Ideological Chaos

Occupy Wall Street founder, now working for Cyberdyne Google calls for Neocameralism in a communist newspaper.

I’ll just let that simmer for a while …

ADDED: There have been some strange goings on at The Guardian recently, for instance, this article on seasteading — because climate change.

ADDED: Now in The Telegraph: “The self-described ‘champagne tranarchist’, who launched Occupy Wall Street in 2011, said that if the technology industry was to take over the US government she would be ‘prancing around skipping for joy’, but accepted that it was unlikely.”

ADDED: Contemplationist (@i_contemplate_) catches this:

“If [this] is not neocameralism, I don’t know what is.” Quite.

ADDED: Justine Tunney interviewed by Christopher Mims (definitely not to be missed by anyone interested in this peculiar episode).

March 20, 2014admin 40 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Pass the popcorn , Political economy

TAGGED WITH : , ,

40 Responses to this entry

  • Mark Warburton Says:

    You forgot to tag this as ‘WTF’…

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Fixed.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 5:41 pm Reply | Quote
  • nyan_sandwich Says:

    Interesting reception in the comments. Usually there is at least some counter-cathedral skepticism, but I see only ad-homs and badly-reasoned contradiction (DH4). No one is even bothering to engage.

    [Reply]

    Hurlock Reply:

    This is the Guardian we are talking about after all.
    It is extremely enjoyable watching progs go morally hysterical, crying about ruthless capitalism et al. If nothing else, she is a great troll.
    From the comment section:

    “The “tech industry” isn’t exactly a haven of progressive ideas…”

    No shit, Sherlock. That’s the point. Another one:

    “So, basically a transition to Feudalism 2.0?”

    So close to the truth, yet so far…

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 7:09 pm Reply | Quote
  • peppermint Says:

    hey, I used to be involved in Occupy back before it fizzled.

    I really didn’t understand why Obama didn’t prosecute the bankers and thought he just needed some political cover from a protest movement. I also thought that a protest movement would enable Obama to pass a jobs bill that would help the middle class (“the middle class” is pretty much PC for White people, but I never would have accepted that gloss).

    Confused about why, I started looking for other ideas.

    I find it quite plausible that I’m not the only bright young White looking for answers to why I and my friends have a worse job market than our parents did.

    [Reply]

    neovictorian23 Reply:

    I find it quite plausible that I’m not the only bright young White looking for answers to why I and my friends have a worse job market than our parents did.

    You’re certainly right about that. If we include the “bright” only, there are perhaps a million or two of you.

    Occupy “fizzled” because it was, as you hint, financed by the Brahmins as a harmless visual outlet to release some steam.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 7:15 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alfred Says:

    This is bizarre. But, so is Tunney.

    [Reply]

    Bryce Laliberte Reply:

    Everyone here is bizarre.

    [Reply]

    Antisthenean Reply:

    Hungry freaks, daddy.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 7:17 pm Reply | Quote
  • MLR Says:

    Well, this is certainly a colourful addition to my day!

    As a regular “The Last Psychiatrist” reader, my reflex is to reach for “narcissism” as an explanation … but the more I turn it over in my mind, the less mileage I feel I can get out of it. Too little information.

    What a delicious brain-puzzle!

    Per Nyan’s remark, I went back and gave the comments section a quick peruse. Thoughts as deep as a puddle would be generous…

    Pass the popcorn, indeed!

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 8:52 pm Reply | Quote
  • Saddam Hussein's Whirling Aluminium Tubes Says:

    When you design your ideal right wing authoritarian government and people like her immediately get on board with supporting it, that’s *not* a good sign.

    [Reply]

    Karl F. Boetel Reply:

    disagree

    [Reply]

    Hawk Spitui Reply:

    I doubt it’s a sign of anything other than a dizzy hipster broad jumping on the latest political fad. At most, it’s a sign we’re becoming fashionable. Maybe we should be marketing a NRx clothing line. Designed by Hugo Boss, of course.

    [Reply]

    Antisthenean Reply:

    I thought that’s what the T-shirt slogans were for.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 10:12 pm Reply | Quote
  • Count Nothingface Says:

    Here I was trying to think of ways to defend plutocracy, partly to spite OWS, and partly because I thought it would segue into a stronger defense of neocameralism. Then this happens…

    I don’t know what to blog about anymore.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 11:29 pm Reply | Quote
  • Antisthenean Says:

    1. “Retire all government employees” – Moldbuggian R.A.G.E., verbatim. Makes me wonder if she watched that Youtube video. It’s one hell of a slogan.

    2. I wondered what the hell happened to Y. Levine. The Exiled website is dead as a doornail.

    3. ‘Explaining on Twitter why she thinks anti-capitalism is compatible with promotion of her employers, she argued that “Tech companies expropriate ad money from capitalists to build a superintelligence & don’t pay dividends!”’ – so college anarchists are now allies of NRx because, paradoxically, if you don’t believe in anything you’ll believe in anything? That there’s a point where the far-far-left and reaction converge? That, having groped around in the dark for a truly radical Leftist creed since at least the late 60’s, now they’re becoming aware of the possibility of cutting the Gordian knot and embracing capitalism (probably accelerationism, in time) in the name of anti-capitalism?

    4. “occupy founder? more like occupy profiteer or occupy opportunist. setting up a website and twitter feed gives no one the right to claim founding of an organic, popular movement.” – What would an “organic” radical movement look like? How is this metaphor being used? Is it possible to imagine 1789 without Sieyes, 1791 without Marat, October 1917 without the Bolsheviks? “Popular” radical leftism conceives of itself as bottom-up, but like the human visual system, it may not be as bottom-up as our metaphors lead us to believe…

    5. ThomasPaine2 takes the cake: “Corporations are already in control. Where has she been?”

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    All excellent points. RAGE might have been designed to transition confused anarcho-leftists onto an escape track.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    “1. “Retire all government employees” – Moldbuggian R.A.G.E., verbatim. Makes me wonder if she watched that Youtube video. It’s one hell of a slogan.” – my thoughts exactly!

    [Reply]

    nydwracu Reply:

    That there’s a point where the far-far-left and reaction converge?

    You’ve never met any Catholic Communists, have you?

    [Reply]

    Antisthenean Reply:

    I hope to one day…

    http://northdallasgazette.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Pope-Francis.jpg

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 11:34 pm Reply | Quote
  • admin Says:

    If NRx replaces libertarianism as the guiding tech-sector ideology, things begin to get extremely interesting.

    [Reply]

    Stirner (@heresiologist) Reply:

    All the tech sector needs is a “disparate impact” probing of their hiring by the DOJ during Obama’s lame duck last two years, and that ideological conversion could happen pretty damn fast.

    [Reply]

    Henry Dampier Reply:

    This is all that is necessary.

    It may be wise to start a PAC that pushes for just this goal. All we would need are 1-2 front men to do the fundraising and some volunteers for the campaign material. The goal would be to push the EEOC to start an investigation, or at the very least to discover what would be necessary to make it happen.

    Would it be a good thing for the world to force Google and the rest to be more diverse? No, it’d be awful. But the actual goal is to shock champagne socialists so severely that they back away in terror, causing disarray in the left’s new media coalition.

    [Reply]

    nydwracu Reply:

    You think they wouldn’t roll over for it? There’s too much primitivism there. A lot of it is at an impotently aesthetic level, finding impetus for concrete action only in blocking advancements they can’t understand — but if it’s given a cause…

    These are people who think primitive gatherer societies are utopian. They won’t back away from taking an axe to Google. They hate it, its employees, and what it represents.

    The best it’ll do is splinter off a few percent of the Frontines, and get the rich among them to start looking into ways they can fight it without getting Paxed before the whole thing crumbles — but what are the odds of them succeeding?

    When capital butts heads with large packs of Brahmin junk-dealers… well, Keystone XL hasn’t been built yet, you’ll notice. (How undemocratic.)

    Posted on March 20th, 2014 at 11:46 pm Reply | Quote
  • addionlass Says:

    Mexico should be similarly given over to Sinaloa Cartel. Violence would quickly diminish and US immigration problems would be solved. Meth/Coke/opiate industry would become part of the pharmaceutical industry. New research and new uppers/downers for the US market. Narco architecture would also finally escape the graveyards where it currently blooms. The US tech industry would profit from the added extra hours, possibly requiring some alterations to workflow as some speed inflicted errors might at first create some side effects.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 21st, 2014 at 12:05 am Reply | Quote
  • Occupy Neoreaction | Count Nothingface Says:

    […] don’t know what to believe anymore (via Nick Land). Who would have thought the OWS founder would make a formal call for […]

    Posted on March 21st, 2014 at 12:17 am Reply | Quote
  • Rasputin Says:

    I don’t know about this specific instance, but I don’t find the idea of warping from the Far Left to the Outer Right terribly unlikely. In fact that was pretty much the ‘sick journey’ I undertook myself a few years ago. It’s like in an 80’s computer game; if you go all the way to the extreme left of the screen you pop out on the right… and everything starts to finally make sense.

    On a separate (more pornographic) note, anyone familiar with the work of Belle Knox?

    “Belle Knox is cute, smart enough for an ivy league college and got her name by mixing a Disney princess with an alleged murderer. My kinda girl! Except for the small fact that a feminist doing facial abuse for women’s rights is like a rabbi going to Auschwitz for a free shower.” – Efukt.

    Feminists embracing facial abuse… I would link, but in sense it might be unwelcome.

    Still, it’s worth a Google.

    [Reply]

    Antisthenean Reply:

    She’s quite ugly. I don’t see the appeal.

    Other than that, I interpret it as a symptom, one more final, definitive sign that ‘feminism’ no longer has semantic content and now has a merely rhetorical existence. I haven’t traced its history to see how long this has been the case, how long it’s been since the last traces of Wollstonecraftianism left it.

    [Reply]

    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    I don’t find the idea of warping from the Far Left to the Outer Right terribly unlikely. In fact that was pretty much the ‘sick journey’ I undertook myself a few years ago.

    Likewise. Went from a mashup of anarcho-primitivism, transhumanism, and libertarianism to NR via moldbug and encounters with reality.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 21st, 2014 at 12:18 am Reply | Quote
  • VXXC Says:

    Re Disparate Impact Probing of Tech, the more tech pays the more you’ll be probed.

    Notice no one talks about disparate impact of coal miner hiring practices?

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 21st, 2014 at 12:23 am Reply | Quote
  • spandrell Says:

    https://twitter.com/JustineTunney

    She calls herself “Duchess of Occupy”.

    Seems to me she’s quite into feudalism.

    [Reply]

    Hurlock Reply:

    Every “radical” leftie is a closet authoritarian, so the lure of NRx is not that surprising really.

    [Reply]

    Mark Warburton Reply:

    First two tweets that appear are clearly techno-commercialist. Is she a re-activated plant agent?

    “Justine Ní Thonnaigh ‏@JustineTunney 5h

    @nigelcameron @SangitaSri we’re not too far off from being computers ourselves.
    View conversation

    Justine Ní Thonnaigh ‏@JustineTunney 5h

    @C1TYofFL1NT I’m really not into the whole voting thing to be honest. Why not just help her move somewhere less awful?”

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 21st, 2014 at 4:53 am Reply | Quote
  • spandrell Says:

    She looks cute in pictures, but then I found:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCfjLfitMOM

    Awful teeth, manly voice, getting fat. She probably just wants to sleep with Eric Schmidt and this was her way of proposing.

    [Reply]

    Michael Anissimov Reply:

    Yeah, about that…

    [Reply]

    RiverC Reply:

    Lola, lolalolalolalolalolalola Lolaaaaa

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 21st, 2014 at 11:10 am Reply | Quote
  • RiverC Says:

    Tunney is out of her/his mind.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 21st, 2014 at 12:54 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    I appreciate the documentation and collation, but I think you’re being overly optimistic and committing the base-rate fallacy.

    Given that truth seeps in through every crack and that sophist systems produce a constellation of competing lies, what are the odds that sometimes a dogmatic ideologue will say a true thing? Given how many journalistic articles are written per day, multiplied by the number you glance at, how many are you likely to find? About this many, I estimate.

    However, there is that chance these things are part of a more profound pattern, which we’ll only discover if you keep pointing them out.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 21st, 2014 at 2:30 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Corporatism can take two forms.

    Either you have a values system incorporate the corporations, which is fascism, or you allow the corporate needs to dictate your values system, and you have McDonald’s.

    Of course the Bay Area idiots — including the obviously Irish ( = slave cabins ) Ms. Tunney — want the latter. It lets them continue to be plastic fools who get fat paychecks for doing very little of anything.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 26th, 2014 at 11:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • Aeroguy Says:

    Progs who know they’re communists as opposed to the rank and file progs also have an acute awareness that they’re smarter than the rank and file. They harbor a buried elitism that can only be shown on the surface as misanthropy, which is a very common meme on the far left. They already love hierarchy, they’ve just only been comfortable with hierarchy through the nanny state. Just change the words common man to conformist, and stoke the fire of their hatred for them. Nudge their preexisting technocrat mindset just a bit and allow them to drop their pretense. They’ll still hate tradition although I suspect HBD might be easier for them to swallow, but they will be well on the way to unplugging, or entryism.

    [Reply]

    Posted on April 8th, 2014 at 1:12 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment