City of Night

This insisted on being stolen. It made itself irresistible by its sheer Amishlessness:


(via Derek Hopper)

Rather than cathedrals, the East Asian cities that enthrall this blog tend to nurture temples to self-cultivation and ultimate cosmic nullity among their LED-skinned hypermodern edifices of capitalist darkness. Yet, despite the difference in religious heritage, the split-time signature is precisely the same. Neoreaction diverges from Paleoreaction insofar as it coincides with the understanding: Tradition is not something one can ever simply hold on to, or to which one can truly return. The Neoreactionary city is a standing time-spiral in process.

August 28, 2014admin 23 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

23 Responses to this entry

  • Chris B Says:

    I have two temples within 50 feet of me, and supermodern LED covered buildings 5 minutes walk away.


    admin Reply:

    Neoreaction is already here, it’s just unevenly distributed.


    Posted on August 28th, 2014 at 3:29 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chris B Says:

    “ultimate cosmic nullity” do you think this is what is ultimately missing from western philosophy as Dugin claims? the embracing of chaos and ultimate knowledge that you cannot know all? It would mean that the whole western branch of philosophy is utterly worthless. Devoid of any real meaning. I’m noticing now that Chaos is present in Taoism, Budhism and even Hinduism (and too a lesser stunted extent in Catholicism in the form of the devil and original sin). The Catholic position placing Chaos very much as something to be feared, without understanding or embracing the other aspects of chaos. It’s ultimate degradation into Protestantism, and finally progism via the Enlightenment being the symptom of this severing of any lingering connection with Chaos, allowing the full psychosis of what we know see as the western world.


    Hurlock Reply:

    You are overlooking the very elaborate tradition of spontaneous order in the west which deals exactly with the limits of human knowledge and how order emerges from chaos.

    Also “chaos” needs to be rigorously defined as I am sensing differences between the western and eastern (specifically Dugin’s) perceptions of chaos.


    ultraZEN Reply:

    For the sake of reference, here is Dugin’s “Metaphysics of Chaos”:

    Part rasputine madman, part reactionary genius, often way off, sometimes straight out ridiculous, but always interesting.


    admin Reply:

    We definitely need to find a productive way to discuss this stuff. In the Western tradition, I suspect it requires a loop through ancient skepticism (Pyrrho) to set it up.


    Brother Nihil Reply:

    Take a look at “Liber Null” by Peter Carroll and some of the other Chaos Magic work.

    Chaos has been the great metaphysical blind spot of Western man since that bore Socrates came on the scene; the whole notion of taming chaos and bringing order to the cosmos with our rational minds is the root of Western Judeo-Hellenic-Christian progressive hubris and delusion. Surely a renewed appreciation for chaos is the cure.

    This is what Traditionalists don’t appreciate; the antidote to Enlightenment progressivism isn’t some other ossified tradition; it’s untamed, shamanic chaos. The true Chaote asks: Why not douse the entire planet in aerosolized LSD, launch all the nukes and see what happens? That oughtta blow up the Cathedral real good!

    It’s interesting to note that Dugin has adopted the Chaos symbol for his movement, which originated in Michael Moorcock’s fiction and was popularized by the Chaos Magicians.

    Here’s a member of Dugin’s army with the symbol on an armband:

    Looks like a neoreactionary bad-boy to me!

    Here’s some young Russian revolutionaries flying the Chaos banner:

    And be sure to read up on the Chaos Cults from Wow:

    There are many parallels to the Cathedral and Nrx in this mythos if you use your imagination. I’m particularly fond of “the Managerie”, which is described thus:

    The Cult is a very real and powerful entity which seeks to undermine the very nature of reality itself. Warp-dabblers and those interested in forbidden lore are those most often to eventually fall into the Menagerie’s ranks. The cult itself operates through secret plots, conspiracies, and intrigues. Recruits are treated as an “audience”, shown a vision of the true nature of the universe that normally drives the viewer insane and claims their soul. However those that survive are welcomed into the Cults ranks. The Cult is a collection of madmen, schemers, and Sorcerers. They led by a sect known as the Revelators, fanatical believers in their cause. Revelators seek to reveal what they have seen, the “truth of the universe”, to greater humanity.

    (See )

    Many of you sound like good candidates for such a cult to me. Anyone game?


    Chris B Reply:

    That’s a very western interpretation of Chaos. The premise of undermining reality speaks to Western beliefs in ultimate mastery of Chaos and the world. That way leads to degeneracy.

    Alex Reply:

    Why not douse the entire planet in aerosolized LSD, launch all the nukes and see what happens? That oughtta blow up the Cathedral real good!

    Why give the Cathedral what it wants?

    Chris B Reply:

    @admin – it’s seems to my extremely limited reading of Pyrrho (and Kitaro), that the metaphysical interpretation of his thought has some echoes in Kitaro’s non sublimated contradictions based on nothingness which is fundamentally Buddhist. I really don’t like the Hegel link, but even that is telling. Hegel’s dialectic, taken to it’s logical destination by Marx, is nothing more then a demented victory dance of logos over Chaos, each synthesis being nothing more then a refresh of the rejection of nothingness and swirl into western madness. Apparently Kitaro is even quoted as saying “we can distinguish traditional Eastern and Western philosophies by the East’s prioritizing of nothingness and the West’s reliance on being”.
    This is also (again from very limited reading) seemingly linked to Zongshan’s two levels Ontology.

    It looks like reactionaries everywhere are trying to get to the same place. A placement of nothingness, Chaos or God back in the center of the world. NRx and Neo-confucism seemingly intent on doing so whilst preserving the non stultifying nature of technological progress obtained from the concentration on Being in the west. To call this a difficult task is putting it lightly.


    Hurlock Reply:

    “Apparently Kitaro is even quoted as saying “we can distinguish traditional Eastern and Western philosophies by the East’s prioritizing of nothingness and the West’s reliance on being”.”

    There is a lot about nothingness in western philosophy as well. Specifically about Hegel and nothingness (being at the center of being), you might want to have a word with Zizek.

    Also, reading that piece by Dugin that ultraZEN posted, he just seems like a plain old dialectitian, so I was not really impressed. He actually sounds quite Hegelian to me.

    Chris B Reply:

    @hurlock Kitaro use the language of dialectic,but has no synthesis. It’s clearly Budhist derived. Dugin is no Hegelian. I don’tthink Dugin fully knows what he is yet. He is grasping for some kind of eastern synthesis through Chaos to remedy the flaw of Logos without Chaos. Hence the search through non western traditons he seems to be conducting, hence the praise for levi-strauss, Boaz etc for their praise of non western societies. This is where a lot of the confusion with Dugin stems from imho.

    scientism Reply:

    Westerners use God to refer to chaos and the unknowable. For example, classical liberals used “divine providence” where they now use “spontaneous order.” When you look at how the God concept is used, rather than how it is justified metaphysically, it looks a lot like anthropomorphic way of discussing “cosmic nullity” (many common expressions using “God” are the equivalent of “shit happens”).

    Self-cultivation was also common to the Western tradition (including the goal of Sagehood found in East Asian traditions) until the 17th century when morality became problematised (i.e., supposedly impossible to reconcile with Nature and hence either in need of deductive support or else subjective and arbitrary).


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    “Ultimate cosmic nullity” is a claim for a kind of ultimate knowledge. If you recognized limits on your knowledge, you wouldn’t be sure that you added up to nothing in the end.


    admin Reply:

    I’m using “nullity” as a cipher rather than a dogma. In contrast to ‘Supreme Unity’, it tilts that way IMHO. (We don’t even know how to perform basic division by arithmetical zero yet, so I see little danger of excessive cognitive hubris on this path.)


    Bryce Laliberte Reply:

    Can there be a Stick of Wittgenstein? That use of ‘chaos’ is so slippery it deserves a round beating.


    nydwracu Reply:

    Wasn’t chaos just kicked upstairs? God’s plan. But then people started claiming they could figure it out.


    Posted on August 28th, 2014 at 3:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chris B Says:

    @Not overlooking it at all. In fact, I have been thinking that the three branches of NRx are united in having cognition of chaos. Fear of it from the trad religious, Same with the eth nats to a lesser degree, and a more nuanced understanding from the tech comms. Spontaneous order is very much in my thoughts and it’s interesting that you picked up on that link very quickly. But, yes, I am not referring to Chaos merely as it is commonly known in the west as a bad thing, but in the more open, subtle and worthwhile sense in which the eastern tradition see it. The west dumped it at the beginning of Greek philosophy. It seems to me it does need bringing back up. But I’m no expert in philosophy.


    Posted on August 28th, 2014 at 4:05 pm Reply | Quote
  • Gegen Cro-Mags Says:

    “Neoreaction diverges from Paleoreaction insofar as it coincides with the understanding: Tradition is not something one can ever simply hold on to, or to which one can truly return.”

    One way to put it: Cathedral is fragile, Paleoreaction is robust, Neoreaction is anti-fragile.


    Posted on August 28th, 2014 at 4:58 pm Reply | Quote
  • Igor Stavrovsky Says:

    Nice picture. Nick Land once more time justified that he is really Old Nick. 😀


    Posted on August 28th, 2014 at 7:37 pm Reply | Quote
  • nydwracu Says:

    Tradition is never static — and it’s at its least static when it claims to be at its most.


    Posted on August 29th, 2014 at 5:24 am Reply | Quote
  • E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Says:

    Chaos in the sense of ‘prima materia’ or ‘quintessence’ – the void. But the void is the element ‘of the heavens’ – the Heaven is the Void (aether). This Chaos (as opposed to mere disorder) is ‘the void from which’- ex-nihilo, rather than the Chaos of the left, an-nihilo – to nothing.

    Chaos (ex nihilo) -> Existence -> (an nihilo) Chaos

    The two chaos’ are not the same.

    “ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος καὶ σκότος ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύςου καὶ πνεῦμα θεοῦ ἐπεφέρετο ἐπάνω τοῦ ὕδατος ”

    “And the earth was unseen and unfurnished and there was darkness over this abyss; and a breath of God was brought on above the water.”

    In this particular understanding of the elemental types, water represents chaos. The meaning is that the world as first-created is in an unseen, unbuilt chaos (nothingness). Creato ex nihilo.

    (This explicit reading doesn’t emerge until the Maccabees, and Protestants carry it despite not having the books from which it stems.)

    This idea that ‘nothing’ is a very strange sort of something is not a new idea of course. And it continues as a theme, as for instance here

    Aristotle does seem to show correctly in Physics that the Void cannot be a positive thing or substance in the normal sense, but this field from which things spontaneously, and seemingly randomly emerge –? The void won’t go away. It doesn’t have anywhere to go.


    Chris B Reply:

    Sure the two Chaos’ are not the same. Dugin covers that in his Chaos Logos metaphysics.
    The link you provided is excellent though. Wheeler-Dewalt equation i- H(x)|Ψ> = 0. Much to ponder on that.


    Posted on August 30th, 2014 at 5:34 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment