Archive for the ‘Ideology’ Category

Proposition Nations

Xenosystems likes proposition nations so much it wants to see a lot more of them.

America is a problem for the world for two main (and conflicting) reasons:

1) Its proposition contains enough productive innovation to be scary. Independence war, foundational liberalism, constitutionally-restricted government, and laissez-faire capitalism have been a memetic-cocktail-from-hell for those in thrall to competitively-inferior ideas. But, undoing all of this, is the legacy of the American Civil War (in particular) —

2) The suppression of the propositional principle — i.e. geopolitical ideological sorting — under an idealization of national unity. Upon this pyre the liberal tradition has been incinerated, until it exists only as a charred parody of itself. The Proposition is by now little more than the State of the Union. Mandatory agreement, within an undivided territory, is policed by the democratic mechanism. That we remain one is left as the only strictly axiomatic propositional content (as the Trump and Sanders presidential candidacies in their different ways illustrate).

Spatial Metapolitics recommends that America do both Trumpist ethno-nationalism, and Sanderista democratic socialism, and a large number of other (more interesting) things, even also more stupid ones, if such can be devised. The critical point is the precise inverse of the late-modern axiom: As long as mandatory unity is dissolved, ideological tolerance can be extended without definite limit — across a disintegrated territory.

First-order ideological preferences, elaborated under an assumption of dominant unity, are a trap entirely irrespective of their specific content.

Here’s a proposition: Abolish the Union. Only disintegration is worth doing.

May 17, 2016admin 42 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

Quote note (#249)

Fernandez (reaching the reboot imperative around the back):

The computer revolution has given us the tools to understand why Communism has so much devastating power. We can now recognize it as history’s greatest and most dangerous piece of intellectual malware, whose only true rival is radical Islam. It tricks the social network into thinking you can get something for nothing; it promises freedom in exchange for enslavement. It presents a deceptive interface but its inner methods are all destructors. It subverts the operating system and like the computer viruses we are familiar with uses the host’s own processing power to spawn more copies of itself. The more powerful and resource-endowed a host is, the more powerfully the malware can attack it. In the end it trashes everything and only a complete reinstall and rebuild can fix it.

May 16, 2016admin 14 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , ,

Sentences (#51)

Nationalism is far more of an Alt-Right than an NRx priority, but this was still an absolute jaw-dropper:

Globalists are motivated by humanitarian impulses. For them, the rights and well-being of the world’s people supersede the rights and well-being of the American populace. Indeed, as writer Robert D. Kaplan has observed, the liberal embrace of universal principles as foreign-policy guidance “leads to a pacifist strain … when it comes to defending our hard-core national interest, and an aggressive strain when it comes to defending human rights.” (Ellipsis in original, XS emphasis.)

Sacrifice only for matter of zero (or negative) self-interest, then. Looking back, it’s going to be hard for people to understand how this was ever politically saleable.

ADDED: They still think they can sell it, though.

May 5, 2016admin 15 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , , ,

Against Universalism II

Preliminary throat-clearing (as in part one): In its most rigorous construction, ‘universalism’ is robust under conditions of rational argument (i.e. evidence-based logico-mathematical criticism). Mathematical theorems, in particular [sic], are universal truths. Any assertions that can be constructed to a comparable level of formal rigor (and ultimately mechanization) can lay claim to the same status. However, with the slightest departure from this — rigidly algorithmic — criterion, controversy rapidly begins. This is not the place and time to argue the case for transcendental philosophy (within which praxeology in included), but such a case could be made. Ditto strictly proceduralized empirical science. All of this is a digression.

The question of universalism as it concerns us here is not a matter of meta-mathematics, epistemology, or the philosophy of science. It is rather directed at the political scope of argument. Is it mandatory to demand that argument, according to the highest principles of (logical) cognitive compulsion, be imposed globally? Does the quality of argument — however exalted — require its unrestricted application across space and time? It is the affirmative response to this question that defines universalism in its ideological sense. Pure Jacobinism, of course, answers yes. There is a universal duty to compel submission to the truth. This is the secular form of evangelical salvationism.

The contrary suggestion, here defended, is that — under real global conditions — universalism is a catastrophic mistake. The social scope of rational discussion is itself strictly bounded, and attempts to extend it (coercively) beyond such limits are politically disastrous. Laissez-faire envelops the sphere of imperative rationality, and respects its practical contour. Stupidity does not need to be hunted down and exterminated. All historical evidence indicates that it cannot be.

If the universal triumph of reason is an impractical goal, democratic globalism is exposed as a preposterous error. Minimizing the voice of stupidity is the realistic — and already extremely challenging — alternative. Rare enclaves of rigorously self-critical realism have as their primary obligation the self-protection of their (evidently precarious) particularity. In the wider world, fanatical ignorance and grotesque cognitive malformation rage rampantly. Borders, filters, tests, and selection mechanisms of all kinds provide the only defenses against it.

The universalist (Jacobin) model is always a conversation. You have to join together first, simply to talk, and after that reason will prevail. That’s the path of the Zeitgeist — Hegelianism at its most arcane, expedient progressivism at more common levels of popularity — with its twin-stroke motor of aggressive proselytization and mass embrace.
“Invade the world, invite the world” is the Sailer formula (quasi-random link). Amalgamate, then elevate (in the direction of ascending rationality). This isn’t a (theoretically convincing) claim about the unique structure of mathematical proof, it’s a (factually trashed) claim about the global uniformity of human brains. The ‘universality’ it invokes is that of convergence upon the authority of reason. In other words, it’s a bizarre progressive myth that all self-protective sanity seeks to maximally distance itself from.

People learn, but only very rarely through sophisticated argument, or its ‘cunning‘ socio-political avatars. They learn because they fail badly, and it hurts. ‘Mankind’ is a progressive myth, incapable of learning anything. When real cultures learn, it is because they have been locked in intimate particularity, such that the consequences of their own cognitive processes impact intensely upon them. Anything that separates an individual, or a group, from the results of its own thoughts, is an apparatus of anti-learning. Progressive universalism is precisely this.

Dis-amalgamation — isolation — is the way to learn. It’s how speciation happens, long before learning becomes neurological. Individuation (at whatever scale) establishes the foundation for trade, communication, and intellectual exchange. Micro-states commercialize. Macro-states decay into political resource allocation, and entropic sludge. Protect your own patch if you want to have anything to talk about.

There’s going to be a lot of talk about ‘universalism’ rolling in:

It’s a suicidal ideology in its death-spasm phase, but it won’t die quietly.

Continue Reading

April 28, 2016admin 97 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , , ,

Quote note (#226)

It would be gratuitously provocative to summarize this as ‘Conrad on HRx’ — but still. Here he is, in The Secret Agent (Chapter VI), exploring the thought-processes of the unnamed aristocratic “lady patroness of Michaelis” (an anarcho-communist):

It was as if the monstrosity of the man, with his candid infant’s eyes and a fat angelic smile, had fascinated her. She had come to believe almost his theory of the future, since it was not repugnant to her prejudices. She disliked the new element of plutocracy in the social compound, and industrialism as a method of human development appeared to her singularly repulsive in its mechanical and unfeeling character. The humanitarian hopes of the mild Michaelis tended not towards utter destruction, but merely towards the complete economic ruin of the system. And she did not really see where was the moral harm of it. It would do away with all the multitude of the “parvenus,” whom she disliked and distrusted, not because they had arrived anywhere (she denied that), but because of their profound unintelligence of the world, which was the primary cause of the crudity of their perceptions and the aridity of their hearts. With the annihilation of all capital they would vanish, too; but universal ruin (providing it was universal, as revealed to Michaelis) would leave the social values untouched. The disappearance of the last piece of money could not affect people of position. She could not conceive how it could affect her position, for instance.

Conrad understood why Tories are even less trustworthy than Whigs.

March 4, 2016admin 19 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , , ,

Sentences (#40)

How to gauge the prevailing ideology. In stark contrast to ritualized witch-hunting of rightists (examples given) …

It’s hard to think of a situation where holding left-wing beliefs, no matter how left wing they are, would get someone removed from an an organization that is not itself expressly right-wing.

(Feel free to take that as a challenge. Reference here.)

February 6, 2016admin 24 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , , ,

What is the Alt-Right?

Topic of the week, it seems. XS will carve out a Chaos Patch space for targeted links on Sunday, but for impatient types, here’s a taster (1, 2, 3, 4).

This blog, I’m guessing predictably, takes a count me out position. Neoreaction, as I understand it, predicted the emergence of the Alt-Right as an inevitable outcome of Cathedral over-reach, and didn’t remotely like what it saw. Kick a dog enough and you end up with a bad-tempered dog. Acknowledging the fact doesn’t mean you support kicking dogs — or bad-tempered dogs. Maybe you’d be happy to see the dog-kicker get bitten (me too). That, however, is as far as it goes.

A short definition, that seems to me uncontroversial: The Alt-Right is the populist dissident right. Set theoretically, NRx is therefore grouped with it, but as a quite different thing. Another obvious conclusion from the definition: the Alt-Right is almost inevitably going to be far larger than NRx is, or should ever aim to be. If you think people power is basically great, but the Left have just been doing it wrong, the Alt-Right is most probably what you’re looking for (and NRx definitely isn’t).

For the Alt-Right, generally speaking, fascism is (1) basically a great idea, and (2) a meaningless slur concocted by (((Cultural Marxists))) to be laughed at. For NRx (XS version) fascism is a late-stage leftist aberration made peculiarly toxic by its comparative practicality. There’s no real room for a meeting of minds on this point.

As a consequence of its essential populism, the Alt-Right is inclined to anti-capitalism, ethno-socialism, grievance politics, and progressive statism. Its interest in geopolitical fragmentation (or Patchwork production) is somewhere between hopelessly distracted and positively hostile. Beside its — admittedly highly entertaining — potential for collapse catalysis, there’s no reason at all for the techno-commercial wing of NRx to have the slightest sympathy for it. Space for tactical cooperation, within the strategic framework of pan-secessionism, certainly exists, but that could equally be said of full-on Maoists with a willingness to break things up.

None of this should be taken as a competition for recruits. The Alt-Right will get almost all of them — it’s bound to be huge. From the NRx perspective, the Alt-Right is to be appreciated for helping to clean us up. They’re most welcome to take whoever they can, especially if they shut the door on the way out.

Continue Reading

January 22, 2016admin 87 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

Sentences (#32)

… few things are as oppressive and intolerable as living under the yoke of a lie … (Skeletalized for purposes of extraction from its mainstream conservative context, but the whole article is insightful if read with a modicum of detachment.)

Even Trump skeptics (such as this blog) are finding it hard to deny that the phenomenon is a revolt against the Cathedral (defined approximately as “the yoke of a lie”). It’s a campaign against the media, and ‘correct opinion’ in general, with ordinary political antagonism as a very secondary feature. Does anybody seriously doubt that the media establishment understands, he’s running against us?

The romantic medievalism of much ‘NRx’ thought captures things of importance — one of which is the cultural value of a separation between State and Church, which is to say: the absence of politically-mandated correct opinion. Heretics were not political criminals before the onset of modernity. When the state becomes a church (‘the Cathedral’), political antagonism acquires religious intensity. That’s what is being seen today, whatever else one might think about it. At the climax of the democratic regime, politics necessarily becomes holy war. As the old saw goes: nobody said it was going to be pretty.

ADDED: The Cathedral has its own distinctive version of social contract theory: “There are people who already hold these views, and there used to be kind of an agreement between them and society that they wouldn’t speak these things in public.”

December 10, 2015admin 24 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , , ,

Lynch Law

This is insanely great (second only to NeoCam for absolute attractiveness, and arguably more suitable under predominant rough-and-ready social conditions). First, a little scene-setting:

There is, to the best of my knowledge, no single right and proper method to construct a gallows. A few elements are common to just about every design, but the grim carpenters’ flourishes of the scaffold reflect the tastes of the community and the eye of the builders. There is always a raised platform; there are always stairs leading to the platform, usually thirteen; there is always a crossbeam around which to string the noose; and there is always a trapdoor to launch the condemned into the hereafter. Beyond that, the timbers of the frame are a matter of discretion. Supporting braces and thick beams are common for permanent installations. Temporary gallows will often rely on a nock rather than a full cleat to hold the bitter end of the killing rope. A shoreside hanging can even rely on a high tide and the scuttling claws of the merciless deep to clean up the turgid mess left by a dead man dancing. …

Continue Reading

December 7, 2015admin 35 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , ,

Moron bites (#5)

Anti-Fascist News on Radix:

… a who’s who of the “alt right,” which we prefer to identify as “alt fascist.” This means far right ideas that associate with counter-cultural and intellectual elements, including neo-paganism, radical environmentalism, and other more spiritually and intellectually inclined folks, while also bridging to former paleoconversatives and beltway types. They cheerfully lament about the “decline” of white civilization, the destructiveness implicit in immigration and queer identity, and about how skin color determines IQ

Nobody, ever, across the entire span of history, has believed that (if they could even make sense of it).

The Radix-crew aren’t XS-types, but productive criticism doesn’t begin with this kind of idiotic lying.

October 19, 2015admin 16 Comments »
FILED UNDER :Ideology
TAGGED WITH : , , ,