<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The horror &#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/</link>
	<description>Involvements with reality</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2015 06:52:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Citadel</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-113727</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Citadel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2014 14:42:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-113727</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oh the horror!

Hahaha. You&#039;re already finished, you fools. Your whole vile little world of diversity and tolerance and democracy and secularism and equal distribution of wealth, is on its last legs. Its overthrow will not be through some joke party at the ballot box.

Please, try to sound the alarm bells! Nobody is listening. You might have stopped up before, but its too late now.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh the horror!</p>
<p>Hahaha. You&#8217;re already finished, you fools. Your whole vile little world of diversity and tolerance and democracy and secularism and equal distribution of wealth, is on its last legs. Its overthrow will not be through some joke party at the ballot box.</p>
<p>Please, try to sound the alarm bells! Nobody is listening. You might have stopped up before, but its too late now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The 2013 Anti-Progress Report &#124; Radish</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-33157</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The 2013 Anti-Progress Report &#124; Radish]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2014 06:21:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-33157</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] Charles Stross, science fiction writer David Brin, and Khannea Suntzu of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies all more or less freak out about it. The horror! [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Charles Stross, science fiction writer David Brin, and Khannea Suntzu of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies all more or less freak out about it. The horror! [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 3.9 Anarcho-Tyranny &#124; Radish</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-30905</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[3.9 Anarcho-Tyranny &#124; Radish]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Dec 2013 01:18:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-30905</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] The horror! [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] The horror! [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hurlock</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-29441</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hurlock]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2013 17:59:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-29441</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think the problem of libertarianism is that it is implicitly (actually explicitly) egalitarian. When you introduce the concept (for example) of &quot;Everyone has the right of private property&quot; you are introducing the formula &quot;Everyone has the right to X&quot; and that opens up a massive can of worms. Not to mention that said rights are considered &quot;natural&quot;. They have existed before the state and etc. Which leads to further confusion and the appearance of other egalitarian ideas with a rising level of ridiculousness. They are all part of the natural evolution of the original egalitarian theory and obviously the more radical they are the more popular they become (there is a proper historical progression to this phenomenon). Bottom line is, when you introduce egalitarianism, it tends to grow and radicalize itself more and more. In this sense, libertarianism is doomed to lead to socialism, communism and etc. And even though it is the least egalitarian of all of the left-wing theories, it is still left-wing (and egalitarian). When considered historicaly, you could argue that right now it is more of a conservative and reactionary theory, but it is still egalitarian in its core. 

The thing is, you can&#039;t fight egalitarianism with &quot;less&quot; egalitarianism. You can&#039;t fight imaginary equality with imaginary (but not so much) equality.  You have to fight egalitarianism with it&#039;s opposite - reality. 

Nowadays every libertarian has to think about what he values more in libertarianism. The fact that it is egalitarian? Or the fact that it is less egalitarian than other liberal theories? If the latter, then he will end up on this side of the internet very soon. If the former...he is just an underdeveloped progressive.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the problem of libertarianism is that it is implicitly (actually explicitly) egalitarian. When you introduce the concept (for example) of &#8220;Everyone has the right of private property&#8221; you are introducing the formula &#8220;Everyone has the right to X&#8221; and that opens up a massive can of worms. Not to mention that said rights are considered &#8220;natural&#8221;. They have existed before the state and etc. Which leads to further confusion and the appearance of other egalitarian ideas with a rising level of ridiculousness. They are all part of the natural evolution of the original egalitarian theory and obviously the more radical they are the more popular they become (there is a proper historical progression to this phenomenon). Bottom line is, when you introduce egalitarianism, it tends to grow and radicalize itself more and more. In this sense, libertarianism is doomed to lead to socialism, communism and etc. And even though it is the least egalitarian of all of the left-wing theories, it is still left-wing (and egalitarian). When considered historicaly, you could argue that right now it is more of a conservative and reactionary theory, but it is still egalitarian in its core. </p>
<p>The thing is, you can&#8217;t fight egalitarianism with &#8220;less&#8221; egalitarianism. You can&#8217;t fight imaginary equality with imaginary (but not so much) equality.  You have to fight egalitarianism with it&#8217;s opposite &#8211; reality. </p>
<p>Nowadays every libertarian has to think about what he values more in libertarianism. The fact that it is egalitarian? Or the fact that it is less egalitarian than other liberal theories? If the latter, then he will end up on this side of the internet very soon. If the former&#8230;he is just an underdeveloped progressive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fotrkd</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-29431</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[fotrkd]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-29431</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[But there’s got to be a bridge. There’s no point bashing progs for being progressive then telling them to read an obscure (for them) blog post. All you get in return is attacks on NRs for being neoreactionary (and not reading enough ‘history’). Moldbug knew this. That’s why, despite the verbosity, his introductory posts are accessible and sympathetic to the demands being placed on his readers. The red/blue pill imagery is familiar and decisive: he’s not asking you to evaluate his ideas from your socially ingrained understanding of the world because he knows from that perspective what he’s saying appears bat-shit crazy – it can’t be anything other. So he’s got to take the reader with him through an appeal – take the pill, keep everything open, trust the crazy person that this might eventually not just make some sense, but also be rewarding. You’re not going to get that agreement by being prickly.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But there’s got to be a bridge. There’s no point bashing progs for being progressive then telling them to read an obscure (for them) blog post. All you get in return is attacks on NRs for being neoreactionary (and not reading enough ‘history’). Moldbug knew this. That’s why, despite the verbosity, his introductory posts are accessible and sympathetic to the demands being placed on his readers. The red/blue pill imagery is familiar and decisive: he’s not asking you to evaluate his ideas from your socially ingrained understanding of the world because he knows from that perspective what he’s saying appears bat-shit crazy – it can’t be anything other. So he’s got to take the reader with him through an appeal – take the pill, keep everything open, trust the crazy person that this might eventually not just make some sense, but also be rewarding. You’re not going to get that agreement by being prickly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alrenous</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-29423</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alrenous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:36:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-29423</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obligatory Moldbug quote: &quot;In fact, it&#039;s basically impossible to combine a system in which agreements stay agreed with one in which equality stays equal.&quot;

The core of anarcho-capitalism is property rights. Agreements staying equal. Where&#039;s the stable equilibrium? Most likely, it&#039;s not below the barony or thereabouts. There&#039;s only a couple differences between an anarcho-capitalist mayor-turned-baron and historical barons. The ancap baron will have bought the land, not robbed it, and anarcho-barons can&#039;t have hereditary serfs. From the point of view of day-to-day life, the difference may well be invisible. 

I have no respect for reddit ancaps because they cannot and will never wrap their heads around this implication. 

That said, the fact that ancap morality guarantees exit is likely to have subtle knock-on effects. 

-

Put another way, ancap already exists in the form of the Amish. They obey the one objective rule: their members agree to the local rules at majority or thereabouts.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obligatory Moldbug quote: &#8220;In fact, it&#8217;s basically impossible to combine a system in which agreements stay agreed with one in which equality stays equal.&#8221;</p>
<p>The core of anarcho-capitalism is property rights. Agreements staying equal. Where&#8217;s the stable equilibrium? Most likely, it&#8217;s not below the barony or thereabouts. There&#8217;s only a couple differences between an anarcho-capitalist mayor-turned-baron and historical barons. The ancap baron will have bought the land, not robbed it, and anarcho-barons can&#8217;t have hereditary serfs. From the point of view of day-to-day life, the difference may well be invisible. </p>
<p>I have no respect for reddit ancaps because they cannot and will never wrap their heads around this implication. </p>
<p>That said, the fact that ancap morality guarantees exit is likely to have subtle knock-on effects. </p>
<p>&#8211;</p>
<p>Put another way, ancap already exists in the form of the Amish. They obey the one objective rule: their members agree to the local rules at majority or thereabouts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alrenous</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-29422</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alrenous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:21:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-29422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hack Edit: above is @Spandrell.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hack Edit: above is @Spandrell.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alrenous</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-29421</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Alrenous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:21:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-29421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Breaking the rules is strictly more interesting than following the rules - e.g. fornication versus marriage. Reason forward from there. High church proggies are bored and they let it taint their politics. 

Of course nowadays fornication is boring too, so....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Breaking the rules is strictly more interesting than following the rules &#8211; e.g. fornication versus marriage. Reason forward from there. High church proggies are bored and they let it taint their politics. </p>
<p>Of course nowadays fornication is boring too, so&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: VXXC</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-29414</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[VXXC]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2013 09:31:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-29414</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;did not provide a cultural revolution, but only furthered inequality and reinforced traditional social stratification, demarcated by race, class, and gender.&quot;

Dear Ms Marcek, do you know what cultural revolution means?  Oh and madam the Jury is far from out on whether it did or not.  

&quot;did not provide &lt;i&gt; a Holocaust, &lt;/i&gt; but only furthered inequality and reinforced traditional social stratification, demarcated by race, class, and gender.&quot;

you could have a lot of fun with this stuff.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;did not provide a cultural revolution, but only furthered inequality and reinforced traditional social stratification, demarcated by race, class, and gender.&#8221;</p>
<p>Dear Ms Marcek, do you know what cultural revolution means?  Oh and madam the Jury is far from out on whether it did or not.  </p>
<p>&#8220;did not provide <i> a Holocaust, </i> but only furthered inequality and reinforced traditional social stratification, demarcated by race, class, and gender.&#8221;</p>
<p>you could have a lot of fun with this stuff.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: VXXC</title>
		<link>http://www.xenosystems.net/the-horror/#comment-29412</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[VXXC]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2013 09:22:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xenosystems.net/?p=1646#comment-29412</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Handle,

&quot; wants to rearrange the world basically in their own vision.” In this sense, entrepreneurs are like writers who cannot help but write: they cannot help but “change the world.”

BUT THAT MEANS....

Hey, at least DEC is reality based [gag]
========================================================
The female capacity to reason resembles the pyschopaths ability to feel empathy for victims.  It&#039;s probably the same weight in brain matter grams.  They&#039;re both faking it.  The degree of success depends on conscientious discipline and taming, channeling of impulses.   Women in tech are &lt;i&gt; fakers &lt;/i&gt;.  They rearrange the problem and wait for the end of the day to pass the problem, then a man fixes it.   The feminist is the non-conscientious faker whose destructive impulses reveal the truth.  

Why is the miracle of life not enough?  With all that men will do to protect you for it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Handle,</p>
<p>&#8221; wants to rearrange the world basically in their own vision.” In this sense, entrepreneurs are like writers who cannot help but write: they cannot help but “change the world.”</p>
<p>BUT THAT MEANS&#8230;.</p>
<p>Hey, at least DEC is reality based [gag]<br />
========================================================<br />
The female capacity to reason resembles the pyschopaths ability to feel empathy for victims.  It&#8217;s probably the same weight in brain matter grams.  They&#8217;re both faking it.  The degree of success depends on conscientious discipline and taming, channeling of impulses.   Women in tech are <i> fakers </i>.  They rearrange the problem and wait for the end of the day to pass the problem, then a man fixes it.   The feminist is the non-conscientious faker whose destructive impulses reveal the truth.  </p>
<p>Why is the miracle of life not enough?  With all that men will do to protect you for it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
