Subversion

Nyan Sandwich has a cunning plan:

Sister Sarah (@sarahdoingthing) suggests the “hard part is to be somehow different from actual real leftist sites …”

Partly because there can simply never be enough of this, but also for other reasons, this idea is perfectly delicious. It would be like a Sokal tar-baby, spreading sticky black paranoid confusion throughout the redoubts of the enemy. To make this work, however, would require a very exceptional type of genius (of exactly the kind demonstrated in the Shea case). Judging the precise extent and flavors of absurdity that the left will endorse — or at least find credibly non-parodic — is a rare and delicate art, especially since they have to be taken to the very edge, teetering prominently into gulfs of roaring madness. In addition, since effectiveness would correspond closely with persistence, the work involved would be immense.

If anyone is embarking on this, I do not (of course) want to know — Omertà.

(Before anyone else brings it up (here) I should perhaps also mention this.)

Modeling strategy on espionage and the double-agent, rather than military confrontation and the hero-warrior, would do much to burn-off ludicrous romanticism, replacing theatrical attitude with realist cunning. As with anything that involves demonstrated performance of a complex feat, rather than grandiose proclamations of antagonism, it would require actual cognitive achievement. Given basic facts about numbers and capabilities, infiltration is almost certainly something that will eventually need to be done.

Such subversion would also be an experiment in practical metaphysics. How are identities assembled? What are agents? How do expressed values coordinate with effective activity? These questions are destined to explosive complication in the ragged, techno-psychological world to come, so it is worth tangling with them early, and intricately. Making biorealism an excuse to regress into paleolithic brotherhoods is a temptation to be torched-out ruthlessly by Internet machinations. Turn social Cyberspace into a jungle, where camouflage and complexity rule.

March 13, 2014admin 32 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Arcane , Pass the popcorn

TAGGED WITH :

32 Responses to this entry

  • RiverC Says:

    I will offer but one suggestion. An important part of intelligence scrambling – camoflauge – is not true hidden-ness, where we should remember that a ‘present absence’ is the sign of a ‘absent presence’ – a black hole is not hidden by consuming all light.

    Since symbols are the keys to men’s minds and names are the symbols of men, internet camoflauge begins with name scrambling. I for one love the idea of adopting monikers that are common words, that when googled result in highly conflicting data sets.

    This is counter-intuitive to the modern who wants to STAND OUT by coming up with a ‘novel’ name. The idea is quite the reverse; you may even be able to be out ‘in the open’ if you add enough noise to the signal. If there are at least two equally likely identities, the identity remains unknown.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 13th, 2014 at 4:16 pm Reply | Quote
  • Nick B. Steves Says:

    So let me get this straight. The goal is to create a credible leftist site dedicated principally to exposing the “extremism” of neoreaction? A cause so convincingly holy that other leftist sites could not but compete in moral outrage? I’d be all for it of course, but it’s a profoundly delicate balance for the simple reason that the best and brightest and therefore most powerful progressives consider themselves to be preternaturally moderate.

    That said, I think there are good and proper purposes for “paleolithic brotherhoods” in the real world. Perhaps not so much on-line, except that they be advocated. I definitely think this is a war that must be fought on many fronts, but we should not minimize the necessity of fighting it at home.

    [Reply]

    RiverC Reply:

    maybe, perhaps just consider this an experiment and not ‘serious’. As the old aphorism goes, “do easy things as though they were hard and hard things as though they were easy.”

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 13th, 2014 at 4:20 pm Reply | Quote
  • Stirner (@heresiologist) Says:

    One could cut down on the work considerable by making it a “linker” site, not a “thinker” site. Sort of like an Anti-NR Instapundit, with links to NR postings followed by links to the prog counterarguments. Evil Racist Paul Kersey on flash mobs! Followed by “Flashmobs are a myth” posting.

    Editorially, the faux outrage blog would be Prog, but the subversion would come from the weakness of the prog yammering, and the realism of the NR observations.

    Dark Enlightenment Hatewatch!

    Of course when the SPLC gets around to targeting the Dark Enlightenment, we can always point to this post to undermine that sites prog credibility and intentions…

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    This is an inspired suggestion.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 13th, 2014 at 5:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • iParallax Says:

    Already (kind of) going on

    http://www.returnofkings.com/18393/black-propaganda-in-feminism

    http://www.returnofkings.com/29651/black-propaganda-in-feminism-part-ii

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 13th, 2014 at 5:23 pm Reply | Quote
  • peppermint Says:

    Progressives are like ants. They don’t acclaim thought leaders, they acclaim champions, like Barack Obama, the son of a whore by a foreigner. George Soros is may or may not be a Progressive thought leader, but he does pay for a lot of stuff.

    If you have leftist thoughts, congratulations, a thousand other people have those same thoughts. Maybe you can get on the progressive stack and get people to twinkle your idea up. And then it’s their idea too.

    Pushing leftists further left is pretty easy – just hang out with some leftists and argue with them. But what if you could convince some journalists to pass out your idea as the latest? Wouldn’t work, and their careers would be damaged. Journalists succeed by being the mouth of the Zeitgeist.

    You want to see some blogs aiming to push leftists further left? Try DailyKos for starters, also check out Socialist Worker.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 13th, 2014 at 5:23 pm Reply | Quote
  • Mai La Dreapta Says:

    The format of posts on such a blog could be quite simple:

    1) Present some hatefacts
    2) Proceed to screaming, hysterical denunciation of such hatefacts
    3) Never actually present any coherent counterargument beyond moral outrage

    Those who engage with progressivism as an outlet for sanctimoniousness will never catch on, and will be glad to signal-boost you with tweets and links. But the marginally intelligent observer will eventually start to notice the gap.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Agreed — cite devastating material, and frame it incompetently. Leftists tend to be deontologists who forgive blatant stupidity immediately so long as it is well intentioned.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 13th, 2014 at 5:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • iParallax Says:

    Also, isn’t this kind of what “intersectionality” is? Let’s just encourage more of that.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    There can never be enough intersectionality.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 13th, 2014 at 5:26 pm Reply | Quote
  • nyan_sandwich Says:

    Hmm. My vision for this seems to have not been communicated well. Allow me to explain:

    This is not just about driving the lefties to ever deeper howling insanity. It is not about “engaging” with NR from the left. It is about studying the internal mechanisms of the Cathedral and left singularity. This is not about any particular PR outcome. It is not a PR project; it is an intelligence and possibly sabotage (COINTELPRO) project.

    Cthulu swims, the question is how exactly he swims. We learn this by directly poking electrodes in his pulpy brain and seeing if he be made to swim faster or in a slightly different direction. The point of it is, in taking over some tentacles and influencing the left, we learn how the whole system works. What are the boundaries of what leftists will accept and reblog, what will they reject as too radical? What happens if a leftist blog suddenly starts posting unfiltered hatefacts? What happens if it respins hatefacts as injustices to be corrected by more leftism? How does leftism work, in detail? That is the question.

    So the proposal is to start a secret coordination institution that maintains a fleet of personalities and their blogs that post normal leftist stuff and oinnovative leftist stuff. The participants would iteratively form hypotheses, test them, and update based on what happend with the goal of understanding how to manipulate how the Cathedral handles things.

    If any particular blog is outed, it is unconnected to the others. If we want to try something really radical, we use an expendable “leftist” blog to experiment. Multiplicity reduces risk aversion.

    There would be no point in doing this without strong central coordination and coherent experimental methodology.

    [Reply]

    Konkvistador Reply:

    Agreed. The point is to use the false outlet as a stage for experiments, to discover new things about leftism. This is one reason I think it has to be a new site, one where we could be free of editorial control at least, since that might compromise experiments.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 13th, 2014 at 10:46 pm Reply | Quote
  • Bill Says:

    I think of us as the right, but a right that was reared by the left. It should be possible to write something that uses 90% of leftist language, but reaches a “controversial” conclusion. “Bowling Alone” is one good example. We could even use Putnam’s language, wonderfully summarized by John Derbyshire, in his book “We are Doomed” as:

    PROFESSOR PUTNAM LAYS AN EGG

    In September 2006, political scientist Robert Putnam was awarded the Johan Skytte Prize, one of the most prestigious in his field. The prize is awarded in Uppsala, Sweden, by a Scandinavian scholarly association. (Skytte was a seventeenth-century Swedish grandee.)

    As usual with such events in the academic world, Putnam presented a research paper to commemorate the event. The paper is titled “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century,” and can easily be found on the Internet. I’ll refer to it in what follows as “the Uppsala paper.”

    That paper has a very curious structure. After a brief introduction (two pages), there are three main sections, headed as follows:

    The Prospects and Benefits of Immigration and Ethnic Diversity (three pages)
    Immigration and Diversity Foster Social Isolation (nineteen pages)
    Becoming Comfortable with Diversity (seven pages)

    I’ve had some mild amusement here at my desk trying to think up imaginary research papers similarly structured. One for publication in a health journal, perhaps, with three sections titled:

    Health benefits of drinking green tea
    Green tea causes intestinal cancer
    Making the switch to green tea

    Social science research in our universities cries out for a modern Jonathan Swift to lampoon its absurdities. (end of quote)

    Seems like a good game plan. I agree that the person doing it needs to seem completely sincere, and should never reveal that they are NRx.

    [Reply]

    Randy M Reply:

    How sexual liberation has improved the self-esteem of women, gays, and transexuals.
    The connection to the complete beakdown of social order.
    How to negotiate with roving gangs of barbarians.

    [Reply]

    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Deficit spending keeps up employment rates
    In the long term it creates total financial collapse
    Considerations for making sure the next Fed chairman is a good one

    [Reply]

    Erik Reply:

    Minorities may feel more included if we abandon widespread cultural traditions
    Abandoning cultural traditions destroys people’s sense of fellowship, community spirit, and willingness to pitch in
    How best to legislate an end to cultural traditions

    [Reply]

    Lesser Bull Reply:

    European travel and the DINK lifestyle
    Lost Decades of Economic Stagnation and Military Weakness
    Converting Unused Schools to Yoga Parlors

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 14th, 2014 at 12:16 am Reply | Quote
  • Orthodox Says:

    There’s already a ton of information on leftists if you want to study it. Go to Vox Popoli and find posts on the SFWA and Scalzi; he exposes the left in detail. The latest fight in the SFWA is typical, over who would host the convention in London. One top for being a good leftist: always ban commenters who disagree with you or make good arguments against you, even if they are otherwise a good leftist.

    If David Horowitz is inside the Cathedral, this site exposes the deep state within the Cathedral.
    “This website describes the networks and agendas of the political Left. The database is divided into 10 major sections”
    http://discoverthenetworks.org/

    The average right-winger who is not familiar with the left would laugh hysterically if you repeated to them verbatim the conversations on the local NPR programs in leftist cities. Or how about that “PIV is always rape, OK” post awihle back. Is that a real feminist or a DE secret agent?

    This s the ultimate condemnation of the Left: you seek to troll it by pretending to be the left, but in the end you will successfully troll the Right because it will be unable to separate the real from the parody. The left already is a joke, the goal is to get more people in on the joke.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 14th, 2014 at 12:25 am Reply | Quote
  • Mai La Dreapta Says:

    @Nyan_sandwich, that is a much more interesting proposal than most of the misunderstandings floating around in this thread. I’d be very curious to see it succeed.

    (Unfortunately, I don’t think I have the stomach to actually participate in such a project.)

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 14th, 2014 at 3:00 am Reply | Quote
  • Stirner (@heresiologist) Says:

    There is no cure for the prog Crusader types. The USSR fell without them missing a beat ideologically, but their activism just mutated into new forms. Their memetic pathologies may be of interest to the gentleman scholar, but hold little utility in the wider ideological conflict.

    Of greater interest:

    1) What gets weakly affiliated liberals to have the scales fall from their eyes, and begin to make the trip rightward? In my experience it is a series of observations that don’t fit the liberal framework, and fester away for a while. Eventually, something tips over the apple-cart, and they are able to actually listen to the arguments coming from the right (and not just dismiss them as bad faith bleatings from ignorance or evil).

    2) What gets conservatives and libertarians to swallow the NRx Red Pill? Some racial incident? Some feminist nuttiness? The explanatory power of the DE sociology? The final evaporation of faith that there is some political solution that could turn back the tide? Who is most immune to the Red Pill, and who is most likely to succumb to exposure?

    While there is some research on the first question, there is very little on the second. Neoreactionary memetic warfare needs to create infectious badthink for group 1, while getting group 2 to finally burn out the last vestiges of their right-liberalism.

    [Reply]

    Lesser Bull Reply:

    Interesting research program. Though converting enough liberals, conservatives, and libertarians isn’t an end in itself. Just trying to ring up bigger numbers recreates the conservative democratic delusion that we can escape the Wrath of Gnon by getting an electoral majority.

    Coming from a very conservative background, I didn’t need to swallow the red pill. The basic infostructures were already there. I did need to realize that our problems were structural, society-wide, not going to be rolled back by normal politics, and getting worse.

    [Reply]

    Stirner (@heresiologist) Reply:

    We don’t need an electoral majority, but there is a need for a NRx critical mass. Something to be reckoned with, not just dismissed, demonized, or marginalized.

    And I would disagree that you didn’t have to swallow the red pill. I swam in conservative waters for years, until an event catalyzed the rejection of the conservative democratic delusion. Something pushes you over the threshold from egalitarian and populist conservatism to the darker insights of the Dark Enlightenment. Every person may have a different straw, but there should be some commonalities. Many conservatives can read The Bell Curve, or Sailer, or the Manosphere, and rationalize around it. That is normal. What is uncommon are those little glitches in the Matrix that let people pass through into the Dark Enlightenment. Those sorts of conversion stories are not shared, documented, or cataloged.

    Perhaps there is a Neoreactionary coffee table book to be made, in the footsteps of Post Secret. “Why I became a Neoreactionary – your journey in 500 words or less.”

    [Reply]

    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    The stories do tend to get shared at IRL meetups.

    My I ask (OT) what was your catalyzing “event”?

    Posted on March 14th, 2014 at 3:06 am Reply | Quote
  • Galdruxian Says:

    A bit off topic, but I hope some of you are following Alexander Dugin’s recent writings. For example, here he describes the larger ideological dimension of the new war on Russia: http://openrevolt.info/2014/03/11/alexander-dugin-the-war-on-russia-in-its-ideological-dimension/

    “We need to present Russia not as a pre-liberal entity but as a post-liberal revolutionary force that struggles for an alternative future for all the peoples of the planet. The Russian war will be not only be for Russian national interests, but will be in the cause of a just multipolar world, for real dignity and for real, positive freedom – not (nihilistic) freedom from but (creative) freedom for. In this war, Russia will set an example as the defender of Tradition, conservative organic values, and will represent real liberation from the open society and its beneficiaries – the global financial oligarchy. This war is not against Ukrainians or even against part of the Ukrainian populace. Nor is it against Europe. It is against the liberal world (dis)order. We are not going to save liberalism, per their designs. We are going to kill it once and for all. Modernity was always essentially wrong, and we are now at the terminal point of modernity. For those who rendered modernity and their own destiny synonymous, or who let that occur unconsciously, this will mean the end. But for those who are on the side of eternal truth and of Tradition, of faith, and of the spiritual and immortal human essence, it will be a new beginning, ABSOLUTE BEGINNING.”

    Neoreaction with nukes? Fun times!

    [Reply]

    Alex Reply:

    Dugin: “We need to present Russia not as a pre-liberal entity but as a post-liberal revolutionary force that struggles for an alternative future for all the peoples of the planet.”

    Cf. Mussolini: “The Fascist negation of socialism, democracy, liberalism, should not, however, be interpreted as implying a desire to drive the world backwards to positions occupied prior to 1789, a year commonly referred to as that which opened the demo-liberal century. History does not travel backwards. The Fascist doctrine has not taken De Maistre as its prophet. Monarchical absolutism is of the past, and so is ecclesiolatry.”

    Dugin: “… it will be a new beginning, ABSOLUTE BEGINNING.”

    Politique Potentielle.

    “What is needed is not a revolution in the opposite direction, but the opposite of a revolution.”

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 14th, 2014 at 6:05 am Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction | The Reactivity Place Says:

    […] advertises and amplifies a nifty reactionary subversion idea. Not sure I completely understand it, but subversion is pretty much the only thing we got going […]

    Posted on March 14th, 2014 at 1:16 pm Reply | Quote
  • Nick B. Steves Says:

    BTW, WTF happened to moreright.net. I’m getting unresolved DNS. Is that part of the plan?

    [Reply]

    nyan_sandwich Reply:

    I asked Samo. Apparently Mike ran out of cash or something so the host pulled the plug. Expected to be running again in the next few days AFAIK.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 14th, 2014 at 6:37 pm Reply | Quote
  • Bill Says:

    @Bill I saw a news show a few months ago where they were talking about black violence, and they had on a white male reporter who had been beaten up by (a) black male(s), (I can’t remember all the details) but the white male professed to not blame his attackers. That story is sort of perfect for this, because it meets the victimhood requirement, the tolerance requirement, and at the same time, any normal human being has to stop and say “Hey, wait a minute, that doesn’t make sense.” Yet, it never stops being “liberal.”

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 14th, 2014 at 8:01 pm Reply | Quote
  • John Hannon Says:

    But what if the reverse were to happen? How would anyone know?
    Indeed maybe it’s already happening and some sly, mischievous lefty is already jerking the reactosphere around and nobody has caught on yet.
    After all the left indisputably has the best comedians – intentional or otherwise.

    [Reply]

    Posted on March 15th, 2014 at 9:07 am Reply | Quote
  • Lightning Round – 2014/03/19 | Free Northerner Says:

    […] Neoreactionary subversion. […]

    Posted on March 19th, 2014 at 5:02 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment