Ratchets and Catastrophes

Perhaps all significant ideological distinctions — at the level of philosophical abstraction — can be derived from this proposition. For the progressive, it represents the purest expression of history’s “moral arc“. For the Conservative (or, more desperately, the Reactionary), it describes an unfolding historical catastrophe. For the Neoreactionary, it indicates a problem in need of theorization. Moldbug lays out the problem in this (now classic) formulation:

Cthulhu may swim slowly. But he only swims left. Isn’t that interesting?

In the history of American democracy, if you take the mainstream political position (Overton Window, if you care) at time T1, and place it on the map at a later time T2, T1 is always way to the right, near the fringe or outside it. So, for instance, if you take the average segregationist voter of 1963 and let him vote in the 2008 election, he will be way out on the wacky right wing. Cthulhu has passed him by.

Where is the John Birch Society, now? What about the NAACP? Cthulhu swims left, and left, and left. There are a few brief periods of true reaction in American history — the post-Reconstruction era or Redemption, the Return to Normalcy of Harding, and a couple of others. But they are unusual and feeble compared to the great leftward shift.

The specific Moldbuggian solution to this problem, whether approached historically through the Ultra-Calvinism Thesis, or systemically through the analysis of the Cathedral, invokes a dynamic model of Occidental religious modernization. The irreversible bifurcations, symmetry breaks, or schisms that lock Western modernity into its “great leftward shift” correspond to successive episodes of cladistic fission within Protestant Christianity (abstractly understood). The religious history of modernity is constituted by a degenerative ratchet (as touched upon here, 1, 2, 3).

Discussing a recent critique of the Euro by Keith Humphreys, Megan McArdle converges upon the same insight. She writes:

As a longtime euroskeptic, who has frequently flirted with the idea that the euro must eventually destroy itself, I am sympathetic to Humphreys’ point. But let me attempt to offer a partial defense of the hapless eurocrats: However stupid the creation of the euro was, undoing it will not be easy. […] Yes, we’re back to our old friend path dependence. As I noted the other day, the fact that you can avoid some sort of terrible fate by stopping something before it starts does not mean that you can later achieve the same salutary effects by ceasing whatever stupid thing you have done. It would have been painless just to not have the euro. But it will be painful indeed to get rid of it.

She encounters the signature nonlinearities of such lock-in phenomena in noting: “No wonder that no one wants even to discuss it. Especially since even discussing a dissolution of the euro area makes a crisis more likely …”

Progressivism as a process, rather than a mere attitude, is always and everywhere a matter of degenerative ratchets. Consider, very briefly, some of the most prominent examples:

(1) Democratization. Every extension of the franchise is effectively irreversible. This is why the promotion of democratic reform in Hong Kong, in a complete rupture from its local traditions, is so breathtakingly irresponsible. (No link, because I have yet to encounter an article on the subject worthy of recommendation.)

(2) Welfare systems (and positive rights in general). The irreversibility of these socio-economic innovations is widely recognized. Once implemented, they cannot be rolled back without the infliction of massive suffering. Obamacare is a more-or-less cynical attempt to exploit this lock-in dynamic.

(3) Immigration. Welcoming newcomers is effortless, removing them all-but impossible (or at least entirely unprecedented in the modern West). Immigration policy, by its nature, can only “swim left”. It consists of freezes and floods (but never reversals) — epitomizing the ratchet pattern.

(4) Macroeconomic politicized money (central banking, fiat currency, inflationary normalization, and debt financing). Easing is easy, tightening is terrifying, roll back unattempted (since Jackson in the mid-19th century).

My contention: There is no substantial topic of Neoreactionary concern that does not conform to this basic pattern. The degenerative ratchet is the problem, abstractly conceived.

This is why NRx is dark. The only way out of a degenerative ratchet is catastrophe. Such processes are essentially unreformable, and this conclusion captures the critique of political conservatism from which NRx has been born. The only non-disastrous solution to a DR, or progressive lock-in dynamic, is to avoid entering into it. Once it has begun, normal politics can only modulate the speed of deterioration, and then only to a relatively limited degree. It will reach its end, which will be seriously horrible. NRx forecasting begins and ends with this thesis.

Our doomsterism is not a psychological tic, but a rigorous theoretical obligation. It follows, ineluctably, from iron historical law. Looking on the dark side is the only way to see.

September 2, 2014admin 72 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Neoreaction

TAGGED WITH : , , , , ,

72 Responses to this entry

  • Nick B. Steves Says:

    Well. There are disasters and then there are disasters.

    If mass psychology got us into this mess (and I think it did), then mass psychology ought to be able to get us out.

    There is, in other (even more abstruse) words, a big difference between an ill-conditioned matrix and a singular one.


    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 3:40 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chris B Says:

    AAA baby! lets burn this puppy to the ground while the place is not completely overrun by kebab.


    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 3:54 pm Reply | Quote
  • Prog-Trad Says:

    Hence rises the question of ‘Exit vs Subversion’ again. I think it was Legionnaire (or, possibly, this blog) that stated the rather obvious fact that Exit has connotations of subversion in that it is a rejection of the system. Ironically, the notion of ‘subtraction’ is found in some modern Leftist theory (Negri, I’m fairly sure; Zizek has certainly touched on it, calling for a ‘subtraction’ from capitalism that is like the subtraction of a card from a house of cards, one that brings down the whole structure).


    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 4:12 pm Reply | Quote
  • Steve Johnson Says:

    “My contention: There is no substantial topic of Neoreactionary concern that does not conform to this basic pattern. The degenerative ratchet is the problem, abstractly conceived.”

    Progressivism generates memes hoping to find ratchets. Who knew that (3) was a ratchet in 1986?

    Progressive instinctively reject proposals that don’t include the possibility of a ratchet.

    If you’re hopeful you can think that now that NRx has identified the mechanism (the ratchet) that future proposals that threaten ratchets will generate more opposition and that we can survive the ratchets we already have in place (or that they’re not that bad). Conservatives have caught on a bit – they did argue against Obamacare on ratchet grounds.

    If you’re not hopeful then you notice that each ratchet tends to weaken opposition to the next ratchet and that future ratchets will almost certainly be even more destructive.


    Nathan Turner Overdrive Reply:

    ” Who knew that (3) was a ratchet in 1986?”

    Enoch Powell knew in ’67, at the latest.


    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 4:34 pm Reply | Quote
  • E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Says:

    Regarding the kind of thoughts known as ‘suggestions’ (logismoi) it is said that one can avoid sin so long as one does not entertain them. Once one entertains them (assuming of course, a certain degree of susceptibility to these in particular) the only question that remains is the amount of time until the sin is committed, barring external events that block it from escalating.

    Once the thought is entertained, the process of a Destructive Ratchet begins, until ruin. Conscience aids in allowing ruin to occur with minimal damage, but the process is regarded as being pretty much irreversible up to the point of ruin.

    This is therefore a fundamental human problem and it seems like Leftism is the discovery that this mechanic exists on the social level and can be exploited to certain ends.


    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 7:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • kgaard Says:

    While I want to agree with the themes of this post, my mind instinctively seeks out counter-examples. So, with the caveat that these may be minor, I will toss a few out:

    How does the notion of the permanent leftward ratchet square with the creation of ZEDEs in Honduras? They seem to be a successful example of stepping off the treadmill-to-the-left.

    Violent crime has been steadily falling in the US — perhaps due to some sort of instinctive countervailing force at the individual level that seeks to preserve stability in the face of institutional weakness?

    Eastern Europe has been quite aggressive in its adoption of capitalist institutions, as have Peru, Colombia, Indonesia, Pakistan and now India. These countries do not appear to be swimming left.

    Global tax rates have been roughly stable in recent decades. I can point to as many cases of tax cuts as tax increases.

    The data on teen sexual activity are inconclusive. Some data sets suggest a decline. Certainly there has been a decline in drug use, and a huge decline in teen births.

    We could be on the cusp of global tightening of immigration standards. Hungary is overtly talking about it. Australia has acted. Will the UK be far behind?

    Perhaps I am missing a larger point behind Nick’s argument and am open to correction. I myself have often made the argument of the permanent leftward ratchet in debates, but today I seem to want to take the other side …


    Antisthenes Reply:

    The bankers that own the United Kingdom won’t be satisfied until there are no white British left. Vortigern, Hengist and Horsa 2.0, Electric Boogaloo.


    kgaard Reply:

    Okay … let’s use that as an example. To some extent the immigration boom in the UK has been the result of the leftward ratchet. But it’s also been the natural result of what happens when a big city gets rich: birth rates fall and the capitalists import more bodies to fuel the growth machine. Been that way since Roman times, if not earlier.

    At the margin, a major driver of leftward ratchet in the immigration realm — the mass media — is being de-fanged. The rise of the alt-right on the internet is a classic case of exit — just like the Honduran ZEDEs.

    I’ll be curious to see what the fallout is from this Rotherham thing. In theory, every white guy in Britain who is not a commie or a hopeless mangina should be getting increasingly dialed in to right-wing thought. After all, every white guy is being persecuted at SOME level by all this change.

    So perhaps one area of fallout will come with men keeping tighter control on their daughters — being more upfront and strict about where they can go, who they can hang out with, etc etc. This would lead to further school segregation. Perhaps an uptick in start-up schools (perhaps with the help of online tools) etc.

    Just some ideas. I could be wrong. Maybe the universalist forces are too strong …


    Antisthenes Reply:

    Definitely not #everywhiteguy, how are elite whites/Brahmins being ‘persecuted’ by these events?

    Kgaard Reply:

    Well this is going to degenerate quickly. I’m on weak footting already. I had thought to suggest that the r/K methodology might be equally suitable in describing the dynamic that the concept of the leftward ratchet seeks to capture, but am not sure that works. The theory would be that much of the movement leftward in any society is a function of increased wealth — i.e. reduced Darwinian pressure — which shifts people’s preferences toward amusement and away from struggle. But while this read might help to explain the Middle East’s seeming rightward move (and I saw your comments to the contrary below), it doesn’t explain Venezuela, another dirt poor country that is hopelessly left-wing in its public discourse.

    Mike Reply:

    Mobility of capital probably accounts for part of any global economic rationalism – it means capital can exit without too much hassle, hence govenrments have to override domestic political voice to attract and keep it.

    Also, things like automation, free trade, offshoring/outsourcing, etc have increased/created elasticity in labour markets where there was little to no elasticity before. In practice, that’s essentially a type of mobility (eg. “moderate your wage demands or I’ll offshore this to Singapore”).

    So economic reforms have, at least, some track record of overriding domestic political voice (and hence acting to turn back, or at least stop or slow, ratchets). But that doesn’t deny Nick’s points any.

    It seems that the most powerfully ratchet-busting reforms are reforms that increase the mobility of factors of production. Not surprising, I guess – should have been obvious.


    Kgaard Reply:

    I agree with this.


    scientism Reply:

    Personally I think both welfarism and laissez faire economics belong to the ratchet. Having duelling economic ideologies allows for some wiggle room when the Cathedral runs into financial difficulties; both lead to social decline.


    admin Reply:

    Laissez-faire economics has been massively rolled back since the late 19th century, so how could that possibly count as a progressive ratchet?


    scientism Reply:

    Modern economic policy has oscillated between the ideological poles of socialism and laissez faire. The mechanism wasn’t fully established in the 19th century, since laissez faire wasn’t defined against socialism at the time, although even then you have industry protection for the national interest. I think the shift from the mercantilist / laissez faire dialectic to the socialist / laissez faire dialectic was the capture of economic policy by the Cathedral.

    Economic policy became highly ideological, representing equality on one side and individual liberty on the other. This ensures that (a) the Cathedral has some room to manoeuvre so it can adapt to tough fiscal circumstances and (b) whether it zig or zags it maximises the negative social effects of its policies (in the form of welfare dependency and liberal atomisation). So it’s the ideological spectrum itself that serves as the economic ratchet, producing social outcomes conducive to progressivism regardless of economic policy reversals, thanks to the dialectical structure of the debate.

    admin Reply:

    @ Kgaard — I think you’re fuzzing the argument by glossing it as a general “permanent leftward ratchet” — it’s a set of specific ratchet mechanisms (with some principal examples briefly enumerated). Rightward ‘deviations’ via escapes (i.e. ZEDEs), or restorations (Eastern Europe) aren’t counter-examples in any damaging way. If they were, there’s nothing to do except roll-over for the cosmic triumph of Progressivism — which is NOT the recommended stance of this blog.

    I don’t even think any of this is particularly controversial. When Obamacare was being pushed through, it was openly discussed as a ratchet event on both mainstream left and right. Does anybody seriously think that a decision to deport millions of Hispanics from America would be even remotely as smooth as the process of amnestying the same number? How about a decision to disenfranchise everyone receiving benefit payments from the State?

    There are a number of crucial socio-political options which are vastly easier to get into than out of, and when bundled together they sum to the progressive tide.


    Kgaard Reply:

    Well, again with the caveat that I am still wrestling with the parameters of what we’re really debating, here are a few thoughts:

    1) In Novosibirsk or Karachi or Chongqing or Lima or Lagos, there are basically no immigrants. The immigrant phenomenon strikes me as a very geographically-specific thing. It’s a function of the wealth and power amassed in the US, UK and parts of Western Europe more than anything else. As a phenomenon it almost seems ideologically neutral, no?

    2) Yes Obamacare is a leftward move … but if we look back to the Progressive era, FDR’s 30s and Labour’s peak in the 60s and 70s, these were times when the powers that be were toying with ideas that were a lot more commie than those we see today, no? One glaring example — perhaps the most glaring of all — would be government ownership of industry. That has been largely undone. It just didn’t work.

    You could at least make a conceptual case as to why universal healthcare is rational. It’s not categorically different from universal schooling, for instance. Obviously Obamacare was a disastrous way to go about it. Maybe it will be improved.

    Ultimately my point is that I’m not sure I see a relentless leftward ratchet at work (though it depends on the day we’re having the discussion). I could perhaps just as easily describe what’s happening as an r/K phenomenon (hence wealth driven) or a cyclical phenomenon, partially captured by the Fourth Turning methodology (particularly when it comes to the lax morals etc).

    Speaking of the Fourth Turning, one oft the things that really struck me from that book is that Gen-Xers like myself are historically relegated to clean-up duty — picking up the messes left by the hippie zealots a generation ahead of them. The example I like is that of George Washington, who was basically a hired hand executing the vision of the zealots like Ben Franklin, one generation his senior. Or Ulysses Grant, cleaning up the mess made by the Transcendentalists (proto-hippies) like Lincoln in the Civil War.

    Point being that people in my age group may have a tendency to see the world as more chaotic and hippie-driven than it really is, because we’ve been living in the shadow of hippies our whole lives. But a generation back (the Millennials) they are not so cognizant of that and may be just building a whole different world.

    Feel free to contradict any of this. I’m not wedded to it.


    Cledun Reply:

    Washington and Grant didn’t clean up the mess of Progress that came before them, they stabilized and cemented it.

    Kgaard Reply:

    Right. I do find it hard to be anti-Washington though. Seems like a pretty good dude.

    Cledun Reply:

    As an individual, there is much to admire about him. The same is true of many Great men whose influence on the course of history has been detrimental to things that I value.

    James A. Donald Reply:

    The decline in teen pregnancy is a bad thing – because the proportion of illegitimate children is still rising while fertility continues to fall.

    Women should marry at fourteen, or at whatever age there is a high risk that the propensity to have sex is likely to be uncontrollable, and then start having children at the age at which they most capable of having healthy children without suffering from pregnancy related health problems, which age is sixteen or seventeen. Women should complete their families, have all the children they intend to have, in their teens or early twenties.


    R. Reply:

    In eastern Europe, the conservatives are (mostly) communists.

    In the big cities, everyone is a liberal. Especially the educated or well-off people. Nary a pinko among them.

    However, that’s not enough to ensure fiscal sanity. Universal franchise is a bitch.


    R. Reply:

    (well, not everyone, just 60-70%, commies hardly ever win the big cities)


    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 7:32 pm Reply | Quote
  • Ex-pat in Oz Says:

    on the other hand, the ratchet is insatiable!



    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 7:33 pm Reply | Quote
  • Amon Khan Says:

    Western civilization can only swim left because its god is not Yahweh, but Satan – bringer of unbridled sexuality, hedonism, feminism, individualism, etc. Anton LaVey had it right when he announced in 1966 that it was Year One of the Satanic Age, and so do the Iranians when they call us the Great Satan. Dugin also talks about this, as I recall.

    What’s interesting is that the only civilization that seems able to swim in the other direction is Islam — only Allah, it seems, swims right. So I think the great conflict in the world for the foreseeable future is going to be between these two gods, and their two global projects: The NWO and the Caliphate. I see nothing coming from the West that can swim right and has comparable power. Western people are too deeply invested in their Satanic civilization to revolt now — it will probably take a vast cataclysm on the scale of a lost world war or the collapse of Rome to change this situation.

    This puts my kind in an interesting spot, munching popcorn, watching the gods war and the progressive world order fall apart. I can’t help rooting for the Islamists in their improbable rebellion against the NWO, because if nothing else, they give us some inspiration, information and models for resistance to Cathedral hegemony.

    I think the most realistic plan is not to try to fight the accelerating entropy, but to prepare to build a new order upon the ashes of the current one. Maybe hiding out in Eurasia lobbing thought bombs and waiting for the dust to settle is the right idea – unless you feel inclined to follow the Islamists’ example, start seizing territory and carving out the Neoreactionary State in some neglected corner of the Empire. These are still the Dark Times, but many Rebellions are stirring, and soon, Allah and Cthulhu willing, the world will burn in a holocaust of ecstasy and freedom.


    Antisthenes Reply:

    Swim right Allah does not. Virulent Islam is a feature of Cathedralism, not a bug. Or more precisely, it’s a benign parasite in a mutually beneficial relationship with its host. The detriment is to poor Westerners who experience the violence of Islam, not the Cathedralists who are shielded from it.

    Read this: http://www.xenosystems.net/rough-triangles/

    I suppose people like you would have scarcely been able to keep themselves from ‘rooting for’ the Protestant Germans in the 30 Years War, on the grounds that they were *really* sticking it to the French. Absurd.

    ‘Clash of Civilizations’ narratives covertly support Universalist rough triangles. You’ll find that people in NRx are generally too smart to be manipulated into embrace of Islam through this sort of facile fear mongering.


    Amon Khan Reply:

    Oh I understand all that. Islamists are very much a tool of the Western imperium, going back at least to T. E. Lawrence.

    But if wanting to return to the values of 7th century Arabia isn’t reactionary, then I don’t know what is. Also, there is still a core of traditional Islam that you don’t hear much about, that is probably the most influential reactionary culture on the planet. A good test of whether you’re really reactionary or just an edgy Satanic Anglo-fag might be to travel to traditional Muslim lands and see how you like it. Historically, the NWO Westerners like Huxley hated it, but the reactionary ones like Guenon embraced it.

    To me Islam is the Lucifer Principle in action. It’s also the most brilliant ideology ever conceived, because it possesses an inherent vitality and will to power that no other religion or ideology can match (except perhaps Judaism, but it’s self-limiting). Moral arguments are irrelevant if they don’t rouse you to fight. Islam rouses people to fight, and is a system of conquest that uses every available weapon to win. And it does win.

    If you truly despise liberal civilization, you should welcome Islam, because it’s a polarizer, a reminder of the power of history, religion and tradition, and an eternal challenge to liberal decadence, weakness, hubris and complacency. Western civilization is horridly decadent today, and like all such civilizations, it must weather assaults by more vital barbarians. If it doesn’t survive, then it didn’t deserve to. Such is the crucible of history, and the Lucifer Principle which none can evade for long. Allahu akbar!


    James A. Donald Reply:

    But if wanting to return to the values of 7th century Arabia isn’t reactionary, then I don’t know what is.

    The puritans nominally wanted to return to the values of first century Christianity, and yet were easily recognizable as twenty first century leftists.

    For example, they quite correctly observed that marriage was not originally a sacrament in first century Christianity – and then proceeded to use that not to restore first century Christian marriage, but to rationalize the destruction of marriage.

    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 9:13 pm Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    As analysis fine. And necessary. And yes where the ratchet is introduced it’s shit happens.

    As a solution, no. There’s also the problem of remaining passive, it’s not human nature. Observing chaos safely from order is one thing, enduring it isn’t.

    And there are countervailing forces, just not as strong so far. Crime dropped in the US because men did something about it.

    Kggard rightly pointed out some examples.

    It’s correct as far as it goes, and sadly that’s so, so far. But it’s not a satisfactory unified field.
    It does not explain all human affairs. It explains the Left and dominant part of our politics.

    If the theory has to function as a unified field explaining everything; NYC would have cannibal cults, as would most of our inner cities. Welfare reform would have never happened. Crime would be at at least the same or higher levels, instead of a fraction.

    We’re on a left wing ratchet since 2006 because conservatism failed to deliver either protection from predation in our own countries [Housing/Finance crisis] or Victory abroad.

    What’s happened the last decade is 1] conservatism couldn’t deliver, in particular Progressive Wilsonian Democracy in Iraq and 2] the Progressive ratchet was delivered decisively into Finance under Clinton with the Privatizing and Criminalizing of Finance/USG using first the Rape of Russia then breaking down Glass-Steagall walls between savings and speculation in the banks, leading to the actual destruction of Finance and USG/Finance mutual death dance capture. In the case of Finance the Ratchet is absolutely correct, and here is your apocalypse. Yes it hasn’t happened, but Finance and it’s governments are the Walking Dead.

    Also if your missing it there’s a silent but deadly partner now for Finance. [RU West Indies Trading Company, shall we say]. Now there’s a ratchet….and they can’t get out of it. One never does, once you go to them they never go away.

    Our government and it’s contracting branch of government, the dominant part increasingly in the Executive Branch save the Uniformed Military, it’s Danse Macabre partner in Finance, and all sections Federal to local are shot through with pandemic corruption and the inability to change their fates except for their own selves by stealing as much as possible before it ends.

    But lets look at all they can do now, for it’s all they’ve been doing. They can and do create money from thin air to give it away, and they betray trusts given to them under sacred Oath, such as the US Border, their Offices, the Law and so on.

    So print money and betray are the moves they are still making, and can seemingly still make.

    They couldn’t deliver on disarming the US. They couldn’t deliver on the Bundy Ranch, and backed down in public. They couldn’t deliver on Syria or Ukraine [where they were expected to deliver war].

    All roads don’t run to Mordor’s Black Gates. Just the roads the Orcs take.

    Those who council wipe out and rebuild are either so passive that’s all they can hope for, or foreigners who either desire our doom or have no interest in our survival. We don’t have that choice. To lay down and die is against human nature, let the Progs do that. For that truly would be loyal to their creed. *

    [*hmm. so if it comes to meting out justice, perhaps they should be made to lay down. oh dear, that’s Dark].


    Aeroguy Reply:

    I wonder if you misunderstand what is meant by wipe out and rebuild. The wipe out is the financial collapse, it is out of that that we build up new institutions. We’re not going to reform our way out (because democratic politics or revolution are not how we do things, besides, conservatives have never done any lasting good, they exist only to give leftists legitimacy) we’re going to build our way out. Not exactly a passive strategy.

    Accepting that the existing institutions are zombies and must be destroyed (through AAA) does not mean we have given up on the hobbits or the shire itself. AAA is also designed to bring back hobbits to the fold. We can’t just go back to things as they were, is essential that the old order be destroyed if we are to exit in place. AAA, giving the cathedral the rope to hang itself with is, today, our best weapon. Governments and institutions are top heavy and prone to collapse under their own weight, increasing that weight rather than fighting them on their terms is how we fight them asymmetricly.

    This isn’t a passive strategy. Today we prep for the collapse as we do our best to encourage progs to tie their boats to their sinking ship. When SHTF, we will be very busy defending our thedes and building a new order, definitely not passively relying on rations or protection from the remaining old order.

    I don’t think we actually disagree substantially on strategy, there’s just issues with talking past each other. Kgaard who thinks the cathedral can get away with its financial schemes indefinitely represents an actual divergence in strategic planning.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    I was thinking about the general matter earlier.

    May I ask if you are a Southerner or Westerner?

    The key word you used being “defend”. Not trying to start a fight but get to an important question about strategy.


    As for the AAA plan, financial collapse does not mean power collapse. They can quite take the resources by force anyway, if they have the force. Defending Thedes=piecemeal.

    Strategic Defense as discussed above is piecemeal defeat. The Progs don’t have much hope for victory, that their enemies follow their natural tendency to fragment and hence present strategic [and tactical] piecemeal targets would surely be one.

    Understand our situation is our resources are coveted, the People are despised.

    Genocidal fear and loathing is their attitude. That’s necessary, if you’re doing this to someone because you need them gone, it’s necessary to hate them.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    “May I ask if you are a Southerner or Westerner?”
    I’m of the southwest so a bit of both actually.

    You make valid points about the danger of being piecemeal but without a rallying leader (which is prone to populism and bullets) I see bottom up organization being necessary. I quite agree that their power will not collapse but they will be weakened. The greater the extent that progs own the collapse (not being able to blame the outside party if they’re kept safely out of power), the more popular sentiment will side with us. Their hold on power will not be evenly distributed, they’ll likely concentrate that power in the denser urban areas, but in the rural areas their power will be weak. The prevalence of a rightwing counter culture will also help undermine their hold on power. Their power structure will also be vulnerable to faction, without it’s financial strings the states can manage their own affairs without Washington’s influence, Governors and Generals will be quite influential. I don’t see why break away communities that are more trouble than they are worth for TPTB, would be impossible to form.

    It sounds like others here want a more top down approach based on frustration with disorganized cats like me. The problem is they have yet to communicate a clear vision of what they have in mind to a level where I see how I would potentially participate (a step that I feel I have done, even if others justifiably see faults in it). I want to discuss game plans but I can’t quite put my finger on exactly what the other game plans are. Kgaard has pointed me towards some reading material about reinventing the state, which can be interpreted as support for going East like Admin.

    I agree with Michael to the extent that Moldbug has a huge blind spot covering the oligarchs which are conspicuously missing from his cathedral formulation. I agree that violent conflict is in the future (war doesn’t swim left or right, it belongs to Ares), while I obviously have no allegiance to the Cathedral, anything that smells like revolution (because populism and demotism are inseparable) is something that I’ll also avoid on principle. I don’t think everyone can be saved, I don’t think most can be saved, I think only a few occupying break away communities will be worth saving. Establish independence early and play the part of the Swiss while the rest fight. I think questions should be asked about how big, how well connected, and how unified those break away communities should be.

    (this is all brainstorming)

    Michael Reply:

    What do you think is going to happen if their a really big financial crisis ? they are not going to simply surrender, they may even be engineering it to have another crisis to exploit. ypu think a few techies among hundreds of millions billions of humans screaming for relief are going to be heard above the din and recognized as sages? They will simply put drones in the air tanks on the street and filters on the internet and do whatever the hell they want to “preserve order”.as long as they can give a soldier a meal they will stay in power.
    about the time the progs were seizing the universities the government became lawless then over time they merged. we live in an ulta Orwellian state that is simply mopping up.They are preparing to massively fire on the American people.They have amply demonstrated the law is what they say it is and constrains them not a whit.anyone who lived through NYC in the 80/90s understands the boiling frog effect people will go along with anything.
    say they simply put up a white flag and asked someone to take control whats denrx going to say.? well acording to our dark science we must march 200 million non whites south of the border so please everyone we need bottles of water and sandwiches across America to make this humane.? or are we going to say hey everyone can stay just you cant vote no welfare minimum wage affirmative action etc good luck- how do you imagine that will play out?
    Moldbug thinks the elites are going to turn DENRX these are the most self serving idiots on the planet they are going to do what they always do suck up to the govt in exchange for protection after all they are one and the same the lawyers guns and money. In a few years it will be impossible to even have a blog like this their server farms and AI will be ready and they will simply declare hate speech illegal end of story.
    One day i was tinkering in my garage and thinking about the future and decided to invent a red herring ideology to get all the reactionary creeps on the record so i could round them up in a few years
    Look I loved atlas shrugged too but at least they actually exited subtracted their talent.And sure I too have been sort of hoping for the collapse, but I can see now they too see the collapse coming and are preparing to hold on by any means necessary. really smart men not namby pamby philosophers would be planning a war to take advantage of their coming weakness. you want to know what swims right? WAR SWIMS RIGHT WAR IS WHAT CHANGES THE WORLD
    The new philosophy is fine and well but its just one of your tole playing video games i know you all play faggots


    Amon Khan Reply:

    Yes, exactly, you got it. The Jews were the radical, despised Muslims of the ancient world. And they still retain a core of that spirit today, despite all their progressive degeneracy.

    Rumor has it that our friend the Grand Mufti al-Husseini told Hitler to his face that his ideology was derived from Judaism, which made the Aryans the racist chosen people destined to rule the world instead of the Jews. And it’s true. And look at the power Hitler was able to command — when has European man ever seen such power in a single individual? So that’s why Hitler was the closest thing to a tribal prophet that Europe has seen, and why his memory will live on, and why the religion of Hitlerism may outlast wretched Christianity. (Actually, Genghis Khan does enjoy somewhat of a similar following in Mongolia, as does the Dalai Lama in Tibet).

    There is a mysterious power in such people that the mundanes of this age will never grasp, until this civilization is buried and the next age begins. Hitler’s problem was that he was born too early, when liberal civilization was at the peak of its power. In another fifty or a hundred years, a Caliph, Fuhrer, Messiah, Emperor or Hindu Hitler will probably have a much better shot at victory.

    kgaard Reply:

    Aeroguy … Yes, I do indeed disagree that a financial collapse is coming, and thus do not think in terms of prepping. Rather, I’m interested in the sorts of improvements to governing systems being made in places like Singapore. Tech can help government do a better job, but it hasn’t been tried hard enough yet. This fellow James Micklethwait seems to be on the right path with his book, “The Fourth Revolution: The Global Race to Re-Invent the State.”


    He recently had a nice piece in Foreign Policy, too, in which he went over similar themes. From the piece:

    “The third ongoing test of Western-style liberal democracy is the impressive track records in recent years of other models, particularly the modernizing authoritarianism pursued by Asian countries such as China and Singapore. For the first time since the middle of the twentieth century, a global race is on to devise the best kind of state and the best system of government. Compared to during that earlier era, the differences between the models competing today are far smaller — but the stakes are just as high. Whoever wins this contest to lead the fourth revolution in modern governance will stand a good chance of dominating the global economy.”

    Whole thing here. Nice historical overview, too.



    Puzzle Privateer (@PuzzlePrivateer) Reply:

    [*hmm. so if it comes to meting out justice, perhaps they should be made to lay down. oh dear, that’s Dark].

    Just their hot women so we can breed them out.


    Blogospheroid Reply:

    Hot women or intelligent women? What are you maximising?


    Puzzle Privateer (@PuzzlePrivateer) Reply:

    The smart Prog women tend to be ugly and besides they can cause more damage.

    Pick the hot girl.

    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 10:15 pm Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    He’s right about Islam, we need to learn from it.

    Not become Muslim, learn from their successes.

    What do you think Urban II did? He cribbed Crusade from Jihad. Up until his announcement in 1095 killing during war was murder, and soldiers had to do penance. Suddenly Holy War is a ticket to paradise. Sound familiar? And look at the results. They took everything by 1099. Having never even organized unified command among other things. That’s where our European HBD comes in.

    And quite could again.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    I don’t understand where European HBD and Islam intersect. Islam isn’t actually that special, militarily successful tribal barbarians are not new (Huns, Mongols). That their culture invites scorn from progs doesn’t automatically win it endorsement. Civilized patriarchy doesn’t ever practice polygamy. Dubai is a mirage built on temporary oil wealth, it will never be the equal of cities like Rome or Beijing.

    In the eyes of the cathedral, imported Muslims and Hispanics serve the exact same purpose, Republicans like to crow about Hispanic family values too. ISIS serves the same purpose for the foreign policy establishment as the republicans do for the cathedral.


    Michael Reply:

    really what purpose do they serve ? have you actually worked or lived with them I have my whole life. They are too stupid to dig ditches efficiently for every one working theres ten on welfare they cheat at absolutely everything welfare taxes immigration schoolwork you name it you couldn’t study their group productivity if you country depended on it you cant even tell how many of them. they are farfarfar more expensive than they produce the costs of diversity is staggering courts prisons lawsuits insurance crime productivity education affirmative action our best and brightest wasted on spining this farce ,-welfare alone is a trillion a year we would be living on a terraformed mars if not for diversity. no the elites get nothing from this its just stupid inertia the whole ratchet thing is just stupid inertia get a really stupid idea going


    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    Nice words. Try sentences and paragraphs next time, please.

    Amon Khan Reply:

    How many Huns and Mongols do you see today, actively trying to revive their past glory with a holy book and armies of Imams, jihadists and fecund immigrants? Islam is a living tradition that still wants to conquer the world; Atilla and the Khans are ancient history and their descendents are broken, barren people.

    Muhammad was a tribal warlord but he was also a prophet; the world has never seen anyone quite like him before or since. Maybe the closest comparisons would be Moses and Hitler. Notice that Moses’ people are still quite vital and out to conquer. Hitler’s people are still smarting from a crushing defeat, but I assure you that the power of their prophet will live on and his message will be remembered, long after every secular ideologue and leader of this age has been forgotten, and the barren, progressive West has entered the dustbin of history.

    The problem with your neoreaction is that it lacks a powerful mythic element. Analyzing the world in terms of ratchets and genetics and the Cathedral is fine, but like Progressivism, such mundane analysis fails to account for the spiritual power that differentiates a Moses, Muhammad or Hitler from, say, Thomas Jefferson or Karl Marx. It also blinds you to the occult ideas that are driving the Cathedral itself, which is after all a Zio-Masonic project at its highest levels that needs to be understood in those terms.


    Kgaard Reply:

    Amon Khan … I gotta say this is an intriguing line of reasoning. Lately I have been reading the Old Testament, starting at page 1. God’s message to the Jews can be summarized as, ‘See that city over there? I’m giving it to you. Go kill all the men, rape the women and enslave the children.” The parallels with modern-day Islam are inescapable. There’s even a certain moral clarity about this presentation of reality. It’s not hard, either, to see parallels between the Old Testament and Game of Thrones. There’s a desire for that old-time, uh, morality.

    Erebus Reply:

    The need for a “mythic” element and “spiritual power”, and your rosy interpretation of modern Islam, brings Schopenhauer to mind:

    “Temples and churches, pagodas and mosques, in all countries and ages, in their splendour and spaciousness, testify to man’s need for metaphysics, a need strong and ineradicable, which follows close on the physical. The man of a satirical frame of mind could of course add that this need for metaphysics is a modest fellow content with meagre fare. Sometimes it lets itself be satisfied with clumsy fables and absurd fairy-tales. If only they are imprinted early enough, they are for man adequate explanations of his existence and supports for his morality. Consider the Koran, for example; this wretched book was sufficient to start a world-religion, to satisfy the metaphysical need for countless millions for twelve hundred years, to become the basis of their morality and of a remarkable contempt for death, and also to inspire them to bloody wars and the most extensive conquests. In this book we find the saddest and poorest form of theism. Much may be lost in translation, but I have not been able to discover in it one single idea of value. Such things show that the capacity for metaphysics does not go hand in hand with the need for it…”

    That said, Schopenhauer and I both agree with your key point: That people tend to support and fight only for things which they understand. (Or think they understand.) Most people are incapable of debating abstract concepts, let alone understanding them, so they need a surrogate. Religions and very simple ideologies offer such people a pre-digested and easy-to-swallow worldview, and provide them with a metaphysical framework in which they can live their lives, with the hard questions already answered for them. The importance of this sort of thing cannot be overstated. (Which is why NRx itself tends to latch on to the technofuturist/transhumanist movement, which often seems like a secular religion, complete with a Rapture of its own.)

    Hurlock Reply:

    You are grossly underestimating the spiritual power of Karl Marx.
    Devoted communists are quite the religious fanatics.

    Ex-pat in Oz Reply:

    I’m not sure you can separate Islam from its hbd roots. Islam was a response to local pressures. Success always kills it. The most successful successor state– the Ottomans– ultimately relied on non believers to allow it to function. In a way it has it’s own Internal Cathedral issues to deal with, as immortalised in last act of Lawrence of Arabia. Back to hbd — Islam works as an effective societal organising force for brown/ black folks with under 90 iqs which is why they’ve adopted it but for East Asians and whites it seems to be less compelling than other options. Not to say there aren’t brilliant Muslims but… Well, just sayin’

    Chris B Reply:

    Islam a success? the progs have turned it into a whirling cirlcle of death. The Muslims are an example of being unable to provide organised resistance, which is replaced with civilization wide chimp out. I would point to China and Russia as *maybe* somewhat better examples to follow.


    ultraZEN Reply:

    Just so. Geopolitically speaking, islam is chess piece, used by [X] against [Y]. Once it was a vechicle of Arab power, now it is a vehicle for potential and actual mayhem, spun around by whomever is swinging the pole. Its unstable, and using it can backfire, but as Islam is splintered into numerous fragmented mutually hostile sects, it can only move with a small tactical freedom of its own, within the space strategically defined by whomever is hosing financial nourishment down its gaping drain.


    Posted on September 2nd, 2014 at 10:21 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kwisatz Haderach Says:

    I think you’e finally done it. I think you’ve suitably summarized Neoreaction in a single blog post. Thank you! Bravo! Encore!


    Posted on September 3rd, 2014 at 12:07 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:


    Mike I don’t think they can count on their soldiers, for that matter police. Look again now, instead of 80/90’s. This isn’t the same country. We hadn’t caught our wind or figured out they mean harm, theft, profit.

    I think people missed my points about Islam, it works: Imitate it. It’s martial successes.

    Mohammed warded off the Dark Ages from Arabia. That was his actual problem to solve, and he succeeded. Those were of course religious wars.


    Chris B Reply:

    War is chaos. Chaos is truth. Reaction + neoreaction live on truth – progs on fantasy. Of course war swims right. Try setting up a diversity peace circle with the enemy in a war.


    Michael Reply:

    Did I steal that ? not consciously from whom. it was just my usual stream of consciousness but i may have read it sounds kind of DE. I did get your point about Islam and thought I have often thought they are a good example of the limits of american power. My other favorite example is George Washington I was told in school for what its worth he knew he couldn’t win head on but sought to only stay on the feild. I interpret his strategy as. Its really really expensive monetarily and politically for a superpowewr to sustain a war even if i never strike a blow only run them around the cost and politics accrue. If i can find ways to raise those costs [ cotton prices skyrocket and English mill workers were furious, whay started as the vast majority of colonists being loyalists turned as british troops did what all troops did wore out their welcome fast. how long before american troops would wear out a welcome in the age of the internet one atrocity is all it would take and this is why america cant win a war since Vietnam because we dont fight wars we police on camera.. Im much more worried about their ability to control communications and media and that is why i think giving them another 10 or 20 years might be a mistake.
    did Mohamed ward off the dark ages were the dark ages really so dark? or did they pwn Christendom, they were very expansionist thats pretty easy money. I bought some books on this i want to read after i finish the reno and plane


    Antisthenes Reply:

    He’s saying that he liked your phrase so much that he’s going to steal it and use it, and it’s therefore now ‘stolen’.


    Posted on September 3rd, 2014 at 3:14 am Reply | Quote
  • Whyvert Says:

    Any Treatise on Ratchetology might have to distinguish two (at least) forms of ratcheting:
    1) deliberate attempts to (like the euro, or like a Constitution) to lock-in some arrangement, make it difficult to alter;
    2) spandrels of modernity; by-products of the massive wealth of modernity (for instance we keep welfare because we can afford to).


    Posted on September 3rd, 2014 at 4:25 am Reply | Quote
  • nyan_sandwich Says:

    >This is why NRx is dark. Our doomsterism is not a psychological tic, but a rigorous theoretical obligation. It follows, ineluctably, from iron historical law. Looking on the dark side is the only way to see.



    Posted on September 3rd, 2014 at 6:21 am Reply | Quote
  • Lesser Bull Says:

    I have really strong doubts about the practicability of the monarch-as-CEO, about the advisability or sustainability of the patchwork, and calling my attitude towards our host’s anti-human techno-nihilism “really strong doubts” would be litote. But I’m still a fellow traveler because of the ratchet. It’s intuitively true and at one swoop makes sense of vast swathes of Western history.

    The ratchet needs more theoretical attention, though, specifically on the points the unpronounceable Kgaard raises above. What explains the declines in leftism that we see from time to time and from place to place?

    Tentatively I see four different types of dips. The first type is the reaction that follows too much leftward movement, and is explicable as a necessary part of the ratchet itself. We should expect to see this type where too much leftward movement has happened very quickly, and where the reaction ends up in a place that is still on average to the left of the starting point of the leftward movement. We should also expect that the reaction will be quick and will then be followed by a period of calm non-movement, i.e., it will not institute even a temporary rightward ratchet.

    The second type is the Napoleonic type. Cathedral ratchet mechanism are put down by main force. Napoleon and Stalin are the main examples. Pinochet is probably another. To the extent that this second type doesn’t always accompany the first, there are disturbing implications for what NRx ought to be working towards (hi, VXCC!)

    The third type is manufactured or illusory reaction. Are crime rates really falling if the statistics can’t be trusted? Is denationalization really counter-ratchet if the regulatory/bureacratic mechanisms that succeeds it are just as extensive or even more so?

    The fourth type is the interesting one. It involves a more detailed understanding of what the Cathedral “wants” and how it works. For example, replacing nationalized industry with regulatory/bureacratic mechanism is actually an *advance* for the Cathedral properly understood. Why? Because the Cathedral works as a consensus and cultural system of knowledge workers. Replacing state ownership with state regulation probably increases the size of its constituent class. It replaces the rule of a few powerful managers with the rule of the Cathedral. It also reduces the difference between private and national, which allows das buros to insert their fingers into more pies. It also allows for easier internationalization. It also decreases responsibility. If nationalized industry lags, nationalization is more clearly to blame then if an apparently free industry with multiple companies and multiple poles of regulation lags.

    The same mechanism explains a number of free market moves and reversions from socialism. Remember that capitalism was originally a leftist mechanism. It broke down localisms and eliminated patchworks, while creating greivances that could be the subject of opinion, and created the prosperity that made opinion viable. Should we be surprised to see it play the same role today? Socialism has always ended up being ‘socialism in one country’ and tended towards autarchy. Whereas the Cathedral ‘wants’ to be international. “Propaganda wants to be free.” Full socialism has usually happened in countries that weren’t fully modernized yet. What we are seeing is the problems created, from the Cathedral perspective, by the fact that not all countries are at the same stage of advancement. In advanced countries, the ratchet requires moving from Stage II to Stage III, but since the ratchet mechanisms are largely public, Stage I countries can’t be isolated from the movement and sometimes try to make the jump themselves. When they succeed, they break the ratchet. Moving from the premature Stage III back to Stage II is therefore an advance from the Cathedral’s standpoint.


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    The only real counter-ratchet I can’t explain is the gun rights movement. Though when I think of it as denationalizing force and putting it in the hands of the mass that the Cathedral thinks it can control through opinion means, my mind shuts down in horror. When life becomes a real life comment thread where bullets are the thumbs up, we are well and truly fracked.


    Ex-pat in Oz Reply:

    They will keep trying but you’re spot on. Gun control is in the too hard basket. No number of spontaneous mass shooting sprees will get Americans to give up the gats. Nor obviously should they. How they managed this in the Uk and Australia is a mystery to me.


    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Gun rights and a few other places (like homeschooling) are where liberalism has managed to stay ahead of leftism.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    For our lands and resources are coveted but the people are despised.

    We need guns, never mind the risks to “civilization.”

    At this point our civilization is rather like conservatism…conserve what?

    Being armed by the way is how humanity began with stone tools. It’s not just millions of years deep it’s very wide.


    Kgaard Reply:

    Re “the unpronounceable Kgaard” it is a nod to my main man Soren Kierkegaard. Though it occurred to me this morning the irony of taking my handle from perhaps the most self-abnegating protestant religious fanatic Denmark has ever seen. Still, I like to think of him more as the existentialist’s existentialist … the forerunner of Heidegger and Camus. (In fact, Heidegger is largely secularized Kierkegaard.) Kierkegaard is also a great read. Extremely funny even in translation. I recommend Either/Or …


    Michael Reply:

    stochastic s could explain reversals beneath that as in most maerkets psychology they over reach the reaction senses weakness does a bear raid but the large long trends pretty leftward since the magna carta at least if not Christianity.
    and i think a lot of the cathedral plays are chance they work with the cards they are dealt and of course cheat but I dont think they are that clever a lot of their brilliant moves were accidental this rlrment of chance can explain a lot of noise.
    guns stay free because the rural politics of america are a wizard of oz and so neither party can be anti gun and be a rural party as the country shrinks or fills up with non whites this changes it will eventually ratchet
    again better fight now while we have the guns


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    Yes sooner is better, especially when we do live you know, now.

    Let’s not leave this mess for posterity.

    Gats are far more deeper rooted Michael et al than rural America. Very deep, your looking at human nature itself. Disarmed societies are not the norm. They simply aren’t.
    They’re very aberrant. Remember we can’t take the 20th Century as comparison for anything. Not to mention our cultural roots. If you were to simply only go back as far as 17th century England with Albions Seed as the source, the only true disarming party is the Friends [Quakers]. It was picked up by New England here just 50 years ago when they went raving insane in the 1960’s. The Scotch-Irish [borderlands/backcountry] would find this as intolerable as an assault upon their women. Take our weapons away?

    And if there’s one thing Scotch-Irish have given America [among many] it is their martial culture which includes weapons always available.

    Only slave cultures are disarmed, and then it’s the lower status that’s disarmed. Very much the modern left as well BTW, they’re about as disarmed as they are poor. Unarmed is only the normal among slave cultures.

    I’m more concerned about the debt, because I think the 40 layers of interlocking debt with high equilibrium duplicates the debt mechanisms that was the true killer of the Irish Famine.

    For our lands and resources are coveted but the people are despised.


    Michael Reply:

    i got to a point where i actually stopped worrying about the debt and the commies i decided financial collapse was the best way to be rid of them a commie will borrow the rope that hangs him? I mean it wasnt like I feared china would kick our ass to get their money back having to live by our own resources would do us good. But then the trayvon martin incident decided to see how the bell curve argument had progressed over twenty years Im naturally not a hater but a natural race realist as i think most city folks are so i want surprised to see Murray and Herstein had been un equivocally vindicated which had always been my take.However I stumbled upon steve sailor and then all the rest and got caught up on HBD and somehow it finally sunk in how demographics will be our destiny . this is what really worries me we can not survive becoming a minority in our homelands all over the world but that is whats happening really quickly.I never imagined Id have the thoughts i have but I cant see a solution that is not horrible for a lot of people and my morals tell me when faced with that choice its my people i must side with god help us all but i have lost faith in a god so its simply me and my dark thoughts.you are correct america is a tinder box and they are correct mere chaos is not good but it might be better maybe the mexocans would at least go home. I too am Of Irish descent and catholic upbringing and am looking at northern ireland real estate but honestly ide rather stand and fight here but i see little interest in that and no agreement on what the goal is. i thought maybe these guys had a plan but i think theyre probably just some nerds

    Posted on September 3rd, 2014 at 1:28 pm Reply | Quote
  • That Rabbit Says:

    It occurs to me that the Left’s most recent economic critiques, with their emphasis on increasing wealth-gaps (Piketty, etc.), seek to describe capitalism as just such a degenerative ratchet. Well, Moldbug always did maintain that projection is the hallmark of progressive tactics. *shrug*


    Posted on September 4th, 2014 at 1:02 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:


    We’re 150 million Mexicans from becoming a minority, at present it’s a myth. That’s if we stand still, and it appears we may well not.

    This is the racial dot map based on the 2010 census. We’re not a minority, the country is 70-79% white depending on how Hispanics are counted, or not counted.

    Of course that’s the intention.



    Posted on September 4th, 2014 at 11:59 pm Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    NRxn Michael is analytics, Red Pill, Overton Creep to the Right.

    That’s what works at NRxn. No they don’t have a plan. Not their job. Nor is fighting.

    The Red Pill alone justifies NRxn, the Progs have never had their faith shaken ideologically before. Sure reality crashes it, but not the ideas.

    The Financial collapse is problem and opportunity to strike, it’s not the solution in itself.


    Posted on September 5th, 2014 at 12:01 am Reply | Quote
  • Michael Says:

    Im not re assured i think its obvious we have surpassed the point of enforcing cultural confidence, and i think culture is really important to a civilizations survival , i think the newest science is showing its not nature vs nurture but that culture is a gene expression then an environmental pressure and so forth in a feedback loop . so culture is not transferable ie HBD chicks work on failure of democracy in the most inbred of cultures etc. so i dont think we can survive 12% AFRICAN AND 17% Amerindian let alone what the future will be And I never would have thought Id say this but Im not sure the Jewish question should be so quickly dismissed as neo nazi hate, its a huge amount of influence and seems to be working against us the Asains seem bent on emulating the tactics including using blacks and Hispanics as a cudgel.In Europe replace Mid eastern for Hispanic and there is the same dynamic. Since a significant portion of whites vote with this multi culti ideolgy it doesnt need to approach 50% to win.
    I really dont see how a financial collapse will change anything. Yes 6-7 years ago I did think so now I think its clear they mean to fight post collapse. I think its clear they are confident they can break any law with a miubo jumbo press release and some media spin, many of them actually think all laws are racist or whatever and its justified to do the right thing.As far as I can tell DENRX thinks the collapse of the dollar etc will rout them. and you are right if it happens next year its worth waiting for because it will be an opportunity. but what if it happens in twenty or thirty years when their technology makes them invincible?When we are 50% and all the cops and armed forces and probably elected officials are non European and our men have been further feminized our women further enamored of the more alphaish males when we have no real families to fight for …. In other words I thinkl there is a point of no possible success
    Yeah I get DENRX isnt the revolutionary guard and anlyitics like Sailor LaGriffe HBDchick Jman fosetti audacious Human varieties gene expression etc etc certainly are responsible for my conclusions. Land seems to be pushing a meritocracy {if i can understand a word he says.}But when i was a libertarian conservative i thought that but HBD says any genius will have children revert to mean over two generation so I dont see how a meritocracy works. we get squeezed from below and above in a meritocracy And im not even convinced asians and jews despite higher Iqs could out compete us without the parasiic edge mano a mano I think we win bit even if not im sure we can hold our own and live and defend our own lands.
    Im not a hater I liked living in NYC a multi cultural city But I realize what I liked was merely a waypoint on a continuum that I will really not like.
    Yes th DENRX are out philosophers I see moldbugs point about democracy and libertarianism, but I kind of got that before reading him
    My dad used to blame the 60s and i would point out the 60s came out of the commies from the 50s the 30s the anarchist commies at the turn of the century that we could go farther back and look at roots in Russia but also earlier in Germany or the french revolution the American revlution the magna carta the Renaissance then id really slay him by saying Christianity was a leftist desert religion. I mean anyone who know a little history knows what DENRX is describing is esentially what we had at the founding or even just before the revolution we still ended up right here. But the change really picks up when the race issue is brought to bear. I used to really be anti communist socialist Ayn Rand and I still am but you know I doubt if socialism could do much damage in a ethnically homogenous and therefore culturally confident America. we would be free to shame the hell out of slackers and we would. but of course in that society socialism would get the votes.
    so where are the DENRX braintrust answers monarchy seriously? this neo cameralism while sounding interesting is extremely vague. and why not something simple like using technology to just outsource all government. whatever i see little serious effort to solve the one problem needing solving In the meantime the cathedral is ramping up and Americans are splintering off into alex jones land maybe better than obama land but
    I guess I just think we could easily rebuild a devastated economy but we can not do it if we are scattered hated minority around the world. And while Im on the DENRX faults whats with this third leg of alter. Yes Im a lapsed but not hostile former Catholic school kid. I tried the latin mass for a while to keep the faith since its harder to think about the glaring inconsistencies in logic when you translate slower than church latin. but the reality is Christianity itself may be the entire cause of leftism, its basically a communist manifesto and only a tortured reading makes it anything but. and if you try to go old testament its about throwing your daughters to the rapists at your door and stoning everyone that’s really hard to argue in today’s world which is why its so easily exploitable by the left I don’t see how a philosophy based on radical capitalism and the biological equivalent HBD can use Christianity as its third leg. What I think is its a political expedient like the republicans and though I was part of that for a long time I think it will turn out the same. If you think about it separation of church and state were the Achilles heel of the American experiment. Does that mean we have an ethno state with a state religion- That would be tough I think rather we let christianity die a natural death while supporting the good in it and in Christians keeping them allies but form a religious substitute that fits with the HBD religious receptors while being productive to our new civilization leftism is that as mold bug and a million others have pointed out but so was naziism there are many possible substitues . recently i read about white south african ex pats returning to africa and most said it was because in a place where the government does all the social work they missed the opportunity to help. this i think is why naziism worked and communism worked and leftism worked as religious substitutes but why america is in a spiritual malaise. things like the rotary club barn raising or whatever are modern spirituality Im not suggesting repressing Christianity but repressing interpretations that conflict with rationalist governance.and of course they have patchwork exit.


    Posted on September 5th, 2014 at 3:45 pm Reply | Quote
  • Lightning Round – 2014/09/10 | Free Northerner Says:

    […] only way out of a degenerative ratchet is […]

    Posted on September 10th, 2014 at 5:01 am Reply | Quote
  • SydneyTrads Editors Says:

    Noted at STF “Quote of the Week


    Posted on September 22nd, 2014 at 11:58 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment