Quote note (#263)


… what we’ve seen from a wide range of writers and analysts in the days since the Brexit vote is not necessarily worry. It is shock. Fury. Disgust. Despair. A faith has been shaken, illusions shattered, pieties punctured. This is what happens when a life-orienting system of belief gets smashed on the rocks of history.

The name of that shattered system of belief? Progressivism.

(Only half-way through the year yet.)

From the same (excellent) piece:

The European Union may well be the purest and most ambitious experiment in progressivism ever attempted — a transnational economic and political entity founded entirely on the moral premises of humanitarian universalism, which is to say on the negation of particularistic attachments. (Kojève was one of the chief planners of the European Common Market, the predecessor to the EU.) […] Yes, neoliberal economic policies (as well as fiscal austerity) undoubtedly played a big role in provoking anti-EU sentiment in Great Britain. But I suspect Angela Merkel is the real catalyst behind the outcome of the UK referendum. Not only did the German chancellor insist on admitting well over a million refugees and migrants from the Greater Middle East into the heart of Europe. Supporters of the policy have also made it clear on numerous occasions that they consider racism and xenophobia to be the only possible grounds for opposing her stand. […] From the standpoint of progressivism, this makes perfect sense. …

June 28, 2016admin 40 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

40 Responses to this entry

  • Brett Stevens Says:

    The idea of human equality is dying, as it should.

    Next up to die: the “wisdom of crowds.”


    holipopiloh Reply:

    >Next up to die: the “wisdom of crowds.”

    This one will be extremely hard to give up, especially in the “wisdom of the market” variant. Just ask Nick.


    Mild Troll Reply:

    I don’t think Land harbors the delusion that the market will have outcomes everyone is going to like.


    holipopiloh Reply:

    Neither do I.

    jay Reply:


    Communism didn’t die with the demise of Soviet Russia. It still holds currency. As they would say: True equality hasn’t been tried yet.


    John Reply:

    >> True equality hasn’t been tried yet.

    The fact this actually works as convincing rhetoric leads me to believe it will never die.


    michael Reply:

    really because its taking a herculean effort that must be re introduced for every generation and backed up with threats. I dont think many actually believe it, they just believe contradictory things and alternate explanations like racism. when you really understand it and then contemplate the implications of what we have done under the misapprehension its enough to just deny it.

    jack arcalon Reply:

    >> True equality hasn’t been tried yet.

    Yes it has, but only at the lowest level of society, where most direct interactions occur.
    It’s not like you can cut ahead in a queue because you’re better looking or smarter or even stronger.


    GC Reply:

    “Wisdom of the crowds” does work provided the individuals that makeup the crowd don’t talk to each other – when they do, it transforms into “Delusions of the echo chamber”.


    Posted on June 28th, 2016 at 3:30 am Reply | Quote
  • Thales Says:

    It’s been less like a “narcissistic injury” and more like a narcissistic massacre


    Posted on June 28th, 2016 at 3:52 am Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    Every one make sure to read Kojeve’s intro to Hegel and take a look into all this EU business. Gotta read that first.


    Erebus Reply:

    Kojève, the Mad Bureaucrat, is garbage… But if you’re saying that this sort of fare is important as a framework for understanding the EU, you’re absolutely right:

    “[…] Man can be truly human only by living in society. Now,
    Society (and membership in a Society) is real only in and by the
    actual interaction of its members, which interaction “manifests”
    itself as, among other things, political existence or State. Hence
    Man is truly human — that is, “individual” — only to the extent that
    he lives and acts as “recognized” citizen of a State. (Cf. Volume
    VII, page 475, lines 23-25.) But at the moment of its appearance,
    and during its whole historical evolution as well, the State does
    not fully satisfy the human desire for Recognition and hence does
    not perfectly realize Man as Individual. Such is the case because,
    in the real historical conditions of his existence, a man is never
    only “this particular man here,” recognized by the State as citizen
    in his unique and irreplaceable particularity. He is always also an
    interchangeable “representative” of a sort of human “species”:
    of a family, a social class, a nation, or a race, and so on. And only
    as such a “representative” or as “specific-particularity” (Besonder-
    heit) is he universally recognized: recognized by the State as a
    citizen enjoying all political rights and as a “juridical person” of
    the civil law. Therefore Man is not truly individual, and that is
    why he is not fully satisfied (befriedigt) by his social and political
    existence. That is also why he actively and freely (i.e., by nega-
    tion) transforms the given social and political reality, in order to
    make it such that he can realize his true Individuality in it. And
    this progressive realization of Individuality, by the active and free
    progressive satisfaction of the desire for Recognition, is the “dia-
    lectical movement” of History which Man himself is.

    In fact, Individuality can be fully realized, the desire for Recog-
    nition can be completely satisfied, only in and by the universal
    and homogeneous State.
    For, in the homogeneous State, the “spe-
    cific-differences” (Besonderheiten) of class, race, and so on are
    “overcome,” and therefore this State is directly related to the
    particular man as such, who is recognized as citizen in his very
    particularity. And this recognition is truly universal, for, by defini-
    tion, the State embraces the whole of the human race (even in its
    past, through the total historical tradition which this State per-
    petuates in the present; and in its future, since henceforth the future
    no longer differs from the present in which Man is already fully

    By fully realizing Individuality, the universal and homogeneous
    State completes History
    , since Man, satisfied in and by this State,
    will not be tempted to negate it and thus to create something new
    in its place…”
    (Emphasis added.)

    That this is all obviously wrong should go without saying. HBD alone makes it impossible, before even taking other considerations into account. But that hasn’t stopped Kojève, and won’t stop people like him, from trying to make their pet-dystopia a reality.


    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    It’s too bad most Righties that reject ‘atomistic individualism’ seem to verge into the exact same Hegelian, reified nonsense that Leftards do. MuhNation.


    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    The leftist tendency can only really lose vvhen it is no longer considered a good thing to take care of people that aren’t either profitable or personal friends. Put simply, charity ought to be a sin.


    Wagner Reply:


    “(Kojève was one of the chief planners of the European Common Market, the predecessor to the EU.)”


    The smug aura of this image mocks me.


    Wagner Reply:


    Recognize a presupposition of modern times anywhere therein?

    Its mechanism is more surreptitious than that- the fact that they’re “slaves” is hidden as part of the changeability initiative.

    The essential question is “Are slaves changeable?” Was Kojeve right? It seems we as a civilization have built our ethics on the decision that he was.


    Wagner Reply:

    The Strauss-Kojeve debate you could see as ancient realism vs. modern optimism


    Remember how I used to always get autistic about “master/slave-perspectivism”? Bioleninism could be restated as…. pre-scientific people will read the above quote and call it pre-scientific, believing themselves to be scientific. Since the majority are slaves, and since the majority rules, Science is not in control. Hence we need a coup by an aristocratic few who are political scientists.

    Wagner Reply:

    *shoves a pickaxe into a Bilderberger’s chest*

    Ever used one of these before?

    Wagner Reply:

    The everyday, pre-theoretical belief most have is that the Ideas that dominate our time are random, without origin, and eternal. I don’t think so. Oftentimes you can trace them back to galaxybrains like Kojeve. Soros’s favored saint is Karl Popper, for instance. I’m sure lots of our oligarchs have favorites that motivate them and shape their entire worldviews, favorites who manifest concretely in our very lives.

    This is a form of genealogy. When you trace an idea back to the one who originally enunciated it it tends to lose that “glimmer of eternity”. That’s what genealogy does, it relativizes, it dissolves.

    Do you think any of the ones who control our lives Well Ackshually each other regarding the Hegel/Kierkegaard discrepancy? Highly highly doubt it, most of them seem like surface-people. Could be wrong, don’t know their private lives, most of them just seem like mindless platitude repeaters.

    If they really want to reform the EU or the US they’re going to have to philosophize. That means putting the very ideals one holds sacred into question and then attempting to justify them from the ground-up. If they don’t check out, welp, looks like it’s time to toss them on the scrap-pile.

    Here are a couple sacred cows to slaughter: liberty and individualism. If they lead to the historically unprecedented degeneracy that we see today, hate to say it, time to go back to the drawing-boards.

    Wagner Reply:


    You tell me if Kojeve’s “end state” has arrived.

    The eschaton is immanentized amirite? There are no noble lies, no ignoble lies, no grandiose mythologizations of history, or secular dogmas in our society, nor are there any thinkers and critics questioning them, because they don’t exist, for all truth is transparent and agreed to by all.


    Wagner Reply:

    Lest you’ve forgotten, intrinsic to the imperialistic expansion of the occidental forces of Unity, as witnessed in the latinization of the USA and the arabization of Europe, is the forgetfulness of the hierarchy between civilizations. The immediate concern of the NWO is to flamethrow all demons of remembrance until they’ve reached their goal of flattening said hierarchies so that there are no hierarchies existing anymore to remember. The allegedly “noble” lie of equality at that time will be obsolete as it will cease to be a lie. So we exist in an in-between era wherein the reality of hierarchy must be smothered in order to advance the process of physiological nihilism that is the equalism-imperative. This both unconscious and deliberate “forgetization” needs to be shaken out of its stupor on a daily or ideally hourly basis in order to hinder the movement toward 2nd-worldization. Hence why I don’t go off and live in a cabin without WiFi like I might want to..


    Posted on June 28th, 2016 at 5:00 am Reply | Quote
  • Ahote Says:

    >fiscal austerity

    It’s interesting that “fiscal austerity” and “budget cuts” means decreasing spending *growth* (so no actual cuts to spending) by some measly amount, and *raising* taxes.


    michael Reply:

    yeah well thats conservative inc circa 90s. I used to think they will cause financial armageddon but now they have everyone in the tank they will simply negotiate bail ins etc


    Posted on June 28th, 2016 at 6:39 am Reply | Quote
  • TheDividualist Says:

    Elites are naturally more cosmopolitan than the plebs, even on our side, see Vox Day liiving in Italy, running a publishing business in Finland… from that angle, the Progs are sort of accurate to call Leavers as uneducated, small-minded folks, what they don’t fully understand is how what they are trying to block is precisely the immigration of uneducated, small-minded folks of different cultures who are rationally expected to be even more intolerant, aggressive etc. Elites simply don’t see that, they see other elites of immigrant backgrounds, educated high-IQ people like Razib Khan, of course they are not problematic.

    So it is a four-player game. White High sees Brown High and considers them correctly OK. White Low sees Brown Low and considers them correctly not OK. White High thinks this makes White Low intolerant and narrow minded. On one side correct, on the other side the whole point is that Brown Low is of course even more intolerant and narrow minded and that makes White Low right.

    Many elites are entirely disingenous and signalling about it, but AFAIK it is often genuine. Upper class white students don’t understand what the fuss is about, their upper class brown classmates are entirely fine. They are like Razib Khan. OK – but they have no idea what lower class brown people are like.

    Yes, at some level the whole thing is driven by ideology and signalling and lies. But it all is propped up by White High genuinely seeing only Brown High and seeing them as more similar to themselves as White Low is.

    When it dawns on White High that Brown Low is even more intolerant and unlike-themselves than White Low is, they pull a Pim Fortuyn. But the cost of that is the utter loss of status. Fortuyn was nothing but a *principled* left-liberal, feminist, gay – and was regularly called a fascist.

    And we are in many ways the Dissident White High. Much of the argument Nick gets into with the Alt-Right is all about how to deal with the really low kind of White Low who can be seen as useful or as counter-productive…

    So you cannot even reduce it to just one dimension, white and brown, national and immigrant… class gives a second dimension and dissent a third.


    michael Reply:

    “So it is a four-player game. White High sees Brown High and considers them correctly OK. White Low sees Brown Low and considers them correctly not OK. White High thinks this makes White Low intolerant and narrow minded. On one side correct, on the other side the whole point is that Brown Low is of course even more intolerant and narrow minded and that makes White Low right.”

    Certainly youre correct elites base their judgement by the niggers they met at grad school, and even then gloss over the differences.that said Id add to your synopsis

    ….and of course brown high are rare and and their children are going to revert to the brown mean.And brown highs may be high but they still are not western so are simply more traitors to the culture that adopted them. and brown highs almost always serve as apologists and organizers agitators for brown low.

    white highs are utterly convince that racial difference is only a result of racism you are correct they can not be educated by neo nazis, However at this point the meme is rampant through out white culture and dissident from all levels must carefully educate their own class in that classes language about reality. WN arguments are often quite reasonable and important but need translating


    Jefferson Reply:

    Which is why I’m unsure of Admin’s motivation in allowing low whites to poop all over the comments section here.


    admin Reply:

    It’s definitely unappreciated.


    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    The existing elites are morally & financially banking on manipulating the masses for status, the problem is not just that idiots exist but that enough people sympathize vvith untermenschen to make signal ‘altruism’ look virtuous instead of a disgusting subsidization of degenerate subspecies.


    wu-wei Reply:

    Well said.

    When high-status whites observe low-status browns (living far, far away from them, of course), they feel towards them a sort of affection. When high-status whites observe low-status whites, they feel towards them contempt. This is the true meaning behind “multiculturalism”.

    Those on the alt-right sphere often mistakenly assume that “anti-racist” is really a code-word for “anti-white”. This is understandable given the actions of the left, but really misses the greater point; leftism isn’t actually deliberately anti-white, but rather deliberately anti- low-status white.

    One of the greater schisms in *-reaction appears to be between those who view low-status whites with affection (sometimes seemingly regardless of their faults and degenerate behavior), and those who view ALL low-status sapiens with contempt, regardless of heritage. This pattern was especially obvious in the last few threads as well.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    David Burge ‏@iowahawkblog

    People aren’t mad at elites as much as they’re mad at what currently passes for “elites.”

    E.g., a $30k/year clickbait site writer sneering at the intelligence of $150k/year plumbers.


    Jefferson Reply:

    Isn’t one of the key tenets of reaction the idea that the elite’s orientation towards the low-status of all ilks should be one of benign paternalism? When we see NAMs killing each other in our cities, we ought be inclined to stop them, just as we ought stop low-status whites from melting their brains with opiates.


    Posted on June 28th, 2016 at 7:20 am Reply | Quote
  • John Hannon Says:

    Even Ken Wilber, writing 20 years ago,* could see that Progressivism was headed for trouble –

    ” Now you yourself might indeed have evolved from ethnocentric to world-centric perspectives, and so you will easily understand that all people are to be accorded equal consideration and equal opportunity. From this stance of universal pluralism, you are genuinely multicultural and post-conventional. The problem is, most people that you treat with universal coverage do not share your universalism, so you are extending universal consideration to people who will absolutely not extend the same courtesy to you.
    …. Multiculturalists are thus thrown into a series of contradictions. To begin with, they claim to be non-elitist, but the capacity for post-conventional and world-centric pluralism is a very rare, very elite accomplishment. One survey found that only 4% of the American population actually reach this highly developed stage. So multiculturalism is a very elite stance that then claims it is not elitist. In other words it starts to lie about its own identity.
    … (Multiculturalists) know that they have a noble stance, which in part they certainly do, but because they don’t understand how they got there, they simply try to force their view down everybody’s throat. Everybody is equal! No moral stance is better than another! And so off we go with intolerance in the name of tolerance, with censorship in the name of compassion, with we-know-best-for-you thought police and mindless political correctness.”

    *More recently Wilber seems to have gone completely round the bend –



    Posted on June 28th, 2016 at 5:04 pm Reply | Quote
  • anonyme Says:

    Wu-wei: “Those on the alt-right sphere often mistakenly assume that “anti-racist” is really a code-word for “anti-white”. This is understandable given the actions of the left, but really misses the greater point; leftism isn’t actually deliberately anti-white, but rather deliberately anti- low-status white.”

    It’s been obvious for a long time that the real reason the GOP Establishment is upset with Trump is because he’s appealing to low status working class whites, and if this thing gets out of hand it threatens to undermine not only their Open Borders mass immigration agenda, but also their endless neocon war agenda.

    Regarding Brexit, upper class whites who live in London and support the status quo voted Stay, while working class anti-Estabishment whites in the country voted Leave.

    And so, as R.J. Moore II put it, they’re “morally & financially banking on manipulating the masses for status”

    Shorter: Open Borders traitors & virtue signalers might not get all the immigrants they want…. neocons might not get all the wars they want, therefore Trump/Brexit supporters are fascist.


    Posted on June 29th, 2016 at 8:22 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    There’s more to being High Status then simply being pretentious, especially these days.

    The price of being High ____ anything but especially High Whites is betrayal. Not simply betrayal of High Whites but any and all trust. This is the price of even considering entering the Low Elites where most of NRX flatter themselves they belong. Hence the obsession with Game Theory’s primer for betrayal and needing to put everything into the Game Paradigm – Treason is not only the one true core value it’s your only offering to the world.

    You get a degree, act pretentious and then betray whatever you were entrusted with….and file it all under Game theory. You have literally been trained to betray. That’s your High Status.
    You’re the Dogs who roll over without barking because they’ve been trained to betray their trust. You may consider this High Status but no decent Dog would have anything to do with you.

    Really what makes one a “High White” other than being extraordinarily pretentious and dryly regurgitating the Dog’s Breakfast education you received? Well you deliver. Deliver what? You deliver betrayal of whatever you’ve been entrusted.

    The education you received was actually operant conditioning, strongest reinforcement being you are the smartest generation that ever lived. That’s simply not true and in terms of performance or intelligence your actually the worst ruling class in history. In betrayal and utter inability to do naught else is your High/Low elite status.

    History and Common Sense have answers for failed elites and traitors and the answer has begun.


    Posted on June 29th, 2016 at 12:43 pm Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    Most Low Status Whites can plunge a toilet.

    You’d find a way to blow it up and then collect the insurance money you’d then pass on to your (((Masters))). I don’t blame them BTW they’re just being themselves.

    That is why you’re High and we’re Low….also we’re honest. At least honest enough that we can be trusted to plunge a toilet. High Status White’s cannot.

    Hi High. We’re your replacements. Here’s a Mop. Go clean the toilets and don’t fuck it up…this is the first of many tests.


    Posted on June 29th, 2016 at 2:13 pm Reply | Quote
  • anonyme Says:

    @ vxxc2014

    One of your best comments (this was before I saw the toilet plunging comment which is pretty good too)

    In the Stephen Bush essay above he says the rift in Britain isn’t between Left and Right, it’s between Hampstead (the wealthy northern suburb of London, where everyone voted Remain, and Hull, a working class town in the north of England, where everyone voted Leave.

    Oversimplying this to make a point, let’s say that Hampstead’s gain = Hull’s loss. (Because that’s kind of how it works, isnt’ it?)

    Hampstead profits by bringing in 3rd world immigrants, but without having to live next door to them. Hull (the working class low status whites) live next door to the immigrants and complain about them, so that makes them “racist”.

    Hampstead residents might say they’re anti-war but their defense stocks are at all time highs and some of them work in defense contracting so they’re profiting quite nicely from the neocon wars, while looking out from the lush pastures of Hampstead, so of course they support the status quo.

    The low status whites of Hull are the ones who actually fight these wars, but without getting anything out of it (unless you count PTSD)…. so over time this makes this makes them more and more anti-Establishment and against the status quo….. so they vote Leave…

    Which for Hampstead residents makes these low status whites fascists, bigots, racists or Nazis (take your pick)

    The question then is how long can this go on….how long will it take for the residents of Hull to figure out that their real enemy is NOT Muslims or Africans, their real enemy is in fact the residents of Hampstead….


    Posted on June 29th, 2016 at 2:35 pm Reply | Quote
  • anonyme Says:

    As a low status white my idea of a 7 course meal is a bucket of KFC and a sixpack, however I’m too drunk to go fishing this afternoon, so I’ll try my best to make a High White kind of comment here…..concerning Kojève vs Heidegger.

    In contrast to Kojève who posited the human subject as central and language as destructive, Heidegger establishes language and Being as having a kind of priority over human beings. In his Letter on Humanism, Heidegger posits man as the “Shepherd of Being” who approaches Being through language, rather than killing them off, as Kojève would have it.

    Heidegger’s thinking serves Being, it does not master it in the way Kojève attempts to do. Kojève’s Hegelian subject is capable of recombining and representing objects with impunity. It is man as agent of the realization of things.

    Think Karl Popper’s Open Society or his disciples, such as George Soros, Bernard-Henri Lévy et al… who hold International Symposiums where SJW professors take turns accusing Heidegger of Nazism

    In contrast, Heidegger reveals Being through language, which will not subordinate Being to the absolute power of thinking man.

    Heidegger refuses to define thinking as the role of the collective subject, a goal he considers merely the public and the “they”. He sees the instrumental understanding of language on behalf of history that Kojève endorses as inadequate for the revelation of Being and a “threat to the essence of humanity”.

    Technology conquers language and subjugates it to “mere willing and trafficking as an instrument of domination over being”.

    Technical thinking, which necessarily follows from humanist presuppositions, finds the truth of being in endless causes and explanations….

    [….oops, can’t find my beer bottle opener, so I have to stop now…..opens one beer bottle with another one….]


    Posted on June 29th, 2016 at 3:08 pm Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction (2016/07/03) - Social Matter Says:

    […] Land digs up som “[S]hock. Fury. Disgust. Despair” in light of Brexit. Well, I certainly hope that “despair” part is real, but I have my […]

    Posted on July 6th, 2016 at 8:34 am Reply | Quote
  • Wagner Says:

    “One should not forget Kojève’s playfulness, irony, delight in the most paradoxical formulation, and fondness for putting people on. With these qualities in mind, one might take Kojève’s claim to absolute wisdom as an exercise in the negation of Socratic irony. Socrates claimed to have no wisdom beyond knowledge of his ignorance. He considered wisdom regarding the whole of nature to be something divine, beyond the human, and his own knowledge of ignorance to be a merely human sort of wisdom. Kojève claims with Hegel to have attained wisdom and thus to have moved from the human to the divine status.”

    Looks like the left missed the joke.


    Posted on October 2nd, 2019 at 3:19 pm Reply | Quote
  • Wagner Says:

    Compare Schmitt’s mindset to Kojeve’s


    This idea of it being “the end of history” sounds absurd at first, like “who would actually believe that?”, yet, yet, that’s exactly how our establishment acts in regard to liberal democracy. I myself also have a similar sense, I think we all do- we can’t imagine an altogether different form of government.

    “Monarchy?! We’re not in the middle ages anymore!”

    It’s about balance. Our nation is founded on a great rebellion, as they call it across the pond. There’s an exaggeration, an excess, involved in “monarchophobia” that’s ingrained in us.

    Call it my individual temperament, I just don’t think the leader of a country should be prevented from imprisoning corrupt crypto-presidents if they determine that that is the best course of action. That seems like what one of their main tasks should be, if you ask me.


    Posted on October 10th, 2019 at 9:59 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment