Halloween XS 1

Clown terror

If you’ve ever wondered what NRx looks like to “a bog standard democratic socialist, culturally cringing straight white able-bodied rich male Canadian who likes my society multicultural, my economy redistributive, my taxation strongly progressive, my capitalism heavily regulated, my state relatively large, well funded and active in social policy, and my military nearly nonexistent outside of peacekeeping operations. I am even ok with laws regulating hate speech, obscenity, libel and such” — here you go.

Almost every step of the subsequent voyage into raw horror is hilarious. Seeing the NRx reading list (1, 2, 3, 4) this post puts together is a wonder in itself. Clearly, NRx-panic is now a big enough thing to be blowing its own bubbles in the commiesphere.

‘Frog Hop’ is in the Libertarianism = Fascism school of political insight (which I expect to see a lot more of, as these creatures notice people trying to escape their death-grip).

Also worth noting: Phalanx is allotted prime place as a freak-out stimulus. As a count-me-outer, I’m not especially drawn to this kind of Broederbonding, but I have to acknowledge its truly glorious Halloween potential.

ADDED: As a festive bonus, another piece of prog. cultural action (but much better done)

October 31, 2014admin 51 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Humor

TAGGED WITH : , , ,

51 Responses to this entry

  • ReactionaryFerret Says:

    I think this “graydon” dude has completely missed the meaning of the word “entitled”. Doesn’t this word mean feeling that the world owes oneself a living, such as through redistributive policies that take from productive people in order to pay for the sloth of other, more entitled, fucksticks?

    [Reply]

    Bryce Laliberte Reply:

    That’s really obvious, so it must be the other way around.

    [Reply]

    Nyan Sandwich Reply:

    “Entitled” means “entitled to the fruits of one’s own labor”

    [Reply]

    Drfitforge Reply:

    Yes, I noted the odd usage of entitled there as well. He seems to use ‘entitlement to’ in the same sense I might utilise ‘capacity to acquire’.

    Also noted the definition of left / right as r-selective / K-selective using other language.

    Calling ‘Reactionary’ a synonym to ‘Conservative’ is also not quite correct; it’s more an antonym to ‘Progressive’.

    It must be deeply depressing living in the greyness of ‘democratic socialism’, competing to be more equal.

    As to the resonance of the Catholic aspect, I wonder if it is not simply that the Cathedral has most effectively suppressed this resonance. Catholicism and Orthodoxy both seem to have been useful heresies, and have potential to become so again in the future.

    [Reply]

    Tripletap Reply:

    You said “competing to be more equal”. Very good.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    You guys are being cruel. That “entitled” dialectic thingummy is the whole of the post. It’s even the title. It’s like you’re taking the battered tin cup off some homeless dude.

    [Reply]

    ReactionaryFerret Reply:

    That made me literally lol.

    ||||| Reply:

    The meaning of the word itself is completely irrelevant to the article.

    The tactic is to impute some animus which publicly disqualifies an opponent’s ideas, quarantining them and avoiding a direct confrontation or ideological contamination (this can be sidestepped by camouflaged memetic radioactivity – insight porn route – and subverted with unexpected representatives – GGer route – or dampened through anonymous heretical virulence – /pol/ route -). I think it’s a perversion of naive conservative controls against entryism after overtaking previous institutions of cultural dissemination. Leftism has a high mutational load though, so I don’t expect any of this to be effective for long.

    You can tell how low someone is in an ideological hierarchy by how quick they are to flee from argumentation altogether. Superiors are better at suppressing emotional response in favor of getting a stalemate or at least a more graceful exit. They instinctively understand the social function of argumentation. In other terms, they know what kind of game they’re playing and they’re better at it while newbies don’t even realize they’re in one, which is how they end up with things like cognitive dissonance, superiors don’t get that as often because the ideology at the surface is more of an instrument or a puzzle to them.

    Funnier than Libertarianism = Fascism might be Fascism => Libertarianism, potentially driving a deep(er?) wedge between authoritarian and libertarian left.

    [Reply]

    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    C. S. Lewis called this tactic “bulverism”.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulverism

    [Reply]

    Hurlock Reply:

    The pathological and disgusting envy of the diseased leftist is revealing itself.

    Other people achieve more in life, and the leftist, being a pathetic human being of the lowest kind cannot admit his inferiority, cannot admit that he is less capable. His arrogance blinds him and his envy suffocates him.

    It is just not FAIR that all those people have more than him. Why cannot the world appreciate his superiority? There must be something that is keeping him back! He is much more deserving than them! There must be a giant conspiracy which is keeping him down and oppressing his genius. All those succesful people, who are much less deserving, much less holy than he is, they must be all part of a giant class conspiracy which keeps them at the top, while pushing everyone else at the bottom. Because of this conspiracy, those people are in his world ‘entitled’, but undeserving of what they have.
    (You can almost hear his stomach churning with envy)

    I have mentioned this before, but what leftists do all the time is projecting. Here again, the leftist is projecting his own sense of entitlement on other people, those that are more succesful than him. Which is why in his twisted language to be capable, is to be entitled.

    This whole piece is one giant projection.
    As Moldbug said “When you are a quack, quackery is what you know, so you dismiss your opponents by labeling them quacks”.

    Similarly, when you are a parasite, parasitism is what you know, so it is to be expected that you dismiss your opponents by labeling them parasites.

    [Reply]

    M Reply:

    I think it should be required to google up people before assuming unflattering assumptions about them and basing public diatribes upon said assumptions. Fuck googling, you could just click that “My website” link on the top of that page.

    The guy is a hopeless prog, yes, but not because he is some unaccomplished loser — because he is most emphatically not unaccomplished, as any half-way competent software guy (if you yourself are not one, that is) would tell you upon seeing that page or perhaps even just hearing the name. Which only serves to aggravate the sheer sillyness of the rant under discussion, but still.

    [Reply]

    Izak Reply:

    Bingo.

    I’ve noticed that Hurlock is occasionally brilliant, but he’s awful whenever he starts to show emotion or conviction about anything.

    Hurlock Reply:

    First off, how am I showing emotion in this one?

    It doesn’t matter whether he personally is succesful or not.

    Leftism is a mindset which stays with you even if you are one of those succesful people you hate and consider ‘entitled’. Which is also why progressivism is by its nature suicidal.

    Izak Reply:

    Ah, I dunno, man…

    “The pathological and disgusting envy of the diseased leftist is revealing itself.”

    You don’t think disgust is an emotional reaction?

    And look at this sentence: “Here again, the leftist is projecting his own sense of entitlement on other people, those that are more succesful than him.” Our friend M has demonstrated that it’s factually wrong. How is he entitled? He’s basically saying he wants to pay more taxes for stuff he won’t get.

    I don’t really think you can equivocate outta this one. Just say, “OK, I didn’t check the dude’s background, my bad, no big whoop” and let that be the end of it, it’s not a big deal.

    Izak Reply:

    I think he’s against the sort of entitlement where people demand things because of their (totally imaginary) innate abilities and/or (totally inconsequential) achievements.

    Like, for example, if I win a well-funded 5k race that promises a medal for the winner, I’m very entitled if I expect said medal without any further complications.

    That’s the bad kind of entitlement, because meritocracies and innate differences are all fictional and imaginary, so it’s silly that I should expect a medal when it was really my arbitrary social position and subsequent social engineering that caused me to win.

    The acceptable kind of entitlement is where you expect, like, little things here and there for doing nothing. Nothing fancy like a medal, just maybe “minimal food, shelter, healthcare and pensions” (his words) or perhaps also cheap internet access or whatever else is on the table.

    He explains all of this in the article, I’m not sure where people are getting confused.

    [Reply]

    ReactionaryFerret Reply:

    No confusion, just amusement. He “wins” his argument by beginning with a flawed premise; that “entitlement” only applies to those who expect to be rewarded for their efforts, rather than those who expect to be rewarded for standing there.

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 5:41 am Reply | Quote
  • Nyan Sandwich Says:

    Phalanx is going to spook these people right out no matter what I do with it. Can’t wait.

    [Reply]

    Max Reply:

    Are you planning to kill lots of people?

    Don’t answer, but if you aren’t planning to kill lots of people, then I kind of have to question your commitment to SparkleMotion.

    Terrorism is a left-wing thing, obviously, so don’t advertise your actions, or take responsibility for them publicly, or commit them in an unnecessarily cruel or outlandish fashion. The best thing to do would be to make them look like accidents, if possible, or simple disappearances. You would be surprised what a group of well-trained young men who are committed to secrecy and discipline can accomplish. I bet you could hit triple digits before anyone even noticed, if you were careful.

    [Reply]

    Thales Reply:

    The first rule of Phalanx is that you do not talk about Phalanx.

    [Reply]

    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    This is idiotic.

    [Reply]

    Alan J. Perrick Reply:

    I need to get my farthings prepared.

    [Reply]

    E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Reply:

    We will only use nearthings, that’s how close we keep it

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 5:59 am Reply | Quote
  • Halloween XS 1 | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 9:22 am Reply | Quote
  • jatli Says:

    How long until this guy is co-opted for the ends of NRx a la Scott Alexander and becomes one of us?

    [Reply]

    John Reply:

    Yea, but the non-prog controlled parts of SA’s brain actually has smart things to say. This guy…I’m gonna go with never.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Ditto to that.

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 9:43 am Reply | Quote
  • Anon Says:

    O/T but Putin just described America as an “Empire of Chaos”: http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2014/10/putin-to-western-elites-play-time-is.html

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 10:08 am Reply | Quote
  • John Says:

    “I realize there’s a lot of trolling involved in all this. One can reasonably ask of any writer on the internet whether all their writing is a “long-game troll”…They are certainly clownish enough to be trolls.”

    Gnon – The ultimate troll.

    [Reply]

    Thales Reply:

    Der mentsh trakht un Got lakht.

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 10:36 am Reply | Quote
  • Scharlach Says:

    So acceptance of basic evolutionary principles = fascism. Got it. Great armchair psychoanalysis.

    [Reply]

    ReactionaryFerret Reply:

    Dude, seriously. You don’t even have to think that hard. Everything not explicitly left = fascism and must be shamed into explicit leftism.

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 1:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • Butler Says:

    Howdy; long-time reader, first-time commentor-about-things.

    graydon2’s piece seems to just be a long-winded, two-tier ad-hominem. I mean, the central premise of this piece seems to be one of crime-by-association: he assigns himself the mission of demonstrating that Silicon Valley libertarians are fascists, then collects together a bunch of cherry-picked attributes that some guy somewhere said fascism had, and points out some similar threads in the contemporary movement. And then he just dusts his hands, “mission accomplished”, as though this somehow constitutes a worthwhile effort.

    Has he made any effort to argue why any of those ideas cut-pasted from Paxton are (individually or in any combination) always, ipso facto, bad ideas? No. It’s just “Hitler was a vegetarian, therefore vegetarianism is evil” writ large.

    So then, after ‘tackling’ libertarianISM, he moves on to ‘tackling’ libertarianS:
    “If you consider yourself a polite, well meaning, warm-and-cuddly libertarian (or “anarcho-capitalist” if you prefer), I’d urge you to take a little time upon reading this and reflect. Both on your own emotional response, your own feelings of entitlement to things you feel you’ve “earned” in life, your feelings towards equality or inequality, and any sense you might have that defending an entitlement to inequality against others (women and minorities, the poor, the less technical or less wealthy) could lead you to supporting a natural right to rule for people “like yourself”.”

    What is the *point* of this? He’s basically asking libertarians to commit ad-hominem seppuku on themselves. “I have looked within and discovered I’m only a libertarian because I’m a rich white male” is not an *argument*. It may very well be true, but it’s irrelevant. By speculating endlessly about libertarian’s emotional, subconscious reasons for being libertarian, he’s just lazily trying to dodge having to confront, god forbid, any actual issues, like “Is it really fair that an imported dysgenic horde takes all my money?”. No, actually arguing against that might require a smidgen of intellectual exertion and a knowledge of a fact or two, so let’s just try to make libertarians feel uncomfortable about their own backgrounds; white guilt will do all our heavy-lifting work for us.

    Maybe I’m expecting too much out of a self-confessed tax-and-spend liberal’s blog post, but the shameless evasion of any sort of engagement with ideas just stuck in my craw.

    [Reply]

    ||||| Reply:

    “Don’t you see how much you’re harming the populace? Just place your head on the device and the blade will enlighten you!”

    Jacobin techno-decapitalism. No crowns if no heads.

    [Reply]

    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    >He’s basically asking libertarians to commit ad-hominem seppuku on themselves. “I have looked within and discovered I’m only a libertarian because I’m a rich white male” is not an *argument*. It may very well be true, but it’s irrelevant. By speculating endlessly about libertarian’s emotional, subconscious reasons for being libertarian, he’s just lazily trying to dodge having to confront, god forbid, any actual issues

    Good catch. This is typical of the cultural marxist left. Instead of engaging with an issue, they start psychologizing why someone would believe something like that.

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 1:41 pm Reply | Quote
  • John Hannon Says:

    “… not especially drawn to this kind of Broederbonding. ..”

    So the techno-satanist author of The Thirst for Annihilation won’t be going to church then?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    That thing died in a ditch somewhere.

    [Reply]

    Hurlock Reply:

    Things we write never go away, even if we want to.

    Especially when they get on the internet.

    I don’t think you ever actually really explained this – how and why did “that thing” “die in a ditch”?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    OK, that’s next year’s Halloween story.

    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    >implying

    With strange eons…

    [Reply]

    John Hannon Reply:

    Understood. But of course the question then arises as to how long before all this NRx enthusiasm ends up dead and ditched.

    Touching base with the implacable material facticity of Gnon recalls your earlier infatuation with Death as that to which “error cannot adhere.” “Making It With Death” within which “all dreams are soluble.”

    So where could you possibly go post NRx? In a word: “nonduality.” Not death as blank extinction – simply “ego death.” The dying to our illusory skin-encapsulated separate self-sense.

    Psychedelics/anesthetics have taken us there for precious fleeting epiphanies and now it seems a growing number of folk are residing there permanently. The burgeoning sophistication of brain imaging tech has now identified a neuro-materialist substrate for non-dual realization, and developing “psychotechnologies” (eg the (in)famous Persinger “God helmet”) point the way to its attainment becoming ever more convenient and commonplace –

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fox9ALDqiNU&list=UUMSnyxnteEx7IOPIFkfh3og

    Posted before, but this guy gives it to us straight (“you’re all mummers”) –

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fox9ALDqiNU&list=UUMSnyxnteEx7IOPIFkfh3og

    [Reply]

    John Hannon Reply:

    Sorry, the last link should have been to –

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTXDRx4VKOg

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 3:08 pm Reply | Quote
  • neovictorian23 Says:

    Nobody seems to have yet commented on the fact that he self-describes as “rich”. Rich as in, has significant sums of money? But by his very own criteria, any significant money or property he has must be a result of his cismalewhitemale Privilege. In other words, he needs to commit “ad-hominem seppuku” on himself.

    Bravo, “Butler”, I believe you’ve coined a term that will resonate far into the future. Well played, sir, well played!

    [Reply]

    ReactionaryFerret Reply:

    That’s the essenece of western leftism anyway; shamed self-immolation. The more successful that person has been in his personal life the more shame he has in the political and the more public flagellation he must inflict on himself and the more lip service he must pay to Elua. The funny thing is that it is likely these “successful leftists” acknowledge and even act upon the reality of nature (gnon/gods of the copybook headings) and are more than willing to accept the fruits of what they profess is nothing more than the happy accident of social status in a vacuum. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be so successful.

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 5:50 pm Reply | Quote
  • Lesser Bull Says:

    The best thing about Phalanx is the name. The only way it could be better is if we came up with an acronym it stood for, so when people claimed about the resonance with los fascistas espanoles, we could say ‘No, those guys were the phalanx. this is the phalanx. Totally different.’

    I also propose that Phalanx adopt an automated chat routine script as its PR spokesman. Whatever question is asked, the script responds ‘I know nothing.’

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 5:59 pm Reply | Quote
  • Meow Mix Says:

    The panic only rises at the Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/13/gamergate-right-wing-no-neutral-stance

    [Reply]

    nydwracu Reply:

    It’s times like this that make me appreciate the education I get from reading Rodong Sinmun.

    [Reply]

    Posted on October 31st, 2014 at 8:13 pm Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction | The Reactivity Place Says:

    […] shitlords. With enemies like Graydon2, who needs allies? In honor of Hallowe’en, Nick Land makes some merry at his […]

    Posted on November 1st, 2014 at 2:56 am Reply | Quote
  • stræcwine Says:

    (another delurk to comment)

    I’m not so pessimistic about this guy. Maybe not him in particular, but tech geeks like him. He has programming chops, all (decent) coders fully grok the first law of Gnon: some resource limitations cannot be overcome with the tools at hand, regardless of purity of intention or degree of cleverness. Many progressives never get even that far.

    Guys like this just need to learn, and then to fully grok, that lots of good human qualities are limited resources too (and worse, very unevenly distributed). His argument about entitlement rests this being wrong, but he only addresses it with a lame Bulver argument. After you grok the cosmic horror of HBD, it takes pretty serious cognitive dissonance to avoid thinking about how to optmise the allocation of the necessary sacrifices to Gnon. I’m sure he’s been on plenty of software projects where perfectly admirable and useful features had to be cut because they weren’t achievable with the resources at hand.

    The real issue is how the coming results about ‘human resources limitations’ get communicated: reaching these guys is good, spooking the horses is bad.

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 1st, 2014 at 7:24 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    Will you have no sense of decency Sir?

    Will you not grace them with the Title Communist, which they could never earn?

    Do you think the Giants of the Past would grace these creatures with “Comrade”?

    Stop calling them Communists. It’s a insult to the memory of Stalin, Mao, Trotsky, Lenin, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot not to mention their tens of millions of brave conquering soldiers, and over 100 million slaves worked to death for the workers triumph.

    These aren’t communists. They’re Pinkies. Not even Pinkos. Pinkos went to jail [rarely enough]. Pinkos had their screenplay credits redacted. That’s still more than these wankers.

    They don’t deserve to be called Communists.

    I remember the Communists, and these creatures Sir are not Communists.

    [Reply]

    Krelian Reply:

    They may not live up to the name of Communism, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t tools of Communism. In the words of the ComIntern leader, Wilhelm Munzenberg: “We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.”

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 1st, 2014 at 9:45 am Reply | Quote
  • Son of Olorus Says:

    When one thinks of NRx, one thinks of Menippean satire. The similarities are startling and the later has a history which coincides with degeneration, always prevalent when an astute individual senses a social disease. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satires_(Juvenal)

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 5th, 2014 at 2:08 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment