Chaos Patch (#86)

(Open thread + links)

Pillars of right unity. The moralistic prestige engine. The logic of civil rights. Dim enlightenment. TFP postrationalism. Zeitgeist skepticism. Diversity and authoritarianism. The weekly round, in doom.

Strategic pessimism. The coming Chinese global splurge (also), and population policy. Problems in Portugal. Japan’s strange choice. Straight-up Jacobins are the new extreme right. Indonesia burning. The land without a left. The power of ISIS. Venezuelan money troubles. Brazilian dissent.

Deflationary nemesis (can’t be stopped). “… big businesses … have increasingly used Left-ish politics as a form of public relations.” Over-extension (also). The age of distrust. Obstacles to apprenticeship.

Clueless and splintering. Dems ain’t what they used to be.

Sex and gender wars (and avoiding war, also, and more 1, 2, 3). So many tears. “Who cares what you feel?” Beyond comment. Drunken utilitarianism. Brown scare.

How Luther stopped. Douthat in the Cathedral (brings mixed response, and more). Mencken on traditional mass. Satanic squabbles (plus).

The flow (keeps coming). Winter-Chan worries. Disappearing natives.

Climate change. Putin’s cool.

On Cixin Liu.

The military tech in your phone. Innovation virus, and ‘temes‘. Innovative universities. Nero‘s new gig (1, 2). Accidental genius.

Two-Europes. Super-elites. Sequencing costs (graphic). Ritual in social complexity.

Quantum foundations of entropy. Efficient slime. Hot-head rats. Chimera. Hilbert curves.

November 1, 2015admin 26 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , , , , , ,

26 Responses to this entry

  • Chaos Patch (#86) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] By admin […]

    Posted on November 1st, 2015 at 9:10 am Reply | Quote
  • OLF Says:

    Re: Deflationary nemesis

    It may happen.

    “The problems run deeper than the threat of total disaster. In fact, that’s the whole point: if bad monetary policies always produced immediate catastrophe, people would long ago have seen the failings of central banks and done something to replace them.”

    There’s More to Money than Hyperinflation


    Posted on November 1st, 2015 at 9:58 am Reply | Quote
  • Darth Normander Says:

    Why the 10 years old paper on russian conscripts?


    admin Reply:

    Crummy vetting procedure + Twitter randomness. (I’ll take it out.)


    Posted on November 1st, 2015 at 10:35 am Reply | Quote
  • The Electric Philosopher Says:

    The slime piece was surprisingly interesting, especially the stuff on non hierarchical organisation. I’m amused by the idea that slime mold is the key to communism.


    SVErshov Reply:

    parrots lives in flocks with no leader, mate for life and emotionally attached to others flock members, some times 300 of them. I got recently African Grey 5 monthd now and his intelligence really shocking. They can develop intelligence of 9 year old human child.


    Posted on November 1st, 2015 at 12:42 pm Reply | Quote
  • 0987654321 Says:

    Straight-up Jacobins are the new extreme right <– entryists. They're not the only ones.


    Erebus Reply:

    They’re not really reactionaries, and it should go without saying that they have nothing to do with neoreaction. They merely give a damn about French culture & are saying what needs to be said — and they’re openly staking their reputations on it. How the hell are they entryists? Entryists to what? And even if we assume that they are entryists, which seems absurd to me, wouldn’t you agree that France could nevertheless use a lot more of their kind? Anti-migrant and anti-Islamic sentiments should always be applauded without reservation, no matter what the source — such sentiments are, always and everywhere, an unalloyed good.


    Seth Reply:

    It’s a function of the fact that “race” has become the bedrock critical category of all 21st century leftist thought. One can get into bed with corporatism and still be a leftist in decent standing; however, to question the moral rightness of transferring all power to non-whites means to be cast into outer darkness.


    Erebus Reply:

    Right. And this results precisely in the sort of farce we’re seeing here, where if one criticizes (utterly insane) third-world migration, one automatically becomes a “reactionary” — even if one has had nothing to do with the political right, let alone with reaction. The word “reactionary” is simply used to mean: “As far as possible from acceptable leftist/progressive thought.” It is not intended to convey any other information. This is, as mentioned previously, farcical.

    Posted on November 1st, 2015 at 1:33 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chaos Patch (#86) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on November 1st, 2015 at 1:43 pm Reply | Quote
  • Seth Says:

    Re: Herr Doktor Luther

    Luther did not temper his radicalism; he was never radical to begin with. He was a reformer in the true sense of the word. He loved the Catholic Church and her history, and he wanted to purge it of unbiblical traditions. For example, though he thought confession should be voluntary, he also believed that a true Christian would always go voluntarily. Today, one can imagine a progressive priest saying the sacrament is “voluntary,” by which he would mean that it’s not important and you don’t need to do it. Luther, in contrast, meant “voluntary” in the sense that there should be no active punishment against someone forsaking the sacrament. But he absolutely held that it was vital for all Christians.

    There is reformation from the inside, an honest and good will desire to see something you love change so that it might be a better version of itself. To his dying breath, Luther called himself a Reformed Catholic.

    Then there is reformation from the outside, which seeks the undermining and destruction of something you don’t love. The radical reformers hated the Catholic church and wanted to leave it (or destroy it). That’s why they called themselves Lutherans even though Luther hated that term.


    michael Reply:

    I think jayman has vindicated my theory that we need the proles.
    JayMan says:
    • Website
    October 27, 2015 at 4:04 pm GMT • 300 Words

    True but wouldn’t proles contribute at least as many high IQ university students as the elites?
    { Say elites produce 100% high IQ students and all go to university, and proles produce 1 out of 100 of the prole population with a plus 130 IQ and they all go to university, and prole pop is is 100x the elite population of over 130 IQ} I chose >130 IQ because i think that’s the 1%, adjust if im off.

    Let’s figure it out.

    A simple model for estimating this is to cut the normal distribution. By this definition, “prole” = IQ < 115, "elite" = IQ 115+

    (This is of course not proper, but it's close enough for this purpose).

    "Proles" are 84% of the White population while "elites" are 16%.

    Using the formula for a truncated normal distribution, the mean IQ of the “prole” side is 95.7, while the mean of the “elite” side is 123.

    For the next generation (assuming there’s no change in the relative proportions of each), allowing for regression (assuming an additive heritability of IQ of 0.6), the mean IQ of the prole side will be 97.4 and the mean IQ of the elite side will be 114. Each is still 84% and 16% of the total population, respectively.

    The fraction of those IQ 130 coming from the “prole” side will be 1.5% of all proles. The fraction of those coming from the elites will be 14% of all elites.


    “Elite” share of 130+ = 64%
    “Prole” share of 130+ = 36%

    Two thirds of the high IQ children will originate from the elite class under this model.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    I suppose by that logic we also need to convince women of our politics since they birth 100% of the elites. Rather we stand by the notion that women and proles need not concern themselves with politics but fall in line as it is their nature to do so. I also don’t consider intelligence to be sufficient for eliteness. Ambition and initiative are every bit as important.

    Women and proles serve important parts of civilization, they are needed and when they fulfill their allotted roles they accrue a measure of earned respect. Involvement in politics isn’t part of that role which is why their political opinions are undeserving of respect. This doesn’t diminish their character anymore than a lack of respect for a scientist’s athletic ability diminishes his. Hierarchies, divisions of labor, nested systems within systems, and niches aren’t going to disappear. The notion that everything can be simplified into some monolithic uniform structure is as ridiculous as it is pervasive to human thinking.

    The idea that it is better to make every man an elite is every bit as ridiculous as the idea that it would be better to make every woman a man. It is guided by short sighted optimization of blind numbers without regard for reality. The modern prole is every bit as dysfunctional as the modern woman as the modern “elite” as the modern man. In addition to fixing obvious dysfunction, the cultivation of a better humanity can be found in genetic engineering. There is room for a better class of prole.

    One can even extend this to man and machine. Dysfunction can be found in modernity that seeks to make men into machines, mirroring the making of women into men. The biological and mechanical are suited to their own tasks. Our loyalty is to civilization, good is what affirms and builds civilization, evil is what undermines and decays it. There may come a time when machine sits higher on the hierarchy of power than men as elite do prole (though I suspect it will be biomechanical hybrid). Do we suppose men wrong to bend the knee to their betters when they know their place in a hierarchy. Civilization is composed of classes, sexes, and even species (domesticated animals, cows are respected for their deliciousness not their political opinions). Machines serve to expand this complexity, not replace it.


    michael Reply:

    You misunderstand, i dont mean we need to popularize neoreaction for proles, I am pushing back against this elitist strain in nrx where the needs and interests of proles are subordinated to those of systems machines and elites.My point is the us vs them mentality is similar to our current elites thinking, not only is it evil from the perspective of the majority but its stupid because its better to think about proles as part of one organism. The brain may make the decision but no Right thinking brain decides against its arm or cherry pick the worst proles as a representation is not fair first they vary greatly and a lot of this has to do with how the elites cultivate proles, Unlike most of you I spend a fair amount of time with proles and while I wouldnt want to spend all my time with them I wouldnt want to spend it all with elites either. Today’s elites manipulate proles through the basest instincts often getting caught in the ensuing shit culture themselves.I do not want to live in a world not flavored by the salt of the earth as it were.
    I agree with what many of you think was MM idea about the weakness of the democratic system [though we former conservatives usually gave the stoics or Tocqueville credit] but remain unconvinced it is the main problem.That is not to say a popular revolution is the solution. Elites voluntarily gave up control and still use democracy really more as cover for what they already want to do,than a driving force. The proles dont want feminism gay rights or population replacement ,they have fought both valiantly for decades, Proles want these things.Im going to accept a govt subsidized loan for solar panels, I know this is further bankrupting the US and the global warming driving the loans is bullshit that solar electricity without subsidies makes no sense, but hey its free, commons theory, does that make me a socialist prole or just smart enough to take free shit when offered. The elites pretend they are simply implementing the peoples will but are actually ignoring it while trying to manipulate it. This idea that if the elites owned the state they would take better care is equally ridiculous they do own it and or are handsomely rewarded by it, yet are rapidly destroying it It doesnt seem to worry them. as intelligent as they are not only can they not seem to understand basic accounting they seem never to have met an actual kaffir. So giving them absolute authority seems a little crazy no matter how much better they ought to be able to run a nation theoretically. But many go beyond this and think we should all become slaves of a computer this is beyond stupid. Sure machines can help us but even if it becomes possible we should never submit to them. It is true we can never be magically transported back to the turn of the century or earlier. But DENRX really implies a more implausible future. some how magically the cathedral is going to come to us for advice and we are going to tell them to take all rights away and put women back in the kitchen. First the Cathedral will never collapse because of simple debt they will use any financial collapse as an excuse for absolute power with which they will shut down blogs like this. Any outside force like China that defeats them militarily will not want DENRX advice. The Cathedral is rapidly turning over power to the ANC and they will never ask your opinion either. The only chance of influence is going to be a very popular push back and it better happen soon. yes that has risks but it buys time which is in short supply. But DENRX is no where near ready to offer advice so while there would be a greay opportunity to influence a popular movement DENRX has for instance not one single idea on what DENRX patriarchy would look like its only a simple little issue i bring up a lot to point out you guys spend all your time imagining how many pions can dance on the mind of AI while rome burns but all you can say about feminism is women stupid whores, tell me something i dont know and keep in mind i have a daughter so unlike my Yemen grocer im not going to go for stoning and genital mutilation. MM talks about making oneself ready for leadership. Im a leader in my little worlds ill tell you the first thing about leaders they are doers not critics when i take over a situation theres always several easily identifiable groups i must manage the followers are the easiest they simply need assuring theres a safe place for them. other potential leaders are also usually not a problem they tend to quickly assess the odds of supplanting me without wrecking the outcome vs becoming a ally and fall into the hierarchy or leave recognizing their talent usually smooths this.the problem people are the critics. They dont have the solution just a lot of criticism which they use to try and gain status. If NRX want to lead it better start putting its neck out with solutions. general principles are of no help they narrow possibilities prematurely. So ill for the 100 time challenge another dark knight to start working on the simple problem of women. you neednt solve it just begin. how do we get from here and where do we need to end up. the question I usually ask is, How or would DENRX Patriarchy differ from former forms of it?

    michael Reply:

    unfortunately a lot of leftism can be traced to a reasonable reform. we had this discussion about something or other and i suggested these reforms turn into ratchets because it the only direction to go from conservatism.


    Posted on November 1st, 2015 at 6:36 pm Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    “And in this environment, virtue is being reborn. Remarkable.”

    From Dim Enlightenment link.

    So it is.


    Posted on November 1st, 2015 at 10:16 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Thank you for the link, and great to see Amerika on here as always. The “diversity => fascism” article is fascinating because it brings up a larger topic: the more diversity, the less social order. Diversity is entropy. When you have a homogenous society, people do things mostly the same way and the result is a smooth implementation with only a few cases. With diversity, you have cases verging on infinity, and the result is a tendency to choose vague norms and enforce them in greater spirals of severity. This in turn leads to resentment and convinces your smarter people not to breed because they are surrounded by chaos and breakdown. This argument applies to all forms of diversity — ethnic, cultural, linguistic, religious, even of philosophy — and shows why over time societies break down. They become chaotic and turned against themselves internally, thus grind themselves down from within instead of directing that energy outward.


    michael Reply:

    discrimination is the essence of order


    Posted on November 2nd, 2015 at 12:28 am Reply | Quote
  • michael Says:


    Posted on November 2nd, 2015 at 4:12 am Reply | Quote
  • recurrent Says:

    You said, “I only believe what I haven’t got around to yet.” Do you have a pointer to a discussion on how this affects meta-strategies surrounding beliefs?


    Posted on November 2nd, 2015 at 7:21 am Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    rare case. it aslo shows that on cellular level we are all quite compatible.


    Posted on November 2nd, 2015 at 1:09 pm Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    the entire entropy is bad and order is a defacto good thing is overrated. Nassim’s work is the only thing that’s corroborated/actually worked in the real world and his epistemology requires a sufficient amount of volatility/entropy.

    Pursuing the “order” line of thought is a great way to waste time.


    Posted on November 2nd, 2015 at 10:57 pm Reply | Quote
  • Skilluminati Says:

    Thanks especially for the “Strategic Pessimism” riff, that vocabulary will be most useful. Loathe as I am to credit Vox with being thought-provoking…


    Posted on November 3rd, 2015 at 4:39 pm Reply | Quote
  • Krisis Says:

    Is NRx ordinary rightism, with theory-of-mind added?


    admin Reply:

    You mean accepting radical cognitive diversity? (Or what?)


    Posted on November 4th, 2015 at 8:48 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment