It does require force. What is the difference between force and “policy reinforcement”?

For me you / your site was second to none in 2013 in terms of galvanising Neoreactionary thinking, largely due to the frequency of the posts, the quality of the comments section, and your omni-presence within it. Throughout the whole year OI maintained a frenetic pace without so much as the merest hint of flagging once – impressive stuff!

So I feel a bit like Oliver asking for ‘More’ in requesting some long-format, multi-part, pioneering Neoreactionary essays in 2014. But there it is – I’ve gone and done it anyway.

Machiavellian world view. I see this as dangerous because I think it is actually contrary to the facts of how the world works.

Yes, I should be more trusting.

This operation is a cock up because progressive enforcers have been overambitious. Take Nick Land.

() (or (()) ((or ((( )))))) does not signify absence. It manufactures holes, hooks for the future, zones of unresolved plexivity, really so (not at all metaphorically). It is not a ‘signified’ or a referent but a nation, a concrete interruption of the signal (variably blank, pause, memory lapse …) / cut / into (schizzing (())) / machine. Undifferentiable differentiator (=) outside grammaticalness. Messageless operation/s technobuzz (wasps switching).

I enjoyed the book, but is this a person who ought to aspire, on a level playing field, to “program” me? Is there any need; did someone decide so on a firm basis? What did you believe when you were 21, has any of it changed?

We could in theory have an interesting conversation about Machiavelli, Foucault, status and institutions. What is power, how is it shaped? That would probably not have much to do with “Reaction”, it’s just something I’ve been thinking about. C’est moi. After I updated towards the elite progressive ideology recently, based on plausible information, already the difference of our views might be pretty small.

I’m interested in ideas and creation, and I thought Reaction was one of the best places for that. Yes I dislike arsehead economists, so if enforcers want to make the absolute worst interpretation of my occasional cruel and wicked blog entries they can. I guess they kind of need that justification. And yes, I would like to see good ideas come to fruition, but I am still far from sure about what those ideas are. I see blogs as a medium of experimentation and play—my blogs, at least. That’s why I tend to delete most of the stuff (i.e. crap) in hindsight.

Me, I would be more worried about powerful people who want to turn the Internet into something from 1984. Powerful people, bloggers. Internet commenters, spooks. Temper tantrums, secret police powers…

Until that evidence is brought forth, all the toing and froing about AI on this thread is intractable, in my view.

And more than the usual portion of Deceit.