New Low

If this is NRx I’m Mao Zedong.

Necessary Twitter self-citation for context:


ADDED: Hurlock is (very calmly) on the case.

ADDED: Anomaly UK reminds us of a (very relevant) post on pre-Marxist Anglosphere leftism.

ADDED: Essential.

January 20, 2015admin 102 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Pass the popcorn


102 Responses to this entry

  • New Low | Neoreactive Says:

    […] New Low […]

    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 2:51 pm Reply | Quote
  • John Says:

    From where I’m sitting, that Marcuse quote appears similar to admin’s articulation of the leftist strategy of “power through tolerance” in the Dark Enlightenment series. The idea of progressive roots in Soviet communism also feels Moldbuggian.


    admin Reply:

    Moldbug’s entire enterprise is based on getting to the sub-basement of the soviet bogeyman. To focus on that bogeyman’s loose love-beads is to drop the plot entirely.


    josh Reply:

    The problem is its either bogeymen all the way down, or it stops with the devil or Eve or something. Their really isn’t anything new under the sun. This partial analysis is as on point as Moldbugs Puritan partial analysis which ignores enormous amounts of contemporary and past influence.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 3:28 pm Reply | Quote
  • zio-reaction Says:

    Its way too heavy on the Kevin MacDonald, and too light on the Pamela Geller, to be zio-reaction.


    admin Reply:

    So why are you on our lawn?


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 3:38 pm Reply | Quote
  • an inanimate aluminum tube Says:

    Neoreaction has an explanation for historical progressivism prior to the middle 1900s. Ultra-Calvinism. Heh. Fair enough.

    But neoreaction does not really provide an explanation for the rapid and dramatic shift in the character of progressivism that occurred in the middle 1900s.

    In retrospect historical progressivism prior to the middle 1900s looks to have many problematic and potentially problematic elements. But it doesn’t look to have been fully weaponized against the population until the middle 1900s.

    At first progressives were like … let’s end child labor and provide a minimum wage for domestic laborers. It took them a remarkably long time to fully implement that stuff. (late 1930s).

    Then a few decades later they were like … let’s exterminate the white working class and replace them with a hereditary underclass of mestizo peasants and retarded Muslims. Maybe one follows from the other, but the progress from one to the other was suspiciously rapid and perhaps somewhat out of character with earlier progressive tendencies.

    Some stuff happened in between. Power shifted. Neoreaction is fuzzy on what that stuff was. Probably intentionally fuzzy, because digging into that stuff would expose some bad guys who could not credibly be called ultra-Calvinists.


    Chris B Reply:

    Anyone remember the super-Protestantism article from the Times? Or how about the whole self determination drive by the USA starting with Wilson? Jews used liberalism and current acceptable means to power to get into power. They didn’t convince us to do anything we weren’t already busy doing.

    And as for the mid 60’s acceleration and the KGB nonsense, why not try looking into the CIA who it turns out funded bullshit like Feminism and Modern Art to demonstrate how much more ‘free’ the US was than Russia. Both Russia and the US engaged in what can only be described as a leftism orgy.


    an inanimate aluminum tube Reply:

    “Jews used liberalism and current acceptable means to power to get into power.”

    And once they achieved power did that change the character of progressivism? If so, how? NRX has no answer.

    It seems unlikely that things would remain exactly the same, despite a new group with vastly different behavioral traits gaining power.

    “And as for the mid 60’s acceleration and the KGB nonsense, why not try looking into the CIA who it turns out funded bullshit like Feminism and Modern Art to demonstrate how much more ‘free’ the US was than Russia. Both Russia and the US engaged in what can only be described as a leftism orgy.”



    Chris B Reply:

    “did that change the character of progressivism?”

    1) They pushed for immigration reform – but that needed the USA gov to acquiesce, and again, you’ve got to look at the environment – the USA was full on pressing self determination and anti-racism. They did not have some form of mind control, it takes two to tango.

    2)They used black people, race and civil rights as a power tool and means to join progs in power, because the WASPs etc never did that obviously – (

    And any shift mid century has too be seen in light of USA foreign policy and geopolitics in my opinion. Just look at the anthropologists and anti-racism –

    But this is all missing the structural aspect of all of this, which is what NRx is supposed to be about.

    josh Reply:

    Jews and Protestants have been dancing together on and off since the reformation.

    Zimriel Reply:

    “And as for the mid 60’s acceleration and the KGB nonsense, why not try looking into the CIA who it turns out funded bullshit like Feminism and Modern Art to demonstrate how much more ‘free’ the US was than Russia. Both Russia and the US engaged in what can only be described as a leftism orgy”

    Links or it didn’t happen.

    Chris B Reply:


    CIA and modern art funding –

    CIA and feminism funding (see also Rockefeller foundation funding as well)-

    The mighty Wurlitzer –

    Seems to me, the CIA and the US establishment probably decided to undermine economics focused forms of leftism by promoting other forms to crowd it out, and thus directed leftist energy through funding other areas. Add in the desire to signal how much more “free” the USA was to the world and you get a Leftism orgy.

    SVErshov Reply:

    “And as for the mid 60’s acceleration and the KGB nonsense, why not try looking into the CIA who it turns out funded bullshit like Feminism and Modern Art to demonstrate how much more ‘free’ the US was than Russia. Both Russia and the US engaged in what can only be described as a leftism orgy.”

    With time it developed into cultural coalition. Nowadays ALL mass media in Russia controlled by CIA and it suits Putin very well. As result of introduction of destructive cultural components infantilism become dominating psychological element in Russian psycho. If CIA doing good job why interfere, devious Putin.


    admin Reply:

    The idea that Ultra-Calvinism (in its Anglophone incarnation, at least) was not intensely engaged with Judaism from the beginning is historically unsupportable. So the suggestion that some dodgy Semites are going to show up post-1945 and throw everyone into conniptions is a conceit of the populist right-Jacobins.


    fnn Reply:

    The Ashkenazi Black Legend is that the old WASP ruling class kept them out of country clubs, imposed quotas on them in the Ivy League and presumably did all kinds of other anti-Semitic things. Sailer brings this up a lot.


    admin Reply:

    A moral universalist culture is vulnerable to accusations of hypocrisy about such things, and thus succumbs, without obvious limit. Once free association ceases to be a line in the sand, no lines of any kind can be defended.

    an inanimate aluminum tube Reply:

    “The idea that Ultra-Calvinism (in its Anglophone incarnation, at least) was not intensely engaged with Judaism from the beginning is historically unsupportable.”

    Of course. It would be foolish to claim otherwise.

    But that doesn’t translate to a uniform level of Jewish influence on ultra-Calvinism throughout the period in question.

    Look at a graph of the Jewish population in the United States. In 1840 the US had only 15,000 Jews out of a population of 17 million. This only gradually increased through 1880 or so and then there is a giant spike.

    ” Between the last two decades of nineteenth-century, and the first quarter of the twentieth-century, there was a mass emigration of Jewish peoples from Eastern and Southern Europe.[40] During that period 2,800,000 Jewish Europeans immigrated to the United States, with 94% of them coming from Eastern Europe.”

    In 1924 quotas were put in place which limited this, but a significant demographic change had already occurred.

    “Before 1900 American Jews had always amounted to less than 1% of America’s total population, but by 1930 Jews formed about 3.5%”

    ” Growing anti-immigration feelings in the United States at this time, resulted in the National Origins Quota of 1924 which severely restricted immigration from many regions including Eastern Europe. The Jewish community took the lead in opposing immigration restrictions, which remained in effect until 1965.”

    But of course they didn’t just step into a leading role, they had to gradually work their way up over the course of a few decades, during which their influence was somewhat more limited than it later became…

    “In the first half of the 20th century, in the USA, Jews were discriminated against in employment, access to residential and resort areas, membership in clubs and organizations, and in tightened quotas on Jewish enrollment and teaching positions in colleges and universities.”

    But eventually, they assumed their current leading role.

    “With the influx of Jews from Central and Eastern Europe many members of the Jewish community were attracted to labor and socialist movements and numerous Jewish newspapers such as Forwerts and Morgen Freiheit had a socialist orientation. Left wing organizations such as the The Workmen’s Circle and the Jewish People’s Fraternal Order played an important part in Jewish community life until World War II.

    Jewish Americans were not just involved in nearly every important social movement but in the forefront of promoting such issues as workers rights, civil rights, woman’s rights, freedom of religion, peace movements, and various other progressive causes.”

    History is complicated and boiling it down to any one cause is likely to be overly simplistic.

    Did ultra-calvinists do progressivism? Probably they did.

    But other factors played significant roles in molding progressivism into the perfect killing machine that it is today.

    NRX is a bit weak on analyzing those other factors, but it is never too late to start.

    NRX would become a bit of a joke if it ignored all other factors that made progressivism what it is today and tried to make the case that what we have now is just the direct, logical and inevitable consequence of ultra-Calvinism.


    admin Reply:

    Alternatively, one can frame the problem as that of sufficiently enriching the conception of Ultra-Calvinism, so that pseudo-exogenous factors are grasped as integral. The moral universalism that enabled the processes you describe to take place was not imported from outside. On the contrary, the cultural peculiarity leading to indiscriminate importation of subversive elements is lodged in the core of the universalist project.

    an inanimate aluminum tube Reply:

    That’s fair. The fundamental weakness / error in thinking was internal.

    But what you describe is perhaps an excessively enriched definition of ultra-Calvinism and the concepts involved might be more clearly communicated by another term, like universalism.

    vxxc2014 Reply:


    “A moral universalist culture is vulnerable to accusations of hypocrisy about such things”.

    And yet Dear Admin…not universally they’re not.

    The Greeks were universalist, this is a cause of the Seleucid vs Maccabees quarrel from the Greek side.

    The Muslims dear admin are very, very universalist. And they keep their end of the universalist bargain. If you become Muslim under their rule your children will not be second class.

    Catholicism is Universalism. Not politically, but politics is much insane in our day and inevitably our point of view. As it’s trying and failing to substitute for religion and the family we see everything politically.

    Roman Law was universalist. As was citizenship in the Empire.

    Admin something else is at work here, although we are vulnerable to universalism to quote Schrodinger’s Cat we’re here in the now, our time.

    What is different to render us so vulnerable? For your generalization of universalist vulnerability is historically inaccurate.

    What’s different is Protestantism and women having broad direct political participation to name two differences.

    We can’t zero in on any one cause or any one group.

    This is why I say the first duty is to remove the insane and evil from power.

    In such times the Weak do what they Can, The Strong do what they must.

    But why I add – BUT when the Strong have done what they must, they must STOP. For continuing to do not what they MUST but what they CAN they enter the provinces of the Weak and will find themselves its’ subjects.

    [I hope last bit explains incentivizing incentive rule a bit more].

    Now in the BUT then STOP ….is sane and traditional rule.

    In the modern but we must FINALLY fix and SOLVE the problem of this bad/evil strain of Humanity for all time, because we at present believe having power means having the power to do what we CAN in that modern CAN lies the madness of the 20th century.

    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 4:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chris B Says:


    1) Modern Leftism is post protestanism via reformation, the enlightenment and the whole of the 20th century.
    2) Demotic politics are utter ruin (see Hoppe on democracy) hence (3)
    3) alternative source of legitimization of sovereign needed (mandate of heaven, or ownership ala formalism)
    4) AIACC

    Or did we decide to drop all of this?


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 4:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • Orthodox Says:

    If the audience is inner party, not NRx. If outer party, it is not not-NRx.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 4:49 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kgaard Says:

    Japan offers a control sample for a modern society that did not experience the Frankfurt School influx in the 20s to 50s though of course it never had any protestants either. Today it’s sort of like the US’s twin planet on the other side of the sun — similar but different.

    What Japan demonstrates is that technology — particularly birth control and soaring population density but also lots of other stuff — alone can be fingered as the cause of many changes, such as plunging fertility rates, women’s liberation, feminization of men and rising political pressure for a big welfare state. So that’s perhaps 70% of the progressive program right there.

    What Japan does NOT have is an anti-Japanese-male bias infused in its society, akin to the west’s anti-white-male bias. I think the absence of any serious minorities for hundreds of years just made that a non-starter from the get-go. The radical left could never hope to put together a powerful political coalition because there was no big minority group to serve as a base.

    The result is that Japan remains culturally conservative — and very Japanese — in many ways. But women still have evolved along an arc that is fairly similar to how they evolved in the west, again due to technology.


    Hurlock Reply:

    “birth control and soaring population density” “alone can be fingered as the cause of” ” plunging fertility rates, women’s liberation”



    Erebus Reply:

    You understate the degree of influence the USA had on post-WWII Japan. What you describe was not due to technology alone; it was technology combined with a US-written constitution, a debased monarchy, a desecrated folk religion, and a cultural zeitgeist of rock music, booze, and hard-left liberalism straight outta the USA. See, for example, the 1968 student protests and the rise of the Japanese leftist/marxist movements in 1945. (Such things did not exist prior. There was no room in politics for plebian populists.)

    It may be worth mentioning here that Yukio Mishima would have celebrated his 90th birthday a week ago. If only Japan had more men of his caliber and vision….!


    Kgaard Reply:

    Could be … but does the world provide even one example of a rich, high-density population that generates a 2.5x fertility rate? I guess you could say Israel. But that seems like a unique case: A besieged minority under constant threat of attack from neighbors, with reminders coming in the form of missiles lobbed over the border every now and then.

    Once you’ve got sub-2x fertility, most of the rest of the progressive program seems to follow of its own accord.


    Erebus Reply:

    To answer your question, if this is correct, there’s not a single country that comes close. Most rich, high-density populations are in a ~1.5x fertility rate rut.

    (Note that Japan isn’t doing any worse than its wealthy neighbors. In fact, all things being equal, it’s probably the best of the lot. Also, needless to say, whatever the hell is going on in Africa can only end in disaster.)

    I wouldn’t ascribe this fertility rate ill to progressivism, solely. When the Roman elite stopped having children, their senatorial class particularly, we called it decadence. The same thing has also overthrown Chinese dynasties — several times, and most disastrously only recently, with the collapse of the deeply decadent and corrupt Manchurian Qing Dynasty! (If any of the latter-dynasty Qing emperors were anything like the visionary Japanese Meiji emperor, history would be different in ways we cannot even conceive.)
    ….Now the peoples of this earth, on a much broader level, have come to value luxuries and status over raising children. Modern progressivism has a lot to do with it, but there are many other, older factors.

    Sam Goldwyn Reply:

    The birth rate is largely due to the ultra-orthodox, who are culturally opposed to the ruling European Ashkenazim. They live off welfare and various scams. They have a 5-8 kid TFR. The productive members of society are gradually being overwhelmed by them. The birth rate is extremely culturally bipolar.

    Y.Ilan Reply:

    @Sam Goldwyn
    Certainly the ultra-Orthodox are having a lot of babies, but so are other sectors of the Jewish population. While the Orthodox have been living off welfare for a long while, they are also slowly but surely integrating into mainstream society, and not by force; certainly, the system where the State pays ultra-Orthodox to study is not sustainable as it is, and it’s not going to stick around. Not to mention the very healthy birth rate of the National Religious crowd, who are both traditional and support the State perhaps more than any other segment.

    Izak Reply:

    I wrote my post before reading yours, so I’m glad to see that you’ve also identified technology as a huge factor in social change. It’s always an under-appreciated factor, mostly because everyone feels they can do so little to control it, so they might as well complain about something else.


    Son of Olorus Reply:

    There is a scientific basis to this through the work of one and the study of Proxemics, which itself is integral to the understanding of the impact of available topological space on the behaviour of populations of biological organisms. Calhoun proved that even with basically infinite (no limited abundance) of food, water and other necessities of life- physical space was still a limiting factor of what the maximum population could be due to changes in behaviour which detrimentally effected fertility rates. This led to the discovery of the fact that organisms require an adequate “behavioural space” to operate normally in. This type of behavioural adaption goes back all the way to the first proctists and single cellular organisms which all exhibit behaviour in which they stay near each other but always at an average distance apart from individuals of the same species (evolutionary adaption of maximum space utilization for intra-inter special competition) –

    The influence of technology on fertility and behavioural space is that it increases the efficiency of a population at utilizing available physical space, therefore higher population densities can be supported (moving the necessities of life variable of Cahouns experiment towards infinity) however this will only take us closer to the next limiting factor –> “behavioural space”.- Gnon creates cities and ends them.


    muhammad chang Reply:

    Calhoun was more optimistic than most people who cite his work. He believed in ubran planning to alleviate the stresses of cramped living conditions. One wonders if technology, “techspace” could help too.


    Son of Olorus Reply:

    Calhoun’s optimism is certainly true and if one thinks of “Techspace” as skyscrapers and turning deserts/swamps into irrigated fields–>

    Then “techspace” is integral to civilisation and its products.
    -i would presume that the average height of buildings would be almost perfectly correlated with population density; to have more people in the same area, the physical sciences must be pushed to newer limits.

    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 5:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • kartoffel Says:

    The graph is from /pol/, back before the shakeup. I tried explaining the problems to the guy as he was making it, but he didn’t get it. It’s easier to think everything was just great until the Jews showed up.

    As Ace likes to say, stupid is easy and easy is holy. What does Anissimov hope to gain by being holier than NRx?


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 6:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • spandrell Says:

    What’s in a name?

    Moldbug never used the term neoreaction; and honestly Assinimov has etymology on his side.

    You can’t fight etymology. You have a very special touch with language; you should set for a cool terrifying name and cut ties with all the fascist crowd on Twitter.

    Surely it isn’t worth waiting the VPN to start just to tweet that socialism still sucks even if there’s no jews.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 6:14 pm Reply | Quote
  • Y.Ilan Says:

    People are always on the look out for more scapegoats, as if it’ll change anything beyond, perhaps, one’s own emotional satisfaction. If one thinks that the Jews/Zionists are secretly engineering the demise of Western civilization (as if it’s a new and radical idea…) one should definitely do something about it. Or, one can choose to remain pathetically ineffectual and whine about the Jews on the internet. If you think we are to blame, come and get us; beyond that, what is the point of your wretched whimpering beyond capitulation? Those who call themselves NRx should never forget that everything is ultimately about power relations.


    Harold Reply:

    “People are always on the look out for more scapegoats”
    Yes, the Jewish Moldbug is keen to scapegoat Protestants.

    “If one thinks that the Jews/Zionists are secretly engineering the demise of Western civilization (as if it’s a new and radical idea…) one should definitely do something about it.”
    Why would a reactionary, neo or otherwise, give less credence to an idea because it was not new and radical? Neoreactionaries seem to believe those dead white men were correct about Africans, about female pormiscuity, about almost every belief they had for which they are now reviled. Except Jews. They didn’t love Jews because of some strange insanity.

    “Or, one can choose to remain pathetically ineffectual and whine about the Jews on the internet.”
    Maybe they are not capable of being effectual. Maybe they cannot compete with superior Jewish ability at convincing the masses. That is, until special circumstances render the people more receptive.


    NRx_N00B Reply:

    I’m still waiting for a Kmac-ite to come along and theorize that the Moldbuggian strain of NRx is a “Jewish intellectual movement”.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    @Y.Ilan, – Politics is Power: Yes indeed, thank you. Politics is Power, and the self-immolation of our ruling class 50 years ago created a vacuum that was filled. That which not so much replaced our Ruling Elites is less conspiracy and more the natural aggregation of power by man, and groups of men, and there’s dramatic over-staffing by one group.

    The problem being that Progressive Rule is insane.

    With regard to come and get you….

    What about us who don’t want to come and get YOU, but want to remove insane and evil minded towards Americans that includes over-staffing by your demographic from our Commanding Heights of Power [save Force, all that is left to my people in any case, and would be if you didn’t exist here] and rule ourselves?

    Would you like Israel to be administered and policed by the United Nations, a legal case for which if nothing else can be made?

    Would you like the rule of an insane and pornographic Book of Judges who were utterly alien to you, and speaking of racism can’t mention your group without insults?

    However it is ancient to target your enemies but not their entire people, especially when the vast majority [but not overwhelming majority] are quite innocent enough.

    So what about those here who aren’t racist? Not enough in any case to put into action.

    I for instance simply consider I have a duty to remove the insane and evil from Power over my people and am not interested in playing out counter-productive historical re-runs that will expend valuable resources especially time on chasing the innocent, which I greatly suspect is part of the guilty’s escape plan. As it has been before. Soros certainly won’t be lending his money to help innocent Orthodox escape.

    There will be disparate impact. That’s because disparate choices were made.

    We have the right of self-defense. We also have the right to rule ourselves.

    Sir, come and get us Politics is Power isn’t the way to break the historical cycle. Which is of course already running, and running very strong.

    In truth I think you’re simply the bagmen again and being [again] shockingly imprudent in your public displays of wealth and affluence. Again.

    In this case you’re holding the bag for dead men. We actually have no elites, just people looting and degrading us. Due to size, raw power and the historical anomaly of vastly distributed and duplicated Constitutional System of Jeffersonian democracy in America we have neither yet succumbed nor exploded [it’s rising] but are still muddling through playing out the last hands of the New Deal.

    The Cycle has begun, and yes Sir your group’s bad element [whom you never reign in, never to your recursive Doom] has set it off. Whatever is happening and further whatever has happened isn’t a vast and inexplicable mystery, it’s simply the self-defense of human nature.

    There is a way to break this cycle, and come and get us isn’t it. Come and get you is a historical default already running. I’m around if you wish to discuss further.


    Y.Ilan Reply:

    Certainly, Jews play a disproportionate role in the immolation of Western values and civilization, and these same Jews (much like the Hellenized Jews of old, working against their own civilization) are also liable to turn against their only birthright in this world, Israel. They are just as diseased as other Western elites and because of their power they affect the decline better than most. These Jewish elites are fast assimilating into mainstream Ultra-Leftism, and my only suggestion to those wise enough amongst them is to leave the declining West and join me in Zion… Alas, only a minority of them will do it, they are deep in the fleshpots of their own creation, drowning. I cannot reign them in.

    “Come and get us” understandably seems arrogant, unwise, and it is somewhat of a kneejerk reaction to any who wish me and my people harm. As I said, nowadays the Jews of the West, finally holding the helm and directing the ship, seem liable to crash it into the rocks. But these Jews, as much as I despise some of them, are still my people. At least until they completely assimilate, which is soon enough. Those of the West who wish to prevent their own downfall better remember that populism never really worked out well for them, especially if directed against the Jews. My suggestion? The establishment of new systems, new paradigms of power, is the only way to escape the decline.


    Jefferson Reply:

    I get a bit riled when I see folks talking about us as though we’re some sort of monolithic force for prog domination. There are plenty of loopholes in Talmud for progressive BS to leak in, but the Orthodox Jewish community is way more traditionalist/reactionary than anything organic growing out of Christendom right now. It sucks for those of us who aren’t inclined towards religious orthodoxy, but have a clue. The secular Jewish community is self-immolating at an alarming pace.

    To those who blame me and mine for this mess, what would you have me do? Should I take my family and go to Israel (leaving aside that half of my lineage is apparently from the Rhineland)? Should I use my superior power of linguistic persuasion to convince gentiles to stop being so progressive? I’m open to ideas, but the power of the Moldbug argument isn’t in ascribing the blame, it’s in identifying the process so that it can be stopped and prevented (or at least mitigated) going forward.

    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 6:26 pm Reply | Quote
  • Nick B. Steves Says:

    I am still studiously ignoring this. Because I just can’t stand Barbara Streisand. (Well, she does have beautiful voice.)

    But meanwhile, while I’m ignoring this…

    Neoreaction is not about scapegoats. Whether progressivism has lived for 80 years or 500 years or 5000 years, it is something a people does to itself. And why a people does that is the central question of neoreaction.

    As I said on The Twitter, the Frankfurt School represents a transition from a Stage 3 to a Stage 4 cancer. Obviously, everyone hates the Frankfurt School. But it doesn’t explain the cancer.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 6:36 pm Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    Remember Habermas is from Frankfurt and Hoppe was his student, he was a marxist for a little bit.

    Moreright is such a mental poverty.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 6:38 pm Reply | Quote
  • New Low | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 7:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • NRx_N00B Says:

    Yikes, very sensitive topic—as I see it, this is precisely the area that would spur the motivation for entry and hi-jacking of NRx.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 7:50 pm Reply | Quote
  • Izak Says:

    I see no reason to consider the Frankfurt school very powerful. In fact, I had the exact same reaction when I read Kevin MacDonald’s account of them in Culture of Critique. The main reason for the sexual revolution was the invention of the birth control pill. Marcuse served as a convenient rationalization alongside Wilhelm Reich and Ernst Bloch, the latter two having nothing to do with Frankfurt school. To try and make Marcuse the figurehead for the Frankfurt school, who were quite suspicious of him and Erich Fromm, isn’t really correct.

    The main reason for post-WW2 progressivism was white guilt. It would have been activated regardless of Jewish influence. We whites are a guilty bunch. Again, Frankfurt School-style anti-anti-Semitism functioned as a convenient rationalization to rethink the fundamental questions of modernity, but to imbue it with such power is silly. Does anyone take The Authoritarian Personality seriously any longer? Answer: no. No one remembers Horkheimer and Adorno for their attempts to indulge in empiricism, and they currently have zero influence on sociology and psychology. People remember those guys for their whole attack on positivism and enlightenment ideas (and they make some good points, too! Read Walter Benjamin. The guy was a solid thinker), but they don’t care much about their most blatantly anti-Western material.

    I also wonder what Anissimov would say about the various leftists who had nothing really to do with the Frankfurt School and still argued for progressivism. Is he familiar with Paulo Freire? His book Pedagogy of the Oppressed is a Marxian work on teaching from the late 60s, it was a huge bestseller and continues to be influential, and there’s no real Frankfurt School influence on it. It’s mostly Marx and the phenomenological tradition. It was written by a Portugese middle-class Catholic. How does Anissimov account for this?

    For the record, I have no real problems with serious, intellectual anti-Semitism. And the Frankfurt School did have some ideas worth addressing and dismissing productively (in addition to some good points) — but they’re not nearly as serious as some people take them. To say that Leftism “comes from the Frankfurt school” is one of the dumber things I’ve read on here in a while.


    Izak Reply:

    Ah, here’s a small correction. I looked up Ernst Bloch and he has a sort of informal association with Frankfurt School. I still stand by my claim that it is no longer very relevant and wasn’t the center of post-WW2 progressivism.


    Marxist toady Reply:

    Well — Bloch was a friend and associate of Adorno and Horkheimer, but as far as I’ve read (his major works and literary writings) he never advocated or even so much as wrote about “sexual revolution.” His studies were primarily historical, on theology, millenarian groups or literature. I.e., essentially nothing in common with Reich (or Marcuse), and more akin to Benjamin.

    I do find it funny that Adorno is remembered for his contribution “Authoritarian Personality,” which was by all accounts hack work (cf., Simon Jarvis, “Adorno’) — any of his main works are far more insidious, Nietzschean and, well, interesting. (And equally funny that, meanwhile, the third-rate “Dialectic of Enlightenment” knock-off presented by Christopher Lasch in his middle period (Lasch is open and explicit about the influence, here) is held as gospel among some on the right.) Oh well.


    Izak Reply:

    Well, I also said that Freire was Portuguese when he was actually Brazilian. His book is terrible BTW.

    Anyhow, yes, I remember some discussions going on about a year ago or so where White Nationalist types were saying “We really ought to give the Frankfurt School another shot! Adorno really had some OK ideas! There was a streak of cultural conservatism to his writing! It’s time to re-read these guys from a rightist perspective!” — and from what I’ve read of the guy, it’s all true — so it’s sort of disheartening to see some folks sliding backwards into a muck of quasi-conspiracy theory nonsense.

    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 8:22 pm Reply | Quote
  • NRx_N00B Says:

    Obviously Franz Boas’ strategic positioning and the fraudulent pseudoscience he engaged in—significantly derailing/subverting HBD—played a huge role in birthing today’s mass immigration and multiculturalism policy. I don’t know enough about the guy so I ask: Who/what was Franz Boas most influenced by? Ideas, anybody?


    Y.Ilan Reply:
    Adolf Bastian was a big influence on Boas. But one shouldn’t discount significant personal experiences, like his expedition to Baffin Island, as unimportant:

    “I often ask myself what advantages our ‘good society’ possesses over that of the ‘savages’ and find, the more I see of their customs, that we have no right to look down upon them … We have no right to blame them for their forms and superstitions which may seem ridiculous to us. We ‘highly educated people’ are much worse, relatively speaking …”

    Boas was Jewish (although a thoroughly assimilated one) and decided to stay in the USA due to antisemitism back in Germany. This, most likely, would shape his draw towards the acceptance of the “other” and cultural relativism. But I don’t think that’s the main motivator; as a geographer at heart, Boas would be naturally biased for environmental causes vs. biological ones.


    NRx_N00B Reply:

    Thank you Y.Ilan.


    J.Maddy Reply:

    Identitarians in France are having the same prog etiology internal debate (with elite supervision ):

    French Identitarian writer Anne Kling has argued that anti-immigration books have tended to be ignored unless they are kosher. She notes that the best-seller on crime and immigration, La France Orange mécanique, was promoted by “right-wing and ultra-right-wing Zionist” Jews and that the book’s author was represented in court by Gilles-William Goldnadel, a Franco-Israeli dual national close to the Likud party, Franco-Jewish neoconservative networks thus find it in their interest to promote books and ideas hostile to Islamic immigration. — Towards ‘Kosher Nationalism”? (4): The Rise of Éric Zemmour and the Case of France


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 9:03 pm Reply | Quote
  • Aeroguy Says:

    What I find interesting about his posted infographic is how he modified it from a nearly identical infographic I’ve seen floating around /pol/ before he made that post. The origional had a box above the Mike’s version that stated:
    Jewish “intellectuals”, fueled by their resentment towards Europe and Christianity, create the Frankfurt School with the intention of destroying Western culture to bring down capitalism and create a Marxist revolution.

    Also, the box at the very bottom of Mike’s version that contains the statement “Democracy may be blamed but the real problem is the representative system” wasn’t included in the original. The original also had a white background with blue text boxes in black writing. Everything else is exactly identical.

    If you take out the Frankfurt school stuff I think it dovetails nicely with the Cathedral infographic that’s been in circulation longer than the original version of the infographic Mike appropriated. I suspect it was created as a reply to the Cathedral infographic by someone who hasn’t read Moldbug (or simply hasn’t studied pre20th century political history very closely).

    I think it might be a good idea to help educate the curious about political history starting with the turn of the 20th century and working backward until we start debating cuneiform translations. How closely tied the prohibitionists (a puritan cause if there ever was one) and the suffragettes were. Moldbug did a good job running through history, his lessons deserve repeating and should be expounded upon. There should be no love for Lincoln or the cause of preserving the Union. The populism of the so called era of good feelings (along with universalism) should be disparaged as one of the leading causes the civil war which was far from being unavoidable and was entirely unnecessary. We need to be historically literate enough to immediately laugh into ridicule anyone who talks as if the 20th century was the beginning of our problems.

    I see NRx as a sort of Buddhism for civilization, asking how does civilization escape from the endless cycle of history.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 9:15 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alfred Miller Says:

    NRx, in my opinion, should be more a general category, than a specific ideology. I think if Anissimov said something along the lines of “Bill Clinton and the Democrats did it,” then that would not be a neoreactionary opinion. But whatever we think of the ‘enlightenment,’ progress went exponential in the 20th century, especially in the 1960s.

    In general, unless I was founding an actual NRX organization, I would be hesitant to administer any type of ideological purity test, in all but the most extreme cases.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    It’s always been exponential, the constitution itself was a huge victory for progress, Jefferson was quite right when he said he smelled a rat and refused to participate in the convention. A good NRx exercise might include going through and attacking the federalist papers from the right. Libertarian sacred cows still need slaughtering.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 10:28 pm Reply | Quote
  • pseudo-chrysostom Says:

    >the cultural peculiarity leading to indiscriminate importation of subversive elements is lodged in the core of the universalist project.

    statements like these are of course basically true, but the whole character of this sort of conversation smacks head to toe of special pleading.

    yes, such ideologies provided convenient rationalizations for subversive elements, but that also remands the fact that *they are indeed subversive elements*.

    one cant help but wonder if the genesis of these debates can be found in the lingering shell-shock of the former progressive (which i can confidently say is pretty much everyone in this day and age), residue of a lifetime of conditioning, oozing like black tar out of the cracks of their hindbrains, ‘surely, not the jews sir, wow, just wow’.


    Posted on January 20th, 2015 at 11:37 pm Reply | Quote
  • Rob Says:

    f this is NRx

    Well it’s clear that NRx is no longer a very useful or meaningful label since people with quite varying views have adopted it. As a new label without the sort of baggage attached to older labels, it was seized upon by some who want to avoid the baggage.

    It seems to have started with Moldbug and other libertarians to refer to a kind of libertarianism. Then some nationalists, ethno-nationalists, racialists, etc. adopted the label as well. As a result of disparate people and groups adopting the same label for themselves, there arose a belief that there was some sort of ideological unity among them where there really was none. And that’s when the notion of a “trichotomy” and the endless debate and bickering developed. Significant confusion has developed as well with different people using the label to refer to quite different things. There have been pointless debates ultimately grounded on the fact that people are using the same word to mean different things.

    I think there should be some sort of mutual understanding reached whereby the different factions agree on which faction should get to use the label from now on. It does seem that the libertarian-ish types did originate and adopt the label first, so on the grounds of priority they would get to use the label. On the other hand, it’s hard to see some nationalists giving up the label, especially the more public among them, since the label does have less baggage than labels like nationalist and other related labels tend to have. So perhaps the libertarian-ish types should agree to give up the label.

    I don’t know how exactly it should be resolved, but at present it does seem to be a source of pointless bickering and confusion.


    Chris B Reply:

    I started with that view, but now I think it is far from it. The concentration of the three groups into one place allows and allowed for an exploration of the differing connecting points which opens up insights which were not clearly visible when each group was separate. e.g spontaneous order + hierarchy acceptance connects the religious trads and post-libs which provides a new way of looking at religion as a metaphysical system which still has value (if updated.)

    The only real problem is coming from the eth nat branch who are being retards and think that mob rousing is a valuable direction and that if you just appeal to people to love their “race” or “culture” louder then “jews” can say the opposite etc then all will be fine. It wont, and I am beginning to question the value of a great many of them, because it seems to me that NRx needs thinkers not idiots. Plenty of places for idiots who want to wave banners elsewhere. They get to scream and “do” something, and NRx is left to gestate in peace.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    What Mr. Chris B is the value of Neo-reaction’s other components? Other than an intelligent and free conversation can take place.

    Well what the ____ has that ever done for anyone?

    I’m sure they had some fascinating conversations in the Gulag, Dachau and many other places.

    The Eth-Nat’s Mr. Chris B have the intrinsic value of self-defense and human nature.

    They also want something, and it’s not words. Now if they don’t get it here they’ll get it elsewhere…in short when they don’t get what they want here and that NRx doesn’t lend itself to action they’ll go away.

    Ethnic Nationalism has intrinsic human nature and self defense value.

    What if any value is NRxn?

    [I can answer that positively but think on it yourselves].

    The Eth-Nat’s Mr. Chris aren’t engaged in an exercise of My Right Wing Dinner with Andre , they’re fighting they’re own comprehensive genocide of which their physical deaths are apparently designed to be a mercy.

    As far as going away and going elsewhere look around. The replacement for Progress among White’s is here, and it’s going everywhere White. That replacement has intrinsic value, and intrinsic power. Calling them retards for speaking the truth as they see it [and a powerful case can be made it is true] isn’t wise, or anything but…retarded.

    Eth-Nats see no virtue in Socrates end, and I won’t believe NRx does either until I see people drinking the hemlock. In other words – Prove It.


    Rob Reply:

    What do you mean by intrinsic human nature and self defense value? Every ideology, religion, etc. makes appeals to human nature.

    Ethno-nationalist actually might not be the best term since most adherents don’t really have an ethnic culture nor are seeking a revival of ethnic culture. Rather they’re seeking a revival of the nation-state, that is a modern, imperial polity which uses modern communications and military technology to forge formerly ethnic cultures around the metropole into a uniform nation-state culture. Nation-statism or just nationalism are probably the best terms.

    Hurlock Reply:


    For all your condescending talk about the value of ‘action’ and the relative pointlessness of discourse, you seem to spend most of your days spamming comment sections and having rants on twitter.

    yep Reply:


    Alfred Miller Reply:

    As someone who identifies most with the Eth-Nat’s, I have to agree. Too many still want to basically be a racialist version of the left. A lot of the comments on WN websites are always talking about the “image” and how they need to go from being a “reactionary old men’s club” to “appealing to youth.”

    I’ll keep the old reactionary men’s club, thank you very much. WN’s need to realize they cannot out left the left.

    And while I listen to and respect some WN’s, I don’t consider myself a WN for a whole host of other reasons, by the way.


    Izak Reply:

    Well, the problem is with rhetorical strategizing in general.

    It seems that Eth-Nats aren’t really an old man’s club anyhow, and their self-presentation has little to do with that state of affairs. It’s just a mentality that seems to be gradually attracting people less than 30 years of age for whatever reason, and that’s fine.

    It would be much better if they just said, “You know something? Let’s put honesty as the #1 priority at all times and not try to strike poses in a contrived fashion.” I would have no problems at all with young people talking about things that they’re really interested in from a non-left stance, as long as the whole discussion is borne of genuine interest. In most cases, this doesn’t seem to be how it works. Everything they do seems to come from the need to cynically target “regular people” demographics. I remember there was once some video posted by the Youth for Western Civilization group, which is now defunct, and it had really lame Hollywood music in it. Some guy said, “Hey, this music is lame,” and the response was, “We are appealing to youth by using fresh music from the latest Hollywood films” or something of the sort. The actual lameness of the music was never addressed.

    So every attempt to seem fashionable is supplemented with a sort of rationalizing narrative that goes, “In order for our movement (movement? what movement?) to flourish, we need to do X so that we appeal to the youth/average people/women/whatever (who are always considered in somewhat insulting terms).” I’d attribute this mentality to so much of the social awkwardness and stupidity you find in WN discourse — like their bad jokes for instance (IE, “With this sort of racial and religious diversity, some towel heads are certainly going to roll.” Get it? Towel head! This use of a humor joke appeals to the youth). By contrast, when Steve Sailer writes off-handedly about movies he goes to see, there’s nothing phony about that. It seems like he just wants to discuss some movies.

    admin Reply:

    There’s no point surrendering territory without confidence that they won’t just follow you. The thug crowd poison everything they touch, and then move on to a less toxic label. They’re exactly ‘like’ leftists in that way.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    Yes but they’re motivated by survival. There’s only one way they go away, and that’s what they’re fighting against.


    Rob Reply:

    It’s just a label. It’s not surrendering territory.


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 1:35 am Reply | Quote
  • Stirner (@heresiologist) Says:

    I tweeted out that chart, so yes, I think it is NRx.

    The linkages between the Frankfurt School and Progressivism are nebulous, and frankly a distraction..

    However the wider chart is a pretty good primer on Bezemov’s KGB-as-demoralizer strategy in the cold war.

    The communists worked for decades to infect the pillars of the cathedral. By 1968, the harvest was reaped, with academia and journalism soon to become dominated by the agents of the demoralization. By then, it was a self-replicating process, with economic marxism mutating into cultural marxism, and political correctness victorious without firing a shot.

    AIACC after all!

    The great irony is that the KGB’s strategy worked, only it worked too slowly for the USSR to survive and accept our surrender. Poor Obama the red diaper baby….groomed to be the trojan horse of detente and cooperation, only to have nobody left to surrender to.

    Arguably, the west did not commit suicide….it was pushed….


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 2:47 am Reply | Quote
  • Artxell Knaphni Says:

    Adorno was brilliant. A lot of Neoreactives seem tremendously lacking in critical acumen, to the point of insanity.

    Even in your own argot:
    1) If a Neoreactionary suggests rampant colonial exploitations, through corrupt and unethical tactics, were justified by a Darwinian ideology, then why should so-called “NeoLiberal” elitism (the “Cathedral”) be denied access to the same justification?
    2) Wouldn’t the same Darwinian ideology, carried through, say that Neoreaction is the the most ironic form of defeat? After centuries of privilege, there is a group of disaffected hypocrites, who are unable to prevail in a world of multinational kapital whose very development they worship, but whose functioning they are now unable to withstand without whinging complaint.
    3) You’ve been locked out of academic careers because of “affirmative action”? Choose a field requiring the highest IQ, which your HBD mumblings parade so incessantly.
    You’re not popular because you represent a “privileged” group? Wow! That sounds like prejudice! Such bigotry is awful. You must feel terrible. How unfair! But I’m sure the alleged genetic predisposition towards high civilisation can enable a dignified tolerance.
    How come we don’t hear the so called “Neoliberal elites” complain? Is it because they’re the winners of the Darwinian race? Or is it because they’re not insane?

    Adorno wrote the Beatles catalogue, lol:

    ▶ ▶ Jemma King – Monarch Programming, Mind Control & Pop Music – YouTube

    “loose love-beads”:

    ▶ Red Ice Radio – David McGowan – Hour 1 – Covert Ops Behind the Hippie Dream – YouTube


    pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    >1) If a Neoreactionary suggests rampant colonial exploitations, through corrupt and unethical tactics, were justified by a Darwinian ideology, then why should so-called “NeoLiberal” elitism (the “Cathedral”) be denied access to the same justification?

    one works, the other doesnt


    Artxell Knaphni Reply:

    [pseudo-chrysostom]: “one works, the other doesnt”

    {AK}: It works very well for the ‘elites’, just as it worked very well for the ‘colonial exploiters’. If it doesn’t work for you, it could be because you’ve lost the ‘Darwinian race’
    , lol.


    Izak Reply:

    Hahahaha, thank you for the first youtube video, it’s great.

    The second one I stopped after 15 minutes. The guy isn’t even good at being a crackpot, he just sucks.


    Artxell Knaphni Reply:

    YW, Izak. Not sure if Jemma King is serious about Adorno, or not, but he didn’t own the Beatles backcatalogue. That’s just another ‘right-wing’ (NeoCon?) lie.


    Izak Reply:

    I assumed it was all 100% nonsense. I thought it was cool how it sort of gradually turned into Vigilant Citizen, though. They went through a bunch of VC’s arguments and repeated them to a tee.

    The funniest was around 18:00 when the guy pretends not to know about modern pop music. “What is this Jay-Z? I’ve never heard of this Jay-Z fellow, please, educate me.”

    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 4:02 am Reply | Quote
  • Kwisatz Haderach Says:

    As a mischling, I endorse this message. I’ll have my man send the shekels right away.


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 4:40 am Reply | Quote
  • Antinomian Says:

    what is the central unity of western thought post- progressive-ism, ie the consensus between Reform Protestant-Judaism and the transnational corporate governance of the west; an overlay upon the macro self interest of oligopoly capital from the ideology of antinomian western family destruction – extended and nuclear: Here the breaking of natural moral law becomes a good in itself and a way to call upon God, ie antinomian -ism

    Tracing The Antinomian Trajectory Within Sabbatean Messianism

    ” Antinomianism, along with millenarianism and divinization of man, were all central elements of the Frankist religion. Scholem states that Frank avoids some of the more abstract concepts of Sabbateanism, such as Kelippot, Beriah and Atziluth, and focuses more on “exoteric” ideas such as “the Good God,” “the Big Brother” and “the Virgin.”43 For Frank, even though the spiritual Torah de-Aztiluth is the ideal one, it is unattainable, consequently nihilism is the solution so that eventually the “Good God” can manifest him­self in this world. Frank openly declared war on tradition, a policy that manifested itself in ecstatic singing and orgiastic ritual. Like Zevi thinking after his conversion, Frank’s doctrine underwent fur­ther elaboration, where the messiah first needed to descend into the abyss (Rome). Frank believed that the world was created by an evil entity and that the laws of this world did not come from the true God. Therefore part of redemption meant a negation of these laws as expressed in all religions and morality, i.e., nihilism. However, sinful acts which were viewed as holy needed to be done in a secretive manner. Christianity was seen as the garb that could mask their inner process of redemption. He states:

    This much I tell you: Christ as you know, said that he had come to redeem the world from the hands of the devil, but I have come to redeem it from all the laws and customs that have ever existed. It is my task to annihilate all this so that the Good God can reveal Himself.44


    pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    modes of thought like these are really hegelian avant la lettre.

    ‘its okay to be the ‘anti-theis’, because that will just conjure up a thesis to bring us into glorious synthetic paradise!’

    how very convenient.


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 4:47 am Reply | Quote
  • NRx_N00B Says:

    Hurlock sure provides a nice summary!


    Erebus Reply:

    Agreed. The backtracking over on More Right is also worth a read:


    pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    personally i did a bit of mental scoffing when he mentioned a ‘/pol/ theory of leftism’, as if /pol/ were an anthropomorphic entity.

    certainly it has a characteristic spirit, but diving it would be a much more mytheo-poetic affair.


    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    It’s interesting how the Protestants’ attitude toward the Bible has changed. Luther started out using the Bible as a weapon against the Catholic Church. Theodore Parker complained about Protestants making a fetish of the Bible. Now the Progressives, heirs to the Social Gospel movement, have thrown the Bible almost if not completely under the bus. But some “fundamentalists” cling to it as rigidly as ever.


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 6:31 am Reply | Quote
  • Lightning Round – 2015/01/21 | Free Northerner Says:

    […] Frankfurt School caused progressivism. Related: Land disagrees, as does […]

    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 7:12 am Reply | Quote
  • Baron Ludwig von Nichts Says:


    Wow, this is interesting. Some kind of hyper-Gnostic, Left Hand Path, Cthulhu/Chaos cultish variant of Judaism. I will look into this.

    By the way, I’ve heard theories that Frankist Jews were heavily involved in all sort of radical and nefarious things, including Communism, Nazism, etc. It all starts to make sense in light of this information. Thank you.


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 9:00 am Reply | Quote
  • Baron Ludwig von Nichts Says:

    By the way, this is why I think a metaphysical/occult branch of NRx is vital. You will never understand the agendas at work in the world at their deepest levels until you penetrate the various metaphysical currents underlying them. Nor will you be able to counter their magic properly. This is an area where Enlightenment rationalism is a total fail — these people tend to be clueless about the shadowy places in human minds and societies from which power agendas emanate, and the techniques used to propagate them. To an occult-aware person, these agendas are transparent and pervasive in our society; to a rationalist, they’re all but invisible. Removing metaphysics and religion from mainstream education is a great way to blind the masses to what, say, high level Freemasons are up to, but neoreactionaries shouldn’t make the same mistake.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    I endorse the Good Baron as providing worthy step for Neo-Reaction, something Admin has asked for…

    I just don’t endorse Hitler.

    We must rule ourselves, whoever ourselves are…Americans, Boers, Germans, French, Russians, Japanese, Juche, Israeli, English and so on…

    The American mistake which metasized sadly was conflating rights with a right to POWER and none have a right to power but those who earn it, but never Strangers.

    Never Strangers.

    The mistake was made by FDR who reached in every direction in desperation. Remarks he made repeatedly when asked: Who decides? I DO. Dropping his customary charm, indeed for FDR this is snarling. I DO.

    There’s in the American Constitution and Founding no Constitutional barriers to Power, because they deliberately took a chance by not barring it so as to not bar rights. The check was always that the American Ruling Class [gone since 60s, Bush Daddy last WASP alive] did not allow in The Other, whoever The Other was…and the first other you know was the Jacobin Ambassador who stirred up trouble and rebellion in New England during Washington’s Presidency, the responses included the Alien and Sedition Act.

    The next Other are Catholics, and the Irish…and so on. Not trusted at all until 20thC.
    And they didn’t whine it, they earned it dying defending and digging America’s ditches.

    And they earned it because the American Catholic Hierarchy set out to make Catholics the Super Patriot Americans and the entire educational system indeed the entire American Church is bent from arrival of the starving Irish on this goal. It worked well for those who followed. American Police/Firefighter [and FBI gen 1] is Irish Catholic.

    Just as our Warrior/Gun Culture is Scotch-Irish. Emphasis on Scotch [theirs]. Yet another Other.


    antinominian2 Reply:

    contemporary antinomian modern christianity/judaism is a merger of frankist kabbalah and calvinist saved by grace alone rejection of torah defined good works with instead an acclamation of their inverse, especially in the obsessions of freud marx with the female divine. The destruction of the traidtional family was an explicit goal of callin upon G_d and from it naturally flows the destruction of familial tribal ties, community, ethno-organization, ie the decline of the west, eg : eva frank. Nrx cannot understand the spiritual dimension unless it understands the West today as a perversion, heresy of the original Christendom, and thus to be rejected. The spiritual dimension need not be understood solely as something supernatural, that is beyond sense observation, rather as an underlying competition of impulses, one set being adaptive, the other non-adaptive, suicidal for a society-people.

    FRANK, EVA (1754–1816), daughter of the charismatic Shabbatean leader Jacob *Frank (1726–1791) and Hannah Kohen, his wife. Eva was born in Nikopol, Bulgaria, then part of the *Ottoman Empire, into the Jewish-Muslim community of the *Doenmeh. Jacob Frank was a proponent of an antinomian anarchist approach that rejected all the prohibitions and restrictions of Jewish law, including the laws of incest. This annulment was inspired by medieval mystical traditions that the foremost expression of the messianic future would be the establishment of a new code, “the era of mercy,” replacing the halakhah and the “era of harsh judgment.” Frank, who brought his family to Poland in December 1755, was charged by the Jewish community of Brody, Galicia, with instigating illicit practices. He was tried, imprisoned, and excommunicated along with his followers in June 1756. Originally named Rachel, after Jacob Frank’s mother, Rachel Herschel of Reischa, Eva is referred to in Frankist writings as the Lady, the Virgin, or Matronita, the Aramaic name of the mystical female entity Shekhinah. She became known as Eva following the conversion of her family to Christianity c. 1760. This conversion protected the Shabbatean group, which was being persecuted by Jewish communities in Galicia and Podolia for heretical views and unacceptable sexual behavior, and enabled the members to preserve their secret rituals based on messianism and anarchy in all aspects of life. The historian Peter *Beer knew Eva Frank and discussed the evolution of her names and her family’s conversion in his work on Jewish sects (1823).


    Richard Reply:

    Not a bad idea. Provided one does not go off too far on tangents lon the long road to nowhere. Certainly there are dark occult areas to be explored with the clear light of reason, but avoiding all the blind alleyways a very necessary prerequisite.


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 10:00 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    ahh…left FDR unfinished. FDR apparently thought that elections [which he undermined] and the Anglo-American natural ruling class [whom he also undermined] would serve as a check of abuses by a now purely administrative and not elected government that he created.

    He can be called to account for that.

    That the Children of his young advisers and soldiers, workers who armed the entire non-fascist world would be a legion of Nero’s, Nihilists and Cowards by a Battalion in every College is not on FDR but the Greatest Generation’s parenting, and on the 68-ers themselves.

    Who could have foreseen that?

    Which doesn’t mean we have to, just because the 68-ers do. That is a past that deserves no homage, no pact, no tradition.


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 1:26 pm Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    Just to add a few more to the list. Bertrand Russell, Einstein, there are Analytic Marxists who want to have nothing to do with frankfurt. Rosa Luxembourg, Proudhon, Peter Kropotkin. Many. Mill, Liberalism in general, Voltaire, Condorcet, and perhaps the most influential of all Rousseau has nothing to do with all of this. George Orwell, Every leftist and all the romance of the spanish civil war. Every one buried in the Panthéon.

    Let’s not overstretch the protestant example, please.


    Posted on January 21st, 2015 at 9:07 pm Reply | Quote
  • CMB Says:

    @Izak Yeah, I think Keith Preston (although he’s not a WN) wrote some good stuff about Marcuse and the Frankfurt School for AltRight or Radix about a year ago. Don’t know how much of an impact it made. I’m guessing not much!


    Posted on January 22nd, 2015 at 12:35 am Reply | Quote
  • Y.Ilan Says:

    My suggestion to Jews who perceive the self-immolation of secular life in the Gola, is to think in the long term. Decide whether or not the continued existence of your culture is important to you, and follow through on whatever answer you decide upon; if you answer in the positive, then the only way forward is in Israel. Jewish life outside of Israel is disappearing, assimilating into mainstream, universalist society. It is a hard task, not for the faint of heart, and cannot be successfully achieved by everyone. Yet it is worth it.

    I don’t think it is worth one’s time to argue with the mainstream, to attempt persuasion. Best way to go about changing things is to seek real power.


    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    Ilan, can you expand on this? What are the important aspects of culture? How different is Jewish culture from WASP culture? Less denial and projection, maybe?


    Y.Ilan Reply:

    Post-Jews, assimilated and assimilating Jews, are indeed sometimes indistinguishable from mainstream, progressive WASP culture. Jewish culture is another thing entirely; when I say Jewish culture, I mean that which makes Jews similar in every place they settle down, a record and tradition of 2500 odd years. The rituals and holidays, practiced to a larger or smaller degree; these are the things that truly matter in any culture, more than belief. Jewish culture is in practice the culture of Israel, which after all is the only place with a growing Jewish population. There is certainly a huge difference between Israeli and WASP culture, it would be laughable to say otherwise.

    Thus I say to all Jews who wish to remain Jews and prolong the existence of their own people: come to Israel, it is the only place that has a future for us. What denials and projections are you talking about specifically? I am not attempting to avoid anything.


    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    I have nothing specific in mind. The Jews I know all seem very WASPish. But in general, I’m thinking of things like what Robert Priest says in this podcast:

    There are some cultures that are like what is described in the Book of Job, where, if something bad happens to you, you think, “I must have done something to make God angry. I’d better mend my ways.”

    There are other cultures where, if something bad happens to you, you think, “One of my neighbors must be practicing witchcraft. I’d better figure out who it is and kill him.”

    To go off on a tangent, there was an interesting discussion in the comments to the “Disturbance in the Force” post here at Outside In among Handle, Thales, and Adam G. Thales suggested that the Christian crucifixtion story is a psychological tool for forcing people to examing the scapegoating process through the eyes of the scapegoat.

    M. Scott Peck wrote about this sort of thing in terms of “neurotic” (blames self too much) vs. “character disordered” (refuses to accept enough blame) psychotherapy patients.

    Another issue would be particularism vs. universalism, but that language has taken on a life of its own around here, so we probably can’t discuss it easily without doing some rectification of names. That might be worth pursuing.

    Y.Ilan Reply:

    I see what you’re getting at. Self-blaming/Scapegoating and Universalist/Particularist values would seem to map well together on the same axis. Different cultures, in general, would position themselves differently on said axis; from your own personal experience of WASPish Exile Jews you deem to position Jewish Culture on the Self-blaming, Universalist segment. Certainly there is a certain neurosis in exilic European Jewry, obviously stemming from the conditions of the Exile itself, and there is certainly a Universalist strain in Judaism; the very belief in Monotheism being radically Universalist when compared to older religions. Beyond that, though, Judaism is inherently particularist in its natural habitat. I believe that a certain balance needs to be struck for a society to be stable and healthy.

    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    I reject the “self-blaming” description of Progressivism. Scott Alexander has been brilliantly articulate on this. When, e.g., Blue State Americans criticize “America”, they are not criticizing themselves, they are criticizing Red State America. And in saying this, Alexander realizes that he is doing so as part of the “Gray” (libertarian) team, not the “Blue” team.

    Peck wrote that he he mostly saw neurotics. Character disordered people won’t generally get therapy unless they are coerced, in which case it does no good. Neurotics eventually straighten themselves out. A bias towards being a little “neurotic” in that sense is good. I don’t want to name names, but I would like to see more “neurosis” from both my Jewish and gentile acquaintences.

    I’m going to have to compose another rant on “universalism” some day. The way we discuss this issue is wrong. It’s like a door that needs to open sometimes and close sometimes. No sane and honest person will say “always open” or “always closed”. A person who says “always open” is invariably a hypocrit who is either sabotaging an enemy or signalling superior holiness. A person who says “always closed” is a paranoid schizophrenic.

    Posted on January 23rd, 2015 at 8:30 pm Reply | Quote
  • Y.Ilan Says:

    That above aimed @Jefferson


    Posted on January 23rd, 2015 at 8:31 pm Reply | Quote
  • Muhammad Chang Says:

    @Son of Olorus,

    I’m referring to virtual techspace too, a combination of both urban planning, virtual reality, and the internet.


    Posted on January 23rd, 2015 at 9:26 pm Reply | Quote
  • Son of Olorus Says:

    @Muhammad Chang
    i see what you mean, as a way of getting round the limiting effects of “behavioural space” needed by an individual physically, one could give the sensation of greater space to conduct behaviour in -virtually. However i would not consider urban planning as virtual, but rather as physical techspace(with an aesthetic bent).

    Techspace = virtual techspace + physical techspace

    -considering that you made the comment of “techspace” in the context “to alleviate the stresses of cramped living conditions”–>which i presume we can both agree on as the result of the laws of proxemics, then virtual techspace could possibly circumvent the limitations of physical techspace in this context. However virtual techspace or simply virtual reality can branch off into other areas where different modes of behaviour are simply off-shored out of the physical setting- i can see how this can solve proxemic related problems in behaviour such as increased aggression etc however it may not solve some of the other consequences of high denisty populations such as low fertility–> unless it was directed towards such goals, which one could leave to the imagination.

    Would techspace be a more useful/meaningful word, if it meant nothing more than solving spatial-behavioural problems in society(via techne) ?

    if not how should its definition be expanded?


    Posted on January 23rd, 2015 at 10:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • Beyond Dungeons and Drag Queens and Toward the Jacquerie | Aryan Skynet Says:

    […] influence of Frankfurt School intellectuals on the present decay of the civilization, Nick Land responded that this represented a “new low” for Neoreaction. “Is anybody going to try and tell me, with […]

    Posted on May 9th, 2015 at 7:30 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment