Twitter cuts (#65)

The quandary, concisely stated:


(Karl Marx actually made some observations relevant to this point, Joseph Schumpeter — with a far colder tragic vision — even more so.)

May 22, 2016admin 21 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Irony

TAGGED WITH : , ,

21 Responses to this entry

  • Twitter cuts (#65) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] Twitter cuts (#65) […]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 9:30 am Reply | Quote
  • Grotesque Body Says:

    Imagine how much evil could have been averted if Chanakya’s Arthashastra had been rediscovered in 1504 instead of 1904.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 11:06 am Reply | Quote
  • grey enlightenment Says:

    Schumpeter’s theory is that the success of capitalism will lead to a form of corporatism …

    Fine by me

    Corporations are better at managing resources (like money and labor) and their affairs than the US govt.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 11:38 am Reply | Quote
  • Aristocles Invictvs Says:

    Joseph Schumpeter – Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy PDF: https://my.mixtape.moe/khcmxc.pdf

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 12:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • cyborg_nomade Says:

    which makes up for a follow up to classical liberalism (if civilization is to continue, and not terminate in another dark ages)

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 2:23 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Once one leaves behind the traditional type of civilization, there is no mechanism for enforcing standards on an organic level, which is needed to limit or exclude the fools. No “System” can do what it did.

    The most exciting idea of Neoreaction is that societies may exist where people must be invited, and can be dis-invited (exiled). If someone starts behaving in a destructive manner, they can be sent away. No jails, parole boards, lawyers, etc. needed.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 2:23 pm Reply | Quote
  • Dale Rooster Says:

    I.e.: We will hang them with the rope they sell us…slowly.

    I think by corporatism he means Western (global) social democratic neoliberal corporatism, not a neocameralist patchwork of competing realms ruled by corporate CEOs–or Tribalist SunGods, HRx Kings or General Secretaries and Chairmen of new communist states. Perhaps I’m wrong.

    Any Fnargl worthy of longterm rule would recognize that the virtues of pluralism and negative liberty, as understood and developed by classical liberal thinkers, serve his own interests, while dispensing with the “Enlightened” classical liberal ideals of equality, democracy and Progress (as defined by sacred scriptures and sacramental institutions such as the New York Times and Planned Parenthood).

    [Reply]

    Ahote Reply:

    Fatal flaw in Classical Liberalism is quite obvious – if you allow freedom to those who would take yours away, you are going to loose… and that’s exactly what happened as the Classically Liberal social order in the West gave way to communism. Thus, it’s apparent that the Classically Conservative argument that Liberalism is impossible holds true. Hoppe recognized the errors of Classical Liberalism, and tried to correct for them, hence Physical Removal™.

    [Reply]

    Dale Rooster Reply:

    I entirely agree except on this point: “if you allow freedom to those who would take yours away, you are going to lose.” You can allow for all kinds of freedom sans political freedom (democracy). Do not give political freedom to those who would take your freedoms away and problem solved. Are we saying the same thing here? I can’t tell.

    [Reply]

    Ahote Reply:

    Ah, but political freedom is so much more than democracy! Do you allow communists to spread their propaganda? Do you allow them to create their organizations? Do you allow them clubs and salons? Do you simply let them plot a revolution?

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 2:32 pm Reply | Quote
  • cyborg_nomade Says:

    I was wondering also how much a new span of right-wing classical liberalism, such as is seemingly arising in South America now, could affect the world power balance.
    last time a couple countries got right-wing classical liberalism,imperialism sprawled

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 2:37 pm Reply | Quote
  • William Newman Says:

    Meh, get back to me when you find another system that creates wealth so much faster than population growth for as many generations as we have without getting roughly as welrd as we have. It really looks to me as though just pushing the be-basically-sane-or-starve-this-winter constraint so far away is sufficient to grow strange things in any known society.

    Admittedly, there are some classic ills that seem to be peculiar to open societies, and to classical democratic societies, and even some new ills (notably the trend to elect a new underclass people) peculiar to long-standing rich universal-franchise democracies. But they don’t seem worse to me than the ills that are peculiar to the known alternatives. And nothing about looking at the less-classically-liberal societies that got rich (oil monarchies, especially, but to a lesser extent things like modern Japan and 1900 Argentina and Germany) seems to justify the condemnation for classical liberalism: rich societies have the slack to become dysfunctionally weird, and odds are that they will.

    Also, various shams of classical liberalism do deserve condemnation, like flim-flamming between classical liberal equality under the law and Progressive equality of outcome for those animals highest in the aristocracy of pull, and mouthing tolerance or equality while in fact selectively rewarding political friends. James II mouthing tolerance while promoting Catholics, persecuting Scots, doing a bizarre political dance with the Dissenters, and signaling solidarity with the revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Racism-is-the-worst-thing-evah holy zealots discovering that the Asians are a peculiarly diverse race and persecuting peculiarly undiverse people. “A has a right to control his body” rationalizations for discovering abortion in the Constitution when femism is powerful in the Democratic coalition, and discovering homosexuality in the Constitution decades later as homosexuals become powerful too, while still limiting actual control of bodies in e.g. choice of non-AMA doctors, smoking pot, prostitution, or pornography. But just as runaway weirdness is a headache for any system with explosive wealth, gross shams are a headache for any system with a record of success worth pretending to imitate. See e.g., rule by decree of eight or nine supreme oathbreakers being “Constitutional” government, and Communist “republics”, and several different kinds of monarchical pretenders, and also monarchs preserved as powerless figurehead to “legitimize” power seized by in other hands, as well as vaguer shams like being the true heir of Roman imperial success.

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    There are those who want to bury Classical Liberalism, but XS is not among them. The question here is: How does it protect itself? It’s clearly failing at that very badly.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 8:05 pm Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    You’ll be ruled by the Victors.

    It won’t be this bunch.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 8:56 pm Reply | Quote
  • Hacking at the Foundations of one’s Society | The Stebbing-Heuer Project Says:

    […] A perceptive comment from Mr Scientism, reported at the always-scrumptious Xenosystems: […]

    Posted on May 22nd, 2016 at 11:35 pm Reply | Quote
  • Dale Rooster Says:

    @Dale Rooster

    “Do you allow communists to spread their propaganda?”

    Yes.

    “Do you allow them to create their organizations? Do you allow them clubs and salons?”

    Yes.

    “Do you simply let them plot a revolution?”

    Plot away. Let them secede, if need be, with some territory and resources they’ll ultimately destroy. But the moment they act–with violence–on any revolutionary communist plot, let them face the consequences. This would be my policy if I were Fnargl at least. Lucky me I’m just a degenerate “anarcho-fascist” or something.

    [Reply]

    Dale Rooster Reply:

    @ Ahote

    admin’s link here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2016/05/21/armed-with-guns-and-constitutions-the-patriot-movement-sees-america-under-threat/

    shows us the same problem with a role reversal.

    [Reply]

    Ahote Reply:

    >Let them secede, if need be, with some territory and resources they’ll ultimately destroy.

    That’s not how it works. Leftists are chronically allergic to Exit. They don’t want to secede, they want to take over your society, and not just it, but the whole world. The Left was always about spreading revolution around and having global dominance.

    >This would be my policy if I were Fnargl at least.

    The problem is there’s no Fnargl, and there never will be. If anything the thought experiment mocks Classical Liberalism and its concept of minarchy — the perfect self-limiting government requires an immortal unlimited absolutist.

    >Lucky me I’m just a degenerate “anarcho-fascist” or something.

    Then how are you not on board with Cantwell’s plan to give every commie a free helicopter ride?

    [Reply]

    Dale Rooster Reply:

    “That’s not how it works. Leftists are chronically allergic to Exit. They don’t want to secede, they want to take over your society, and not just it, but the whole world. The Left was always about spreading revolution around and having global dominance.”

    Agreed. A problem for sure. I don’t think the Left’s delusional will to dominate the entire world, every thought and action, is symptomatic solely of Crypto-Calvinism, however.

    “the perfect self-limiting government requires an immortal unlimited absolutist.”

    I think Moldbug made a fine argument in defense of consolidating unlimited absolute power. Agreed…except for the “immortal” part.

    “The problem is there’s no Fnargl, and there never will be.”

    Agreed. Hey, I’m not a utopian, man. Human beings are flawed–they’re not alien supermen with powers beyond our comprehension. It seems to me that Fnargl needs other Fnargls with whom to compete, however, in order to effect better Fnargl systems. The more the better–well, I take pleasure in this decentralist, competitive nightmare composed of millions of monstrous Fnargls tearing apart World Peace & Unity.

    “Then how are you not on board with Cantwell’s plan to give every commie a free helicopter ride?”

    Ha! I have not heard this! I don’t follow Cantwell. I love proposing absurdist solutions to Progressives. It’s a soft, humorous and fun way to let them know that, outside of a philosophy class, those of us on the wrong side of history have nothing to discuss with them seriously….we’re not public policy experts. (All PPEs are Progs ((or Neocons)) and all Progs think they’re PPEs.) The first executive step in Program: Abolish the Union might be accommodating Progs with free rides to Yankeestan. Is that absurd?

    Posted on May 24th, 2016 at 12:06 am Reply | Quote
  • jack arcalon Says:

    Too bad George W. Obama was so successful in delaying another giant Muslim terror attack in the USA until probably the 2020s.

    He loved Muslims so much he decide to protect them from themselves by making Americans pay, first in taxes and bureaucracy, and then through their slow replacement.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 24th, 2016 at 9:44 am Reply | Quote
  • Oliver Cromwell Says:

    Classical liberalism combined with democracy.

    England c. 1800 actually didn’t need parliament for anything except to authorise taxes to pay for wars.

    It then grew like a cancer, eventually inadvertently abolishing itself as its scope of assumed duties became too large to actually be managed by parliament, resulting in de-facto sovereignty of the bureaucracy.

    Classical liberalism is stable without a legislature. There are no cops to enforce omnilaws, and the militia composed only of freeholding men shoots rioters.

    If you read old books you will see how strong this system was evidenced by how much the authors (social reformers/modern commie historians) loath[ed] it.

    [Reply]

    Posted on May 24th, 2016 at 4:06 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment