If NRx is spiraling back into a second phase of entryism paranoia, it looks as if it might be a lot more reflexively intense — and therefore more creative — than the last one. It’s still too early to get a firm grip at this point, and it is quite possible that the very nature of the threat makes confident apprehension an unrealistic expectation. Subversion is an abstract horror, or integral obscurity, presumed to be actively restraining itself from emergence as a phenomenon. However, some stimulating indicators:

The self-exemplification (by Konkvistador) here has surely to be taken as the provocation to a more abstract suggestion. If ‘I’ could do it, then others could too. The generalization is strongly encouraged:

Nydwracu has some ideas about the beds ‘we’ should be looking under:

And then there’s the ultimate entryist T-shirt slogan:

Much entertainment in store — and perhaps even some functional ideas — if we can avoid going entirely insane. After all, the last wave of involutionary paranoia brought us some valuable thoughts (among which the best were probably this, this, and this). I’ve probably missed some critical moments, where attempts at institutional self-immunization became productive, and experimental. Keeping social maneuvers virtual helps to ward off incontinent public activism, so any opportunity to experiment with Machiavellian micro-politics is worth seizing with dark glee.

There’s no need for it to remain trivially humanistic. Remember this?

October 25, 2014admin 41 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction


41 Responses to this entry

  • Alrenous Says:

    Entryists look like idiots, because they unwaveringly assert false things.

    Ye need to persecute idiots anyway. Doesn’t look like ye will, though.


    VXXC Reply:

    As a Traditionalist at Heart I am glad Ye is catching on.


    Posted on October 25th, 2014 at 9:33 am Reply | Quote
  • Sulla Says:

    And every single person is a crypto-Leftist lurking
    He could be plotting to murder Kings, claimin’ he’s a Burkean
    Or on the image boards, circling
    Screaming I don’t trust the duck
    With his scruples down and his hackles up
    So, will the real Leftists please stand up
    And put one of those fingers on each hand up
    And be proud to be outta your mind and outta control
    And one more time, loud as you can, how does it go

    Ha ha, I guess there’s an entryist in all of us
    Fuck it, let’s all stand up


    Sulla Reply:

    On a more serious note, do we even have anything to enter? We’re just a flock of like-minded individuals, aside from the Hestia Society we don’t much organisation. Entryists can’t do much to people who remain focused on discovering the truth for themselves.

    “If I were a leftist, I’d push total passivism and accelerationism, and encourage the formation of named identities.”

    Let’s actually think strategically about this. What are Leftists, what do they want, why do they do what they do? They have an ideology that holds that extreme right-wing fascism is ready to spring from the shadows at any opportunity, and must be ruthlessly suppressed from doing so. Thus, nydrwacu is correct; they will not attack passivist NRx groups which is equivalent to pushing passivism.

    *This does not mean we should not pursue passivism.* We should not aim to simply do the opposite of what our opponents want, because fighting Leftists and entryists is not our ultimate goal. As Moldbug said, the Cathedral is a distributed conspiracy — fighting it merely gives it something to rally around.

    Instead, renounce political power and seek truth. Build the Antiversity. An entity solely focused on seeking Truth cannot be subverted. (The antiversity should be designed such that it can either refute intellectual attacks, or integrate them as new epistemologies).

    (This is a new account, am I an entryist? Again, accept or refute these words in themselves, the person who produced these words is irrelevant).


    Dark Psy-Ops Reply:

    ‘We’re just a flock of like-minded individuals’ … that sounds like some hardcore leftism to me… lol but seriously why do entryists need to be ‘leftists’ when the Right itself is made up of competing factions. “Everyone not in ‘my’ Right is an entryist” I could imagine someone thinking…

    but you’re right, the leftist strategy (as far as they have one) is anti-capitalist command ‘economy’, paradoxical totalitarian anarchy, infinite censorship, irrational faith in universal human solidarity, abolishing private property, intersectionality, the destruction of ‘fascist’ identities, non-stop social activism, perpetual revolt, revolution and mouth-foaming insanity in general. Hyper-capitalist pro-class accelerationist technocracy never went down well with the leftists I knew – rather they would go cross-eyed in indignation. Also biorealism was a no-go, and the Machiavellian Intelligence Hypothesis was always met with blank denial.

    This is probably just a blow over from all the sensitive ‘thede’ talk of the last few days. It’s that awkward moment when you thought everyone was a team-player but then you realize you’re not even playing a team sport…

    Also passivism is just a strategy to lay low and bide time until we finally get some nukes in orbit.


    admin Reply:

    This definition of the Left is a gem.

    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Leftists are universalizers. Passivity is no defense. Are the Bolsheviks going to leave you alone if you keep your head down? No.


    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    Well I guess you could call my informal group a society of sanguine empiricists. I have already recruited individuals, although we will stay away from formal organization methodologies, because as a to-be executive I cannot afford some one outing me like this.

    Passivity is not the way to go and no amount of anything will make it otherwise. Besides the only other mainstream intellectuals who seem to have figured out the crypto-calvinist thesis/anti-enlightment folk themselves seem to not have anything against organizing. So why should we let a few writers convince us otherwise?

    Furthermore I do not see any evidence that members of the Anti-Jacobin review thought organizing was a poor idea, the modern people who are anti-enlightment but we have not intersected with also do not believe this.

    Since by definition this is not a populist movement we will need technological & social leverage, but that still means organizing and investing in each other.


    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    Just as a primer there is no way for the operational novices to “Signal your way in” it’s relatively simple for any one who has studied even a basic operational security to know how to keep people are not a part of the group “in”. Furthermore if the tests to enter contain a few things to limit by cognitive ability it gets even easier.

    The only people who complain about entryism to do not know how to do operational design even casually, and no good ‘design’ doesn’t “Look like it” or “Sound like it”. Furthermore there’s no point in publicly announcing these tests anyways.

    Behind the scenes “invite first” recruiting will get you most of the way. There exist a dozen criminal or not organizations that succeed without this. Just apply the epistemology and get going.

    soapjackal Reply:

    interested in what youre referring to as your ‘sanguine empiricts’ if you have any good works to recommend or discussions it would be cool to send them my way

    soapjackal @ cock (dot) li

    Posted on October 25th, 2014 at 10:45 am Reply | Quote
  • Sulla Says:

    ‘We’re just a flock of like-minded individuals’ … that sounds like some hardcore leftism to me…

    We shouldn’t be; we should organise. But right now we’re not.


    Posted on October 25th, 2014 at 11:40 am Reply | Quote
  • Dark Psy-Ops Says:

    I figure when you act out of spite (an action that is mutually harmful for yourself and others) then you are engaging in pure leftism. Nietzsche’s theory of the left was simply that it was resentment of the lower types against the imposing will of higher, healthier types. In that sense anyone can be a leftist if they can’t handle the truth…


    Sulla Reply:

    An idea I’m in full agreement with. Leftism seems to be an intrinsic tendency towards self-destructive behaviour. When I see Big Red yelling at anti-feminists, it almost seems like she wants a big burly right-wing male to put her in her place. Again, from Nietzsche we also learn that Leftists only succeed by gaining control of something strong, powerful and true — e.g., the British Empire or the capitalist heartland of the United States. (Hence the comical spectacle of an Alinskyite community organiser having legions of aircraft carriers, fighter jets and H-bombs at his command — as long as the military is loyal to “democracy”, it will be controllable by Leftism).

    I believe that Moldbug’s plan is the best we have so far. Build the Antiversity. When things start truly crumbling, start building the new structure. Leftists call us fascist aristocrats because that’s what their subconscious secretly desires. When things are truly fucked, people will demand we take power.


    admin Reply:

    Main trouble here is that the ‘rightists’ most impatient to take power tend to be mentally very limited, fervently anti-capitalist egomaniacs. Better to shore up catallaxy wherever possible, until some focused executive-types can fulfill strictly-defined CEO functions, under rigorous Outside control.


    Rasputin Reply:

    “Main trouble here is that the ‘rightists’ most impatient to take power tend to be mentally very limited, fervently anti-capitalist egomaniacs.”

    …with a fetish for caravan holidays in Idaho.

    Implying Implications Reply:

    “Better to shore up catallaxy wherever possible, until some focused executive-types can fulfill strictly-defined CEO functions, under rigorous Outside control.”

    The faggot-to-English translation, presumably, being “save up lots of crypto-money in offshore accounts, buy land in East-Asian trade cities, and then start up a corporate technocracy with the goal of immanentizing the robocalypse?”

    If I were a “mentally-limited, fervently anti-capitalist egomaniac” upon hearing that strategy espoused by my ideological rivals, I’d start seriously pondering how expensive it would be to go the NKVD route. That, or upon seizing power in whatever ethnostate, “accidentally” dropping a nuke or ten on Technopolis.

    Alan J. Perrick Reply:


    It is the Theonomists that probably push the hardest for anti-capitalism.

    admin Reply:

    @ Implying Implications — You have far greater confidence in the capabilities of the gestural far-right than I have.

    Izak Reply:


    Do you think that the anti-capitalism of some rightists and their impatience/egomania are causally related?

    Chris B Reply:

    @Implying Implications ” immanentizing the robocalypse” – that a tshirt slogan if ever I saw one.


    Posted on October 25th, 2014 at 12:23 pm Reply | Quote
  • Entryism | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on October 25th, 2014 at 1:03 pm Reply | Quote
  • Lesser Bull Says:

    I’m not sure why people are being snarky about entryism. It’s only the Left’s number one, massively successful, tactic.

    It’s like Nazis yukking it up about America’s wealth. “What are they gonna do, buy an army, nyuk, nyuk?” Yes, they are.

    NRx is probably immune mostly because NRx is massively unimportant.


    admin Reply:

    Assuming I’m included among “people” here (since my attitude to Entryism is indeed quite snarky) the reason to ironize the problem is that it plays so obviously to weaknesses, which it comically exposes. Any power-seeking institution which respects shallow moral-political signalling gets entered to death as an act of Gnon. The solution to Entryism is simply not to be an idiot, and not to build the kind of institutions that can be guided by people who make the right noises, or wear the right badges. Bitcoin is invulnerable to Entryism because it’s well-designed. The situation with Urbit I expect to be comparable. Most proposed ‘NRx’ clubs, on the other hand, are highly vulnerable to Entryism because their design principles are moronic. If you can signal your way in, it’s already over.


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Thanks for the explanation. I see what you’re advocating for. I think it might be inherently self-limiting, because it requires preemptively torpedoing all the sociality and social benefits that the Cathedral can exploit, like Keyser Soze shooting his family, but I’ll have to give it some thought.


    Thales Reply:

    You had me at “drinking”…

    Mark Yuray Reply:

    “Most proposed ‘NRx’ clubs, on the other hand, are highly vulnerable to Entryism because their design principles are moronic. If you can signal your way in, it’s already over.”

    I just sent a long e-mail to Nyan re:Phalanx on this subject. My solution to the problem was (in short form) to establish male-male personal relationships as the only building block of the “club,” as with Evolian Maennerbuende or what-have-you. Man-to-man vetting based on tangible organic loyalty, trust, honor, love and obedience is the only entryist-proof method of building an organization. If the problem with organization is that you can signal your way in, you need a method of admittance that lets one see past the signals.

    There is only one way to do that and it is for one man to stare into another’s soul, face-to-face, eye-to-eye.


    Implying Implications Reply:

    As gay as that sounds, your are correct. The mega-nerds of NRx tend to overthink organization principles. Personal loyalty is not really that difficult to achieve – if you have real leaders.

    Mark Yuray Reply:

    The fact it sounds “gay” is exactly why I know it’s correct. Shaming male bonding as “gay” is precisely why it’s so hard for males to bond. Wonder who’s doing that shaming and why… hmm…

    The correct way to vet new members: drinking, talking, debating, fighting, shooting, sporting, hiking, chatting, travelling, hazing, walking, feasting, discussing, lifting, horsing around, causing trouble, getting in trouble, avoiding trouble, drinking.

    The incorrect way to vet new members: ideological testing (prime entryism), no barrier to entry (prime entryism squared), active compromise and appeals to “mainstream” to get new members (prime entryism cubed, leftist singularity unavoidable).

    Implying Implications Reply:

    Oh, I’m fully aware that male bonding has been impaired by equating it with homosexual tendencies. I guess I was more insinuating that there’s no reason to wax poetic about it. At least, no more than necessary.

    You’re absolutely correct about the right and wrong ways to go about vetting members of reactionary organizations. The right way to go about is simply to find good men who know the score, even if they aren’t “ideologically pure” or in it for “the right reasons”, and make them your brothers. The wrong way is to try to go full leftist and try to socially-engineer a perfect organization, or on the other end of the scale, go full ancap sperglord and try to create a perfect web of “incentive structures.” Neither fanatics nor amoral cynics will create a lasting organization.

    forkinhell Reply:

    NrX bonding: “Was it too much for you?”

    peppermint Reply:

    if anyone wants to hang out after church, walk around, and talk about how communists are destroying everything, then I’m in

    sviga lae Reply:

    What is easy to pass over is the qualitative difference between the cheap signalling (‘tawk’) that dominates progressive institutions, mostly a matter of making the right noises, and signals that function effectively by being prohibitively expensive to falsely express (see Hanson).

    Informal status mechanisms need to be replaced wherever possible by formal status mechanisms, and the informal status mechanisms that remain need to be grounded in expensive signals. By way of example, a traditionalist männerbund might grant status based on large families; simultaneously ideologically abhorrent to progressives, and expensive to achieve.


    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    Yes, a very acutely sensed but no doubt prudent observation. Every one should seek to adopt this.

    Alan J. Perrick Reply:


    Are you suggesting that the NRx clubs would be able to be self-sustaining? I don’t think that is anywhere close to the truth, and that the “meatspace” clubs would be doing things like group study of popular NRx articles to keep the ideology as a main subject amongst other activities.



    admin Reply:

    No, I’m not suggesting that, at all. Confusing intellectual salons (a good thing) with political organizations (a bad thing) and putsch platforms (perhaps an inevitable, but very different thing) is a chronic error of melodramatic gesticulators. Theory, protest, and seizing power are entirely distinct functions, and their coincidence within a single organization of any kind would almost certainly be a pathological symptom. (And to re-emphasize — dissociating from the culture of protest, completely, is a basic building block of NRx.)

    Posted on October 25th, 2014 at 3:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • peppermint Says:

    This is even stupider than the last time, if someone says interesting or true things it doesn’t matter if they think of themselves as a woman trapped in a man’s body or whatever.


    Hurlock Reply:

    You can abstract one from the other.
    Use your imagination.


    Posted on October 26th, 2014 at 12:40 am Reply | Quote
  • Chris B Says:

    Can we keep tally of how many times Moldbug is effectively indirectly denounced as an entryist this time?


    Posted on October 26th, 2014 at 3:42 am Reply | Quote
  • nightboat2cairo Says:

    Been wondering if trans women are male entryists into the female world. For example, look at the response from women on this thread: https://twitter.com/VanguardVivian/status/526810036077883392


    Posted on October 28th, 2014 at 10:46 am Reply | Quote
  • Rules for Reactionaries and Soccer Nazis | Poseidon Awoke: Realist Says:

    […] have noted that protests and mob actions are Leftist (again, Rules for Reactionaries): Nick Land lists “theory, protest and seizing power” as three “distinct functions” of a possible […]

    Posted on February 27th, 2016 at 12:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction – The Reactivity Place Says:

    […] more readable. Land, who’s never met a paranoia he didn’t like, just happened to have a spare open can of gasoline with which to quench the […]

    Posted on April 3rd, 2016 at 9:33 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment