ block? Or just the passive Hollywood makes the same old crap these days crowd? Still seems worthwhile stuff out there – particularly looking at these links – just maybe not a movement in the conventional sense (which is good, no?).

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 10:03 pm Reply | Quote
  • Izak Says:

    This is a pretty great discussion featuring both Steve Sailer and Steven Pinker’s thoughts on the possibility of technology in the future: http://www.unz.com/isteve/pinker-v-singularity-think/

    It basically ends with Sailer speculating about how there will be a big new servant class. Both people seem pretty realistic.

    [Reply]

    SVErshov Reply:

    they talk how in future human brain will be connected to computer. well … it is not a future any more. neuroprosthetics huge and rapidly expanding area of research. paralysed woman with electrodes implanted to her brain was able to operate robotic arm via computer interface.

    [Reply]

    Lucian of Samosata Reply:

    Thanks for informing us of this, that’s really cool.

    [Reply]

    SVErshov Reply:

    Thank you. Even, if connecting human neural system ( central and peripheral) with electronic interlace been a success, interface issue (effectiveness, safety) may remains a major problem. Future perhaps is in self assembling DNA computers. Since this field been opened in 1995 a lot of research in DNA computing and programing have been done. DNA Computing and Molecular Programming proceedings published annually. Perhaps it may happens that we will have implantable DNA based bitcoin valets before we will find the way to connect it securely to our desktops.

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 10:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • pseudo-chrysostom Says:

    talking shop about the latest completely pointless SJW act of degeneracy is funny, theres really only so much cloud level thinking a person can do.

    im sensing alot of reacto-sphere people burn themselves out in mania, and their perspectives get warped by inordinate focus on the goings on in these parts.

    [Reply]

    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    I think our concerns are legitimate.

    [Reply]

    pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    hey, im concerned too, thats why i bother to post. im also a troll, coincidence?

    back when i first used the internet, any personality defect was potential ammunition for your counterpart e-gladiators. if there is a feeling that ‘nrx’ is imploding, then it is partly because, to use a phrase, they give too much of a shit.

    ‘but civilization is important’. quite true, but then, everyone and their mother can have an opinion on the Greate Questions of the age with scarcely any involvement. ‘but they are plebs’. plebs, yes, but the chief difference is not one of investment or opportunity, which is a progressive conceit, but of capability. the grasping of insights in humans is infact a very short process, what happens after is oft just elaboration.

    picture a dinner party, where the august patrons are making sport with each other with intellectual toys, as a form of roleplay almost, for in their eyes they are indeed toys. they are then occasioned by a more sallow character whos delivery seems to fall flat. for good reason of course, hes taking things *seriously*. sensing this, his compatriots are sighfully obliged to reciprocate, and seriously impinge upon him rather impolitic topics like nignogs actually being subhuman (really, its just one of those things that should just be assumed.) theres a reason one does not talk ideology at the dinner table after all, it is so often enamored by the myopic (for how else can they think, save through the dictates it calculates?)

    all of which is to say, if you threat this whole reaction business more like a hobby, and less like a matter of life or death, it will be more adaptive to matters of life or death.

    all of which is to really say, those guys advocating white nationalism are totally less wrong than the guys trying to reinvoke old enlightenment conceits like masturbating over systemic solutions to personnel problems.

    of course ideally you need both and more besides, but of the two, good people are much more antifragile than good ideology.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 19th, 2015 at 11:55 pm Reply | Quote
  • pseudo-chrysostom Says:

    to put a finer point on it, there can be more than a little futile retreading of the same intellectual stripmine; a feverish turning and returning that at worst leads to the thinkers own befuddlement, obscuring or obliterating that which was at first felicitous. it is a great conceit of man that he can endlessly exceed the bounds of his own thought, if only he has more time and effort to think. of course here we see the great insight, and thus, importance, of Tradition; man cannot exceed himself, without reception of something greater from outside.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 20th, 2015 at 12:27 am Reply | Quote
  • Tom Says:

    Is it true

    http://8ch.net/aristoi/res/999.html

    that NRx is merging with MPC? I’ve heard people in both camps say it is true.

    [Reply]

    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    What is this feverish fetishization of random internet cliques?!

    [Reply]

    pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    distorted emphasis on minutae is a common symptom of poorish persons prolongedly preoccupied with Shit Nobody Cares About™.

    [Reply]

    Chris B Reply:

    @Tom Reading the comments, it is an interesting case study of De Juvenel’s high low power dynamic in social groups. Annissimov, seeing a group of people developing something gaining some value, makes a power play based on lowest common denominator. He appeals to the masses (pol) against the other competing power centers in NRx. The masses plug in and they both riff off of each other to try and bring everyone else low apart from annissimov as he is in line with their shreiking emotional bullshit. Annissimov brought the monarchy style leftism hard, and NRx not schooling themselves on how to maintain order got pole axed.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    That’s a sound analysis.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    “… Rockwell recruited exceptionally inept personnel, attracting hordes of Nazis he admitted were ‘unbelievably stupid.’ And yet he persisted in shooting for the lowest common denominator’s lowest common denominator.” It’s a tradition.

    pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    on the other hand

    >vice

    an inanimate aluminum tube Reply:

    ” Annissimov, seeing a group of people developing something gaining some value, makes a power play based on lowest common denominator. He appeals to the masses (pol) against the other competing power centers in NRx. The masses plug in and they both riff off of each other to try and bring everyone else low apart from annissimov as he is in line with their shreiking emotional bullshit.”

    No.

    It’s wrong to think that Annissimov mobilized /pol against you. They were already against you for reasons that Sam explained above and because NRX tends to come off as a watered down version of stuff they were already into. NRX threads met a hostile reaction there from very early on.

    Annissimov might be guilty of trying to make NRX more appealing to those types, without much success, but it has hardly spared him from mockery, rather every aspect of his life has already been extensively mocked, so it’s kind of old news at this point.

    It’s very simple, you’re being made fun of by people who don’t like your personalities and who (to some extent) disagree with your political views. And having claimed a few scalps, they now smell blood.

    Don’t blame Annissimov, blame yourselves or Gnon.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    You’re missing the criticism. No one cares that the lumpen neonazi detritus is against us — it would be distressing if they weren’t. The criticism is that various NRx doors were left open for them to get in through.

    Chris B Reply:

    @an inanimate aluminium tube

    There is a great confusion around the concept of society and human interactions being not consciously designed. This is one of the key points of Universalism which MM builds from De Juvenel’s Minotaur concept. I also use De Juvenel’s high-low power concept in more localized interactions. The whole point of it is that within human interactions, some decisions and actions are taken which have been largely preset. They naturally occur. Power centralizing via lowest common denominating to gain numbers and undermine other closer powers is one of them.

    The Nazi retards, and (appallingly) lots of (most of really) “NRx” crying for direction to be pushed to Jews/ cultural Marxists completely dump this whole current of NRx and demand conscious actors to blame. That isn’t dark enlightenment. Dark enlightenment is realizing the past 300 years+ have been a rolling chaos with a ridiculous narrative about progress tacked on.

    And that NRx has come across as watered down /pol/ is due to prominent NRxers not reading MM and not taking up his primary sources properly, and on this front I am being charitable. If they did there would be no nationalists, no “enlightenment” monarchists and no *post-libertarians*, there would instead be people aggressively pursuing lines of interest in the material.

    This is a world of difference between NOT being allergic to nazis etc, and thinking nazism etc is a legitimate or sane form of society.

    Posted on April 20th, 2015 at 1:13 am Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    The people who worship the old people are weird in such an acute and specific amount of permutations that it is hard to get across just how many things are going off point. These people are in no specific order

    1) The sort of people who wouldn’t know anyways
    2) Non-technical sorts(non-tech people can be exceptions at the top end)
    3) Are unfamiliar with any of the upper-end intellectual advancements of the 21st century/late 20th and do not participate in them or do not know what they are
    4) Curt is the best anyways
    5)Have a personality structure that makes them spend time on the Internet all day and read only blog posts where the real knowledge is in books
    6) For some reason talk about a very specific and concentrated amount of topics pointing to a lack of breadth and erudition.
    7)Think ups and downs of quality metrics can be strictly pointed to in terms of functional things that can be remedied as opposed to the natural variance of the quality metrics themselves that happen anyways accounting for peoples personal lives and such.
    8) Are unfamiliar with any political philosophy which to the contrary are significant advancements over any discussion that has ever taken place on the internet anyways

    Vladmirs comments about lesswrong I disagree with as well and from what I understand most of the smart people I know in real life disagree about any so called decline. It’s just the main people are involved in other things as of right now and few people want to build a ‘rationality’ image.

    Any one who explains ups/downs is profoundly ignorant aside from specifically demonstrable causes.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 20th, 2015 at 1:49 am Reply | Quote
  • Rasputin Says:

    “The people who worship the old people are weird in such an acute and specific amount of permutations…” What does this even mean?

    By juxtaposing the lucid intelligence of Vladimir with your own unfocused criticism your comment illustrates my point perfectly.

    [Reply]

    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    No. We lack technical people and we have too many pretend elitists posturing as the friends of main writers. The fact that we can’t get anywhere is because dumb nontechnical people like you are faking their education and abilities without any one calling them out.

    We are just at the intersection of too many population groups to accomplish anything meaningful.

    [Reply]

    Rasputin Reply:

    I have never claimed to be technical, in fact I generally make a point of the fact that I am not. Furthermore, I have never claimed to be anybody’s ‘friend’, although there are a number of people I respect a lot and have learned a lot from. It goes without saying that you are not one of them.

    [Reply]

    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    I do not care about the opinions of non-technical people and I do not think their opinion even matters in any circumstance ever, the world has passed them by for good.

    There are too many people weighing down the discussions with their lack of knowledge. Any one who has actually met a personal who can be termed a genius in the classical sense would be humiliated to to overstretch the term online.

    Your awkward responses to me even suggesting the synthesis of John Gray even though it’s perfectly acceptable to add that suggestion(you called him a humanist right?) was enough to damn you from my perspective.

    Rasputin Reply:

    Thanks for your reply, incoherent and illiterate as it is. In answer to your question, John Grey is an anti-humanist. In our previous conversation my point was that he did not manage to advance anything like the systemic critique of Dawkins essayed by Moldbug, despite some overlaps in their criticisms of him regarding his religiosity. I think your point was that Grey was *more* Dark Enlightenment than Moldbug and everyone should go and worship him instead, or something.

    PS the link to your blog isn’t working.

    Posted on April 20th, 2015 at 10:04 am Reply | Quote
  • Mark Warburton Says:

    @

    Agreed. Too much dross filtering through. I keep my comments to a minimum because I’m not knowledgeable enough to add to the vast array of topics discussed here. There is no humility, and because there is no humility, there is lots of noise and not enough signal. I read Chris B for insight and David Thompson for light-relief. I come away from Chris’ posts feeling like I’ve learnt something – that use to be standard across the NRX blog cloud in 2013.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 20th, 2015 at 11:15 am Reply | Quote
  • Chris B Says:

    @Sam “not allergic” does not = supports. It means, not fleeing in shrieking horror because current norms dictate that you should. There is an ocean of difference in there.

    As for NRx abandoning the trike. That’s fine, they can keep it. It’s the trike or MM’s stuff & the material behind MM; that is everyone’s choice. I will take MM’s stuff and his reading list thank you very much and stop labeling myself as NRx.
    Leave NRx to figure out how to create a monarchist nazi libertarian kingdom without comprehending that Nazism is pretty much a really dumb post french revolution/ post feudal absolutism monarchism (with inbuilt ridiculous contradictions), that monarchism in the european sense is the mother of leftism by virtue of being insecure and that libertarianism is incoherent and relies on a refusal to face the reality of power.

    Also, the idea that integrating with theonomists and nationalists has any value is laughable. It’s like everyone has lost their minds. “Hey guys, lets try and push on with these really strange neoreactionary ideas put forward by moldbug based on old books, o wait, some of us used to be Nationalists, some libertarians and some are traditional religious, so lets make this a trike and try to synthesise our old beliefs and start talking about Evola” – what?!?

    [Reply]

    Orthodox Laissez-fairist Reply:

    Don’t be such a whiny little Utopian in your quest to find a Maxwell’s Demon. Count to ten. Breathe. Monarchy has worked, for a long time. Sure, there is probably an infinite amount of better solutions, but there’s no perfect solution. All actions taken to decrease entropy of subsystem increase total entropy in the system, for Demiurge must generate more entropy in creating order than he could ever eliminate. There are always unintended consequences, because people are not omniscient. It’s easy to note failures of the past, but all past order was spontaneous order and I’m not sure that it’s even possible to artificially create entropy dissipators – honestly, best you could hope for is to give a push in the right direction, here and there.

    [Reply]

    Chris B Reply:

    “Monarchy has worked, for a long time.” No, fuedalism worked for a long time and kept the Monarch small, ineffectual and out of everyones hair. Monarchy used negative liberties to undermine the feudal system and gain greater and greater power by turning all vassals into subjects of the King only. This is why early monarchs were useless, and why later monarchs became absolute – they used leftism/ the people/ individual liberties.

    The whole damn point MM was trying to make is that the other way for making a right wing system (as opposed to feudal containment of Power) is to remove the incentive for the central Power to employ leftism to gain power by making Power secure; thereby altering the dynamic.

    But, whatever, I wish NRx the best of luck in their fusing of nationalism/ libertarianism/ monarchism.

    [Reply]

    Orthodox Laissez-fairist Reply:

    You missed my point, which is that it’s not the only dynamic in society. It’s merely the most obvious one.

    Sam Reply:

    Chris,

    A healthy dose of tribalism does not a Nazi make. Your denigration of any and all manifestations of tribalism on the part of ethnic Europeans is Progressive in essence, since *tribalism is of Gnon*, and NRx would be rendered internally-contradictory should it attempt to construct a worldview that doesn’t take into account this reality. You do not resist tribalism – you direct it. This is the meaning, or should be the meaning, of “memetic independence”: you don’t turn into a Nazi, but you can leverage ethno-nationalism to your purposes. It then follows that ethno-nationalists should be seen as allies, allies on the Right (not to be confused with “to the Right”), and as such, your disavowal of them is, if not an ideological treachery, then certainly a futile attempt to do Right by going Left (by which I mean: an attempt to achieve Right-wing ends by following in the direction of the Left; a patent absurd).

    Even as you hear some White Nationalists blaming the Jews (or any “rational agents”) for everything that is bad, ask yourself the following question: do I see Gnon in action here? The answer is yes: they follow their natural, self-preservatory, tribalistic instincts, which are there for a reason. And that’s my point: the cooperation with those groups is not hinged on convenience, much less aesthetics, but on strategic, mutually-beneficial interests: they want to preserve their ethnos against the onslaught of Multiracialism; your purposes are compatible with, despite not being similar to, their objective; and you work together for the promotion of both strands of “reaction”. Thus this allegiance bolsters you, not weakens you. All branches of the Trike would benefit by striving to be acceleratory rather than moderatory. “But I really, *really* dislike their mannerisms” is a common retort from those who share your attitude. Well guess what: I don’t like various aspects of Nature, of which human nature is derived. So? I’ll let you in on a little secret: you cannot Horrify your Cathedralite adversaries without being Horrified yourself.

    [Reply]

    Chris B Reply:

    You make the mistake of failing to appreciate how malleable social groups and “tribalism” are. Nationalism itself was a system employed by central Power to undermine local power centers and turn everyone into individuals. Also, ETHNO NATIONALISM is merely an old incarnation of the CATHEDRAL. I’m not sure how many time I need to point that out.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 20th, 2015 at 3:22 pm Reply | Quote
  • spandrell Says:

    This is a tragedy of the commons if I ever saw one.

    Nominalism is your friend. Neoreaction isn’t a thing. It’s a name. A pretty bad name, used by a set of people to identify themselves, without any license or permission. At first it was fun, level was high and using the name carried some status.

    So obviously eventually a bunch of retards come in and also call themselves Neoreaction. There’s three ways to react to this: you can ignore them, which I did. You can jump and denounce them and insult them and deny their right to use the name. Which I didn’t, because it’s bad form, but perhaps I should have. I guess I was waiting for someone else to do so and then join up, but alas we are all way too polite.

    And then you can embrace them, take them seriously, talk with them and link to their blogs. This is what this blog did, what many others did, and upon what the Twitter echo-chamber was built.

    Now of course your taste may vary, but you shouldn’t get to complain when you’ve been taking A, and B, and all the others seriously for years, quoting them and acting as if they had an IQ beyond room temperature. You earned this. You wanted a movement, well now you got it.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    (I still think it’s going OK, everybody’s dead Utopian delusions aside.)

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    ((Correcting for all the youngsters with mis-calibrated time-horizons is the first step — but time probably has to do that.))

    [Reply]

    Hurlock Reply:

    /thread

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 20th, 2015 at 4:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • scientism Says:

    I’m going to take a shot at defining something worth being a part of, which I think is inclusive of what is good in Neoreaction, although maybe it deserves another name. The way I see this group is that it’s defined by a question, a goal and a consequent methodological stricture.

    The question: What is good and what is bad in modernity?

    The goal: To develop a body of work based on the answer to this question that could be helpful to an intelligent bureaucrat in managing an advanced industrial civilisation.

    The consequent methodological stricture: To, at minimum, engage at the level of the best currently existing political science and economics.

    The question is about separating the wheat from the chaff in our current situation. Some of the changes in the modern world are due to changing material circumstances, primarily due to technological advancement, and, since we reject primitivism, we need to account for these. Others are due to bad ideas, reactions by groups who feel marginalised or just leftover baggage from old struggles. The goal, then, is to figure out which is which. Everyone has a different idea about where, exactly, to draw the line, what to conserve and what to reject, what belongs to changing material conditions and what belongs to ideology. An obvious example is whether declining birth rates are an inevitable consequence of industrialisation or a result of bad policy is pursuit of supposed equality. But I think it’s asking the question, rather than giving any particular answer, that’s important.

    The goal and the methodological stricture define the level we should be aiming at and also positively formulate negative strictures on engaging in populism. What we need to create is a body of knowledge that’s actually useful for running a country or city-state, rather than merely expressing our anger with the current world, and this needs to be done in way that can answer to the best that the opposition has to offer.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 20th, 2015 at 6:05 pm Reply | Quote
  • ivvenalis Says:

    @Erebus

    I don’t know how anybody who has read Diamond Age could expect anything less from Stephenson. The portrayal of the Neo-Victorians struck me as practically trolling when I read it, way before MM ever started writing.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 21st, 2015 at 2:15 am Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    How can any one disagree with what NIO is saying?

    [Reply]

    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    The people who disagree with removing the absolute vicious component are what allow the people who think bringing out every one’s personal affairs is okay and implicitly allows character defamation. Why is everyone fighting so hard? We attract the wrong people.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 21st, 2015 at 3:14 am Reply | Quote
  • Rasputin Says:

    http://www.salon.com/2015/04/21/chimpanzees_recognized_as_legal_persons_for_first_time_in_history/

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 21st, 2015 at 11:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    @Rasputin

    “Thanks for your reply, incoherent and illiterate as it is. In answer to your question, John Grey is an anti-humanist. In our previous conversation my point was that he did not manage to advance anything like the systemic critique of Dawkins essayed by Moldbug, despite some overlaps in their criticisms of him regarding his religiosity. I think your point was that Grey was *more* Dark Enlightenment than Moldbug and everyone should go and worship him instead, or something. PS the link to your blog isn’t working.”

    Moldbug did not advance any systematic critique of Dawkin’s so much as it was an interesting point he made in fact few would argue that John Gray is somehow less than Mencius even equal, you were just responding in a knee-jerk fashion as does anyone when we try to reference anything that isn’t mencius. Your posts in that thread demonstrate your childishness and I’m glad that all of the ‘critiques’ were laughable.

    “Thanks for your reply, incoherent and illiterate as it is”, lol. “I need something that is negative irrespective of the truth and will just say some random negative statement”

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 23rd, 2015 at 11:48 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment