Wagner’s Law

Wagner’s Law is a critical concept for political-philosophy. In the words of Adolph Wagner (1835–1917, as cited by Wikipedia): “The advent of modern industrial society will result in increasing political pressure for social progress and increased allowance for social consideration by industry.” It thus explains why the right has to be radical, if it isn’t to be a sad joke, because snowballing socialism is the ‘natural’ trend.

Here‘s Will Wilkinson abasing himself before it abjectly, and Arnold Kling showing considerably more spine. Also, commentary from Scott Sumner.

Nothing that falls short of a serious assault upon the real process formalized by Wagner’s Law merits the label ‘right-wing’. Conservatism, for instance, is merely decelerated leftism. Wilkinson is positively enthused by that. The Outer Right is everything that definitely isn’t.

What, then, is required to practically defy Wagner’s Law? NRx abstractly designates the project. Neocameralism goes into the details.

If XS expected the Alt-Right to break from the modern demotic meta-regime whose signature is Wagner’s Law, it would celebrate the fact. It doesn’t, sadly, expect anything of the kind. That’s why the Alt-Right isn’t ‘us’ or even — strictly speaking — a right-wing political phenomenon at all.

November 14, 2016admin 38 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Political economy

TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

38 Responses to this entry

  • Erebus Says:

    Kling cites and argues with Noah Smith at that link.

    …What? People still read Noah Smith? Wasn’t Smith declared “world’s stupidest public intellectual” a year or two ago? Kling debating Smith is pointless spectacle — a man versus a gnat. Kling will, of course, win every debate, but to deign to lower himself to Smith’s level is stupid.

    There should be a law: Never read anything written by Noah Smith — but, if you must, then never, never take him seriously.

    [Reply]

    G. Eiríksson Reply:

    Why would anyone take anyone seriously. Men are just vessels emitting what comes thru.

    [Reply]

    Noah Smith Reply:

    As someone who is also named Noah Smith, this is always very odd for me to read.

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 14th, 2016 at 3:15 pm Reply | Quote
  • tsk Says:

    What movements in modern history which have made real progress in rolling back parts of the left, besides fascists?

    [Reply]

    admin Reply:

    Fascists are useless at rolling back the social infrastructure of the Left. Competitive commercial pressure is the only thing that can do that. Limited government exists only in highly-exposed, open micro-states.

    [Reply]

    smg Reply:

    Idk. I think your categories aren’t quite accurate, or possibly it’s my interpretation of your categories. In terms of popular culture alt-right, at least in US, has been resetting norms. No, they haven’t captured institutions (other than presidency) but they’ve certainly reputationally damaged them (media/academe). Progressive CEO’s have incurred wrath of alt-right. Indra Nooyi & Matt Maloney are learning hard lessons.

    [Reply]

    Seth Largo Reply:

    Alt-right trolling was, is, and on January 1 will continue to be a symptom of malaise, not a cure for it. At best, one might use the metaphor that alt-right trolling is a gag reflex spitting out certain microbes causing the malaise, but that’s still not a cure, because microbes quickly repopulate themselves.

    Speaking practically, the only hope I have for a Trump presidency is an increased (and more smartly spent) space budget and an increased (and more smartly spent) military defense budget. Like Spengler, I think that if we’re going to have more taxation and more federal spending, we need to spend it on intelligent things. So far, the God Emperor is disappointing me, as I knew he would.

    smg Reply:

    For Seth:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9B7EsenfFE

    The battle was won; the war goes on.

    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    The AltRight are am opportunistic movement diverting the existing pushback against the left into useless political spectacles and popular idiocy. In that sense they are just like the fascists, and just as useless.

    G. Eiríksson Reply:

    »diverting the existing pushback»?

    TheWhiteDevil Reply:

    >diverting the existing pushback against the left

    I’m going to ask too: what?

    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    There was a lot of anti-SJW and anti-Feminazi stuff flying around long before the Twitter Nazis declared themselves the arbiters of the new counter-culture, and even that was further undermined by hitching itself to the Trump train. Trump isn’t right wing, not even relatively, and I think he was a useful weapon against the Establishment, but the idea that electoral politics at the Federal level can fix the systemic problems of the Union is insane.
    I have seen a lot of AltRighters celebrating the victory of the Republicans in the house and Senate, as though those weren’t the same Republicans who opposed Trump, put out the bogus Contract with America, etc. The AltRight is not only the responsible for the unceasing hatred SJWs have received lately, they seem to have completely forgotten GW Bush’s administration had the same people in the Congress and the same Supreme Court majority. The AltRight have become useful idiots, who will be used by the Republicans and ignored just like the Pro-lifers. Hopefully they will learn that the parties and the Republic cannot be reformed, but more likely they’ll go back to being Republican pigeons after the inefficacy of their strategy becomes apparent.
    Even their troll campaigns are failing as people become accustomed to their spicy language and Nazi icons. Remember, the SJW were never liked by anyone and are a small minority of failures. The Establishment used them just like their AltRight twins (muhDegeneracy, the j00z = inequality, White Privilege) but nobody but the ecclesiastical sociopaths actually believes that garbage.

    Jefferson Reply:

    So no cult of Gnon necessary, or is it implied?

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 14th, 2016 at 3:36 pm Reply | Quote
  • Wagner Says:

    It’s a cosmic law that power accumulates and discharges itself:

    [T]he noble human being… helps the unfortunate, but not, or almost not, from pity, but prompted more by an urge begotten by excess of power. (Beyond Good and Evil)

    The origin and essence of our wealth are given in the radiation of the sun, which dispenses energy—wealth—without any return. The sun gives without ever receiving… Living matter receives and accumulates it… then radiates and squanders it… Its extreme exuberance pours out in a movement always bordering on explosion. (The Accursed Share)

    So the question isn’t to squander or not to squander power, it’s what to squander it on. Squandering it on breeding a master-caste would be preferred to groceries for coons. But it seems like if that master-caste had the prowess it would aid the coons–if it didn’t it would be because it couldn’t. Humans are rightist or leftist but Humanity itself accumulates power by being rightist and discharges it by being leftist. If we had accumulated enough power leftist discharges would be no sweat, but we’re weak, we’ve discharged our supply; now we need to build it back up *so that* it can go boom again. And again, and again, like breathing.

    [Reply]

    Erebus Reply:

    >”But it seems like if that master-caste had the prowess it would aid the coons–if it didn’t it would be because it couldn’t.”

    Does it? Have you ever observed how humans treat vermin, or animals generally? That’s how a master race would treat its stark inferiors.

    The Europeans who first colonized Africa were fantastically cruel, and were a master race of sorts, but were not nearly cruel enough.

    Among equals, what you’re saying has merit. A true master race — if one ascends, via technological means — would not be among equals. In its superiority, it would be hard, stern, unwavering. “Aid?” A shallow grave.

    [Reply]

    Wagner Reply:

    Stark is the key word, because it is all a question of shadows rather than polarities. Vegans to me are as left as one can go outside of ritual Hindu autostarvation. The Darwinian insight is life feeds on life. This begs the question of what life is. If life is something that does the opposite of feed on life and feeds on life by not feeding on life there is a screwy little paradox there. It’s not Christianity OR Darwinism, both of them are perpetuated and therefore perpetuatable.

    The definition surrounded by marks of interrogation to me is “nobility”. Intuitively, nobility is noble by virtue of what it does for the base. I don’t think this is a shallow dogma, I think the left corrupted a good thing. Instead of trying to bring the base masses to nobility we should affirm them for what they are. We can’t change biology, we have learned this now. But we can still be concerned for the base to a degree. Hindus and vegans are extremists; it’s moderate to care about lesser races. It’s extremist once again but in a reverse direction to cancel out the baser souls of humanity.

    [Reply]

    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    Actually we can change biology – not the rules, but the particulars. But it requires a political will or power which does not exist. We would have to eliminate charity, and use either genomic manipulation or indifference to destroy the gray majority of people in an evolutionary level. I certainly endorse this.

    Wagner Reply:

    It’s been discussed at Jim’s blog in the past that if given incentives, blacks would opt for sterilization. It would be quite an investment but it would be worth it. There really is no easy solution to the nigger problem so I understand the spacesteading impulse. A “humane” option is leaving them in Africa to self-destruct. But what do we do with the ones that are ever more rapidly making America look like a reality TV version of Planet of the Apes? What do you mean we can change biology? Like we can take an adult African and remove his brain and replace it with an artificial white brain? Or we can isolate the George Washington Carver gene and make it mandatory that blacks gives birth to GWC babies?

    Posted on November 14th, 2016 at 5:34 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kgaard Says:

    I agree that Noah Smith is a total moron. Also agree that the split between NRx and alt-right is very important to detail, debate and promulgate. I am doing a work-related presentation on the new right and intend to highlight this point.

    I keep thinking about the argument that at root the IS is really a free trade zone. How does ethnic consciousness intersect with the idea of the open city-state as the optimal polity?

    [Reply]

    Sidney Carton Reply:

    Work related? I wish my job were that interesting

    [Reply]

    Xoth Reply:

    And they have a hard currency too!

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 14th, 2016 at 5:39 pm Reply | Quote
  • smg Says:

    Delineating alt-right from nrx isn’t so simple. These’s crossbreeding. Some self-described nrx participate in alt-right
    “activism” & some ethno-nationalists are anti-democratic.

    [Reply]

    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    The AltRight is hard to pin down because it’s not an ideology,it’s a coalition of internally feuding factions. They’re apparently purity spiraling into faux-Nazis, at which point no one will like them anymore.

    [Reply]

    Cryptogenic Reply:

    But no matter who you are, it is OK to gloat viciously about Trump.

    NRx types who refuse to inflict maximum pain on crying leftists because their principals preclude monkey-brain involvements — you need to understand that you take your anti-Cathedral Schadenfreude where you can get it. Have a drink and troll.

    [Reply]

    Xoth Reply:

    I see the alt-right as the practical wing and NRx as the R&D, or is that R&R, wing.

    [Reply]

    R. J. Moore II Reply:

    Electoral politics are not practical. The very tactics of the AltRight show that they don’t understand the nature of the problem. They’re economic and historical retards.

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 14th, 2016 at 10:09 pm Reply | Quote
  • Shlomo Maistre Says:

    Time degrades all things inherently.

    The Left accelerates the process of degradation by definition.

    The Right aims to restore order by definition.

    While the Left acts collectively across time, the Right acts collectively at particular moments within time.

    Industrialization and Wagner’s Law are, like all things, easily and completely encompassed within these aforementioned truths.

    There has been increasing political pressure for social progress since the dawn of time – this is not particular to the era of industrialization by any means. Indeed, the accelerating nature of social degradation is fundamental to its nature.

    That greater state spending, perhaps even the welfare state, evolved out of industrialization is not a singular irony that is in any manner unique. Instead, this is only one iteration of a trend throughout human history: power despises a vacuum.

    Greater state spending after industrialization was only ever evidence that more bureaucratic, diffused, crass, and blatant political patronage in the form of state spending would play an outsized role in filling the power vacuum opened by the technological innovations particular to the so-called “industrial revolution”. The welfare state that some think emerged from the “industrial revolution” was not new in its essence – it was only new in its dimensions, but it was only a specific iteration of political patronage that is as old as time.

    The filling of the power vacuum opened by technological progress degraded social order in keeping with the singular truth of the mortal domain: the only change is constant and that change is the degradation of order.

    The conservatives fighting to (at least) slow the growth of the welfare state are not Right-wing; they are diluted leftists. The Right is not fighting the welfare state; the Right is by definition aiming to restore order to delay the inevitable: the opening of a power vacuum (whether by technological or other causes) necessitating a further degradation of social order.

    While the Left acts collectively across time, the Right acts collectively at particular moments within time. But:

    While the Left acts as individuals at moments in time, the Right acts as individuals across time.

    Therefore, the Right, if there is a Right in the Western world, is primarily comprised of traditionalist Catholics, Mormons, and Orthodox Jews.

    [Reply]

    Wagner Reply:

    If it is all about restoring order you contradict yourself in proposing the three rightist remedies trad catholicism, mormonism, ortho judaism in that the former two did not restore order back toward ortho judaism. What conservatives can’t explain is how they got the traditions they find so worth cherishing.. Was it by a restoration of order that they came about? Or a leftist degradation of time? The myth of decadence is as infinitely pigheaded as the myth of progress. Not a surprising fallacy to be voiced by an ortho jew. Just another priest like admin who’s playing qabbalist by making this post – the trick is to catch the flare of the fluttering hand and immediately direct your attention to the hand he’s distracting attention from. As my English grandfather used to say, “I wouldn’t trust him with a dog’s supper.”

    [Reply]

    Shlomo Maistre Reply:

    1. “If it is all about restoring order you contradict yourself in proposing the three rightist remedies trad catholicism, mormonism, ortho judaism in that the former two did not restore order back toward oath judaism”

    You misunderstand on multiple levels.

    First of all, the right does not ever restore previous order (such a thing is impossible) – this is why I said the right AIMS to restore order.

    Second of all, the veracity of my claim is not testable by empirical evidence; furthermore, you searching the material world for proof of transcendent reality betrays a Progressive worldview that is incompatible with rationalist epistemology.

    Third of all, just so you can (try) to understand: in aiming to restore order the Right slows or at the very best ideally delays the next breakdown in social order. Traditionalist Catholics, Mormons and Orthodox Jews do this through time as individuals in what is called daily life, ordinary moments, the exercise of discipline overtime. This is, in itself, a good thing.

    2. “What conservatives can’t explain is how they got the traditions they find so worth cherishing.. Was it by a restoration of order that they came about? Or a leftist degradation of time?”

    Tradition does not come from anywhere material. Particular traditions come from previous generations; tradition, in general, stems from the Creator or at least reflects his Will.

    3. “Not a surprising fallacy to be voiced by an ortho jew”

    This is more true than you seem to know.

    [Reply]

    Wagner Reply:

    There is a rot that emanates from your prose, kind of like B. O. in that it’s strangely appealing, but ultimately repugnant. Jews are smart yet speak many untruths. As a Platonist my heart worms I mean warms. There is a talent there but it is a talent rooted in eros and spiritedness. Only Christians understand the Logos as a real, lived entity. The Jews are religious cavemen, you can tell by their faces.

    Tradition, in general, stems from the Creator. So why isn’t leftism new-tradition? We used to skip rocks on ponds for fun then we invented the atari; we used to find mana and tapu in bushes then we saw a Burning Bush. I have never gotten an honest response from a theist on this,-if Judaism reformed pre-Judaism and Christianity reformed post-Judaism, why shouldn’t we expect another reformation? Don’t Jews believe in a prophet to come? Are you going to call him (or her) a Progressive?

    Shlomo Maistre Reply:

    Wagner fails to even address my revelations.

    “So why isn’t leftism new-tradition?”

    I don’t remember saying that leftism is or is not “new tradition” (whatever that means)

    “if Judaism reformed pre-Judaism and Christianity reformed post-Judaism, why shouldn’t we expect another reformation?”

    I never said that Judaism reformed anything.

    “Don’t Jews believe in a prophet to come?”

    Most do, yes.

    “Are you going to call him (or her) a Progressive?”

    No. I will call him משיח

    http://deductiveprosecutions.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-lord-is-one.html

    Wagner Reply:

    If Moses was perfect he wouldn’t need people to defend him.

    G. Eiríksson Reply:

    Right used to mean absolute might is right. Not that macho is right, but masculine is right. Not profane sado libido as much as gracious domination and light.

    Why does a slender Pharaoh rule a macho warrior?

    Yet the former leads the storm against the n’wah.

    Right has always meant right reckoning. A part of that is accounting.

    The Left has come to mean e.g. those who do worse accounting. Unjust accounting.

    You reckon the numbers in an affair. In a trade. If you do so rightly you profit. Right? I mean, if you sell what is of low value to you and buy what is of higher value to you. You have enough iron but you lack enough wood. You reckon what you have and what you need, and you trade.

    How does a purported Right crumble then? Apparently the administrations of Louis XVI and Tsar Nicholas II weren´t right anymore.

    They were doing bad reckoning. So they rot and the leftist hordes flooded.

    The Left is just the force that the Right keeps at bay. If the Right isn´t there anymore but in name, there is nothing that keeps the Left at bay. No gates.

    Rightness is doing what is right and thus keeping the evil away.

    This is actually the definition it has in the eldest aryan scriptures. Rta.

    Right? Classic, right. Don´t be left off with those who do evil, & bad (accounting).

    Posted on November 15th, 2016 at 2:12 am Reply | Quote
  • Shlomo Maistre Says:

    Wagner fails to even address my revelations.

    “So why isn’t leftism new-tradition?”

    I don’t remember saying that leftism is or is not “new tradition” (whatever that means)

    “if Judaism reformed pre-Judaism and Christianity reformed post-Judaism, why shouldn’t we expect another reformation?”

    I never said that Judaism reformed anything.

    “Don’t Jews believe in a prophet to come?”

    Most do, yes.

    “Are you going to call him (or her) a Progressive?”

    No. I will call him משיח

    http://deductiveprosecutions.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-lord-is-one.html

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 15th, 2016 at 4:08 am Reply | Quote
  • R. J. Moore II Says:

    @Shlomo Maistre these dimestore prose poetry posts are fucking nonsense and unreadable. Jesus Christ.

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 15th, 2016 at 7:35 am Reply | Quote
  • Post Alley Crackpot Says:

    “Conservatism, for instance, is merely decelerated leftism …”

    The intense pressures of hydraulic politics are too much to bear!

    We must call a crisis specialist to intervene in such matters of Keynesian politics!

    SOMEONE CALL A PLUMBER! 🙂

    [visualises one of several American comic strips featuring Donald Trump, a toilet plunger, and a popular American drain cleaner as being symbolic of the “hydraulic politics” that are not just the clog in the system, but the system qua system itself …]

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 15th, 2016 at 10:07 pm Reply | Quote
  • Xoth Says:

    It is said that Will Wilkinson woke up from a dream and exclaimed, “Am I a Libertarian dreaming I’m a Democrat, or a Democrat dreaming I’m a Libertarian?”

    [Reply]

    Posted on November 16th, 2016 at 12:29 pm Reply | Quote
  • This Week in Reaction (2016/11/20) - Social Matter Says:

    […] Nick Land draws a line in the Left-Right sand at Wagner’s Law: […]

    Posted on November 23rd, 2016 at 8:50 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment