We were having a great discussion yesterday about Bannon's

>>9084193
fug drumb

I need to take a look at that thread, but after reading a profile on Bannon, all l can say is he's a very interesting person to say the least, regardless of your views on the Trump administration.

Here's a link if anyone else wants to read it: https://qz.com/898134/what-steve-bannon-really-wants/

>>9080880
>Moldbug wants Lee Kuan Yews everywhere.
see
>>9078744

Does Moldbug address at all this whole iq shredding phenomenon?

>>9084248
The concept of an "IQ shredder" does not pop up in NRx until 2013 at the earliest, so no.

>>9084248
Land discusses it here and provides multiple responses from people in NRx.
http://www.xenosystems.net/iq-shredders/

>>9084272
That's a wicked read, cheers anon.

>>9084272
I'd read Land's blogpost, but for some reason had never bothered with the responses he links to; thanks for bringing them to my attention!

>you will never attend a meeting of the league of villains with Bannon, Trump, Land and other neoreactionary/broadly right wing aristocrats debate on how to best save civilization

File: cheney-nov-5-448x330.jpg (31KB, 448x330px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 448x330px

Everybody knows Social Matter but these guys have some good essays too.

https://westcoastrxers.com/

File: 1486245225634.jpg (157KB, 498x493px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 498x493px

>>9085241
This depresses me more than it probably should

Good God no!

Can a get a quick rundown on the old thread?

>>9085347
It's linked in the OP, read it yourself.

File: wallpaper-579222.jpg (237KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1680x1050px

Good article & summary here.

>First, ultracalvinists believe in the universal brotherhood of man. As an Ideal (an undefined universal) this might be called Equality. (“All men and women are born equal.”) If we wanted to attach an “ism” to this, we could call it fraternalism.

>Second, ultracalvinists believe in the futility of violence. The corresponding ideal is of course Peace. (“Violence only causes more violence.”) This is well-known as pacifism.

>Third, ultracalvinists believe in the fair distribution of goods. The ideal is Social Justice, which is a fine name as long as we remember that it has nothing to do with justice in the dictionary sense of the word, that is, the accurate application of the law. (“From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”) To avoid hot-button words, we will ride on a name and call this belief Rawlsianism.

>Fourth, ultracalvinists believe in the managed society. The ideal is Community, and a community by definition is led by benevolent experts, or public servants. (“Public servants should be professional and socially responsible.”) After their counterparts east of the Himalaya, we can call this belief mandarism.

>Trump has challenged all four principles, Trump (apparently) rejects all four principles, and Trump has (apparently) triumphed over these four principles...

http://www.socialmatter.net/2017/02/09/short-guide-reactionary-political-theory/

>>9084193
Is there a proper list of books? I don't want to sift through that shitty article

Trump = Duke Leto
Barron = Paul
Meliana = Jessica
Bannon = Thufir Hawat

Complete the dramatis personae.

File: initial-d-328546.jpg (298KB, 800x1162px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 800x1162px

>>9085241
>Land
>wanting to save society
don't think so matey

File: image_1486098997_65780290.jpg (79KB, 636x382px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 636x382px

The Fourth Turning gets the most press, that being the book that inspired his film Generation Zero. Others:

Art of War
Bhagavad Gita
Antifragile
The Best and the Brightest

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/washington/steve-bannons-dangerous-reading-list/

Is Bannon, dare I say it, /ourguy/?

File: ha_navigator3.png (448KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 640x480px

>>9085523

The only ones I can think of are Mattis as Gurney Halleck and Nick Land as the navigator of the spacing guild.

>tfw new Dune coming soon, fuck yes

>>9085535
He absolutely wants to save civilization.

He just recognizes that meatbags like you and I and him are quite bad at the entire civilization thing and as such we should be replaced by AI before we fuck the whole thing up and die out without producing something which can continue the pursuit of holy Gnon.

Producing AI is a form of reproduction just as surely as procreative sex is. It's just cold reproduction. Just as we overcome our fathers in time, as they grow feeble from age, our cybernetic children will also replace us.

>>9085557
>you will never read Nick Land after he has immersed himself in ultraspice for 1,000 years

shit, and we thought he was good after a few decades of amphetamines and Deleuze.

>>9085523
Soros = Harkonnen

File: 161113155404-bannon-11-11-exlarge-169.jpg (83KB, 780x438px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 780x438px

>judaeo-christian west in crisis
>capitalism is in crisis
>great fourth turning in america
>major shooting war in middle east
>war in south china sea in 5-10 years

>remember divine providence rains on the just and the unjust

Going to be an interesting four years boys

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAmUo0Np9nw

>>9085523
Whose gonna be Leto II?

File: ad_232178989.jpg (277KB, 2500x1667px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 2500x1667px

>>9085614
>Whose gonna be Leto II?

To me I would say Barron, moving Ivanka into the Paul role. She's the voice of moderation in House Trump, and everybody seems to like her (well, except Nordstrom's). Apparently there's already a rift growing there between her and Kushner vs Mentat Bannon.

Barron would be the one who inherits the shitstorm that comes afterwards and becomes a god-tier psychic.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/brewing-power-struggle-ivankas-moderating-influence-giving-way-to-extremist-steve-bannon-sources-say

Some great NRx discussion in this (http://boards.4chan.org/lit/thread/9078948#p9085623) thread.

>>9085632
>Mentat Bannon
kek

>>9085386

Social Matte are palaeo-reactionaries pretending at NRx. Fuck them. Social Matter is cancer.

>>9085352
I don't want to read 300+ posts.

All I'm looking for is a basic gestalt.

>>9085672

General discussion of convergence points between reactionary populism (Trump, Bannon) and neoreactionary Techno-Commercialism (Moldbug, Land).

>>9085682
So it's a neckbeard echo chamber of people copypasting things bloggers have said in their articles?

Seems faulty on its surface. Massive generalizations everywhere. Good luck predicting the future, kid.

File: 1457156523458.jpg (65KB, 577x537px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 577x537px

Bannon actually has a pretty crazy background:

>Working class Irish-Catholic family
>Former Navy officer
>MBA from Harvard and masters in national security studies from Georgetown
>Worked at Goldman Sachs
>Spent time in Hollywood as a producer
>Founding member of Breitbart, took over after Andrew died.

My impression is he's some kind of Good Will Hunting type who managed to work his way into elite circles and fucking hated the elite managerial class types he was rubbing elbows with. Seems like more of a generic Buchanan conservative type until the financial crisis & Obama admin turned him into pic related, snapped and went full nationalist/reactionary. He's like a Henry Kissinger that would beat the shit out you in a bar fight.

>>9084193
Where's the actual list (or the /lit/ list)? Not the article, the list.

File: 1475679459553.jpg (86KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 800x533px

>>9085711
Good post.

He's almost like a super-dark Tom Clancy character (noting of course that Jack Ryan would probably not use the phrase "fourth turning" or "crisis of capitalism," but whatever). Maybe that's where things are headed. Not only a new Cold War scenario with China, but the "cold civil war" mentioned in this article, and potentially both at the same time.

No wonder Elon wants to step up the space program.

https://status451.com/2017/01/20/days-of-rage/

>>9085729
see
>>9085541

I googled around on a couple of places and they mostly came up with those five books.

social matter and that other blog are shit tagging along for the ride
get fucked patreons

There seems to be a concerted effort to portray bannon as "smart" or intellectually gifted on several boards on 4chan over the past few days.....despite most things he's actually produced being dumbed down drivel (documentaries, breitbart etc).
I'm calling shenanigans or, more likely, shills.

Also sage

>>9085903
To be fair, he's a propagandist, so most of his actions are going to be directed towards the masses.

>>9085903
Yeah it's getting suspicious. He led Breitbart. They employ people who actively browse and post on 4chan. It's not ridiculous to suggest that there is something going on.

There were 2 bump limit threads in the past few days. And about what? A blog that's been dead for 2+ years? Just look at the embarrassingly affected image that was used to start this and the last thread. Get better interns, Steve.

>>9085903
I lost almost all respect for him when I learned that he directed this fucking trash about that faggot from duck dynasty.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6047844/?ref_=nm_flmg_prd_2

>>9085697
Underrated post.

>>9085903
>>9085978
>>9085997

Yes.

File: 3211396764_4bd6fb6bb3.jpg (119KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 500x375px

>>9085903
>>9085997
>>9086108

>>9085903
You may need to get out more. There's certainly been an effort to depict Bannon as intelligent, but it exceeds this laotian cave painting discussion board. We've just reacted to a broader current in the media landscape.

I thought moldbug already quit political writing to focus on his autistic universe project, now that Thiel is also giving him shekels

File: 10-paul-ryan-ayn-rand.w710.h473.2x.jpg (87KB, 1420x946px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1420x946px

Even if Bannon isn't an "intellectual" (and honestly, how debased is this term anyways? What tiny slice of the population does it actually apply to today? It's almost impossible to have a concept of intellectualism that transcends ideological boundaries) he's wrestling with stuff that I think is near to the heart of the American experience, which is the Jeffersonian concept of manifest destiny: that God creates this land, and therefore it should be used and employed in this Enlightenment sensibility. Christianity, rationalism and capitalism make a powerful cocktail, and that is to me at least what Bannon is serving (and drinking himself).

>Bannon: "The second form of capitalism that I feel is almost as disturbing, is what I call the Ayn Rand or the Objectivist School of libertarian capitalism…that form of capitalism is quite different when you really look at it to what I call the “enlightened capitalism” of the Judeo-Christian West. It is a capitalism that really looks to make people commodities, and to objectify people, and to use them almost — as many of the precepts of Marx — and that is a form of capitalism, particularly to a younger generation [that] they’re really finding quite attractive. And if they don’t see another alternative, it’s going to be an alternative that they gravitate to under this kind of rubric of "personal freedom." '

>At times, it can be difficult to discern precisely what part of libertarianism Bannon objects to. He evinces admiration for “entrepreneurial capitalists,” explaining that he only resents the “corporatist” rich, whose wealth derives from rents secured via the government. And his vision of economic utopia — a “harder-nosed” capitalism where the market is truly free from government distortions like the Export–Import Bank — is identical to that of Rand acolytes like the Koch brothers.

>But in other moments, he expresses skepticism about libertarianism’s idolatry of the market, and suggests that the economic sphere cannot be separated from the moral one in a truly Christian nation.

>Bannon: So I think the discussion of, should we put a cap on wealth creation and distribution? It’s something that should be at the heart of every Christian that is a capitalist — “What is the purpose of whatever I’m doing with this wealth? What is the purpose of what I’m doing with the ability that God has given us, that divine providence has given us to actually be a creator of jobs and a creator of wealth?”

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/why-steve-bannon-hates-paul-ryan.html

Paul Ryan is in this situation as well. He likes some parts of Rand, but rejects her atheism. Bannon is a militant Christian who rejects Rand, but perhaps not for the same reasons that Ryan would. Whether people think Bannon is an intellectual or not (and again, who cares?), it's hard to deny that these aren't very big historical narratives in conflict.

>>9086796
Bannon is a master of obfuscation, literally nobody has any idea what he's thinking. Breitbart employs a similar tactic, despite being staffed almost entirely by Zionist Jews they regularly get accused of being neo-Nazi and anti-Semite.

>political adviser has read a few books

woah.... o_0

Today the Atlantic released a brief rundown on nrx. Nick Land was reached for comment. It will be interesting to see where nrx goes from here. The philosophy has been stuck inside its own version of an ivory tower up until now.

>>9086820

when he starts writing some, then you can run for the hills

>>9086851
"nrx" literally doesn't exist, its just shit Land invented to save his dying career.

>>9086820
in america, this is exceptional.

>>9084193
>Deleuze
Will no one rid me of these meddling continentals?

>https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/10/world/europe/bannon-vatican-julius-evola-fascism.html?_r=0

Meme magic authors in the White house everyone.

File: 1485998072294.jpg (178KB, 960x1234px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 960x1234px

> thinking Bannon is anything but a regular neo-con

I'm struggling to figure out which camp was more delusional, Trump or Hillary supporters?

>>9086851
>White House chief strategist Steve Bannon has been in contact via intermediaries with Curtis Yarvin, Politico Magazine reported this week. Yarvin, a software engineer and blogger, writes under the name Mencius Moldbug. His anti-egalitarian arguments have formed the basis for a movement called “neoreaction.”

>The main thrust of Yarvin’s thinking is that democracy is a bust; rule by the people doesn’t work, and doesn’t lead to good governance. He has described it as an “ineffective and destructive” form of government, which he associates with “war, tyranny, destruction and poverty.” Yarvin’s ideas, along with those of the English philosopher Nick Land, have provided a structure of political theory for parts of the white-nationalist movement calling itself the alt-right. The alt-right can be seen as a political movement; neoreaction, which adherents refer to as NRx, is a philosophy. At the core of that philosophy is a rejection of democracy and an embrace of autocratic rule.

>The fact that Bannon reportedly reads and has been in contact with Yarvin is another sign of the extent to which the Trump era has brought previously fringe right-wing ideologies into the spotlight. It has brought new energy into a right that is questioning and actively trying to dismantle existing orthodoxies—even ones as foundational as democracy. The alt-right, at this point, is well-known, while NRx has remained obscure. But with one of the top people in the White House paying attention, it seems unlikely to remain obscure for long.

>Yarvin’s posts on history, race, and governance are written in a style that is detached and edgy, to say the least. “What's so bad about the Nazis?” he asked in a blog post in 2008, writing, “we are taught that the Nazis were bad because they committed mass murder, to wit, the Holocaust. On the other hand... (a): none of the parties fighting against the Nazis, including us, seems to have given much of a damn about the Jews or the Holocaust. (b): one of the parties on our side was the Soviet Union, whose record of mass murder was known at the time and was at least as awful as the Nazis'.”

>“It should be obvious that, although I am not a white nationalist, I am not exactly allergic to the stuff,” Yarvin wrote in 2007. In a 2009 post about the Scottish philosopher Thomas Carlyle’s defense of slavery, he argued that some races are more suited to slavery than others.

File: aecb1ba607d0aa4ae64018e3e9e0f529.jpg (251KB, 1375x1000px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1375x1000px

>>9086818
That's basically it. And Trump has made obfuscation his official stance: 'I don't want our enemies to know what I'm thinking.' He understands how media works. It's why he declined the Fox debate. It's a survival tactic in a hostile environment, but it's a sad state of affairs when that environment is perceived as hostile rather than fair and impartial.

Jon Stewart exposed this on CNN years ago, saying that the Crossfire guys were both being partisan hacks who were hurting America, because you got the appearance of debate without actual debate. This kind of stuff is going on everywhere. One side produces a one-sided article, the other side responds by calling out the first in an equally one-sided fashion. It's the age of triggering, and all of that copy sells. Being inflammatory works because it gets hits and attention. The problem is that you wind up producing a kind of media that just reiterates political metanarrative to those who are interested in consuming it. And, worse, you justify the worst counter-attacks from the other side by sticking to your own guns and doubling down on your own position. Things become recursive.

It's very hard to get impartial news in an age of rampant cynicism, solipsism, and dishonesty. I would call this kind of stuff the discourse of the sphinx: you ask or present a loaded question, knowing that every possible answer you might receive will be wrong, and then punish accordingly. The records of these punishments then make up your evening copy or YouTube clips.

Rather than accusing or framing people as enemies or hypocrites, what is required is an actual engagement with the position of the other side: steelmanning rather than strawmanning. To continue the analogy, if the riddle can't be solved, then perhaps it can at least be extrapolated to the point where it ceases to be a riddle and becomes a claim that is then sufficiently open for debate in a genuine sense and not an infinite back-and-forth of obscurantism, willful misinterpretation, defensiveness, hostility, and so on.

But you can see how difficult this can be. Listen to Harris' podcast with Omer Aziz ('The Best Podcast Ever') and watch how hard he has to work to try to get his interlocutor to come to the bargaining table. People need to be right more than they need to be intellectually honest.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zy3dIwtqZaA

>>9086884
>Yarvin’s blog has been mostly inactive since 2014. He now is focusing on a startup, Urbit, whose investors reportedly include Paypal co-founder and Trump backer Peter Thiel. (Thiel has himself questioned some of the fundamentals of American politics, writing in 2009, “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.”)

>For a group of people whose writings tend towards the verbose, neoreactionaries don’t show much interest in talking to reporters. Yarvin declined to cooperate when I reached out to ask about his alleged contact with Bannon, instead choosing to try to troll me into believing a Twitter user called @BronzeAgePerv is his contact with the White House.

>“Think you should speak directly to my WH cutout / cell leader,” Yarvin said in an email. “I've never met him and don't know his identity, we just DM on Twitter. He's said to be ‘very close’ to Bannon. There are several levels, but most people just start out with his public persona.” @BronzeAgePerv’s avatar is of a muscular, shirtless man and his account’s biography reads: “Steppe barbarian. Nationalist, Fascist, Nudist Bodybuilder! Purification of world. Revolt of the damned. Destruction of the cities!”

>“I know nothing about BAP personally, except that he lifts. DM him. He may not give you any info but he always responds,” Yarvin said. “Apparently there's a big underground movement of right-wing bodybuilders -- thousands. Their plan is to surface spectacularly this April, in a choreographed flash demo on the Mall. They'll be totally nude, but wearing MAGA hats. Goal is to intimidate Congress with pure masculine show of youth, energy. Trump is said to know, will coordinate with powerful EOs…” Yarvin denied to Vox that he has been in any contact with Bannon.

>>9086890
>"Appreciate the message,” came the response from the Hestia Society, which is one of the newer NRx hubs. “Unfortunately, we prefer not to do interviews. Neoreaction.net might have more of what you're looking for.”

>"Thanks for the email,” wrote Hadley Bishop, the editor of Social Matter, another node of NRx online thinking. “Social Matter does not give interviews. We’ve said everything we would like to say at neoreaction.net.”

>"No,” said Nick Steves, the pseudonym used by one NRxer well-known within the movement. “It will only lend false credence to the misleading facts and outright errors you will inevitably print irrespective of my involvement.”

>Asked what he thought I would print, Steves explained that “115 IQ people are not generally well equipped to summarize 160 IQ people” and that only one journalist, Vox’s Dylan Matthews, had “come close to permitting NRx to speak for itself.”

>“You DO understand that, by the NRx view, journos occupy a major seat of power, viz. manufacturers of consent, in the current structure,” Steves said. “Thus you see why you are the enemy. No hard feelings of course. I'm sure you're a very nice person. But politics is war by other means, and war is, by definition, existential.” (Steves has written a “code of conduct” for neoreactionaries that includes the rule, “Don’t talk to the press about Neoreaction.”)

File: 10.jpg (90KB, 797x598px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 797x598px

> Bannon, the Dark Enlightenment

LITERALLY neo-liberalism made appealing to /pol/tards and misc. declinists

How is this not apparent to everyone? Why is everyone acting like they're retarded?

>>9086796
When Reagan came to power, how easy, or not, was it to interpret his new doctrine ?

Was it ground shaking as the doctrine of Steve "wearing a black shirt under my shirt" Bannon ?

how were the people reacting ?

I'm trying to know if this Bannon intellectual environment is really a new consistent doctrine that is surfacing, or is "NRx techno-comm" amateurish gibberish that is put in front of us only because a "black swan event" happened (election of the donald), otherwise that stuff that would not be discussed at all

I just don't know

And to all the dudes like "I saw that coming and was reading Motdgbul stuff since the beginning" : the team you support winning a game doesn't make you a genius or good at predicting the next game

Excuse my poor english

>>9086897
>So, on to neoreaction.net, which states up front that “Neoreaction is a political worldview and intellectual movement based largely on the ideas of Mencius Moldbug.”

>The worldview espouses an explicitly authoritarian idea, a rejection of the post-Enlightenment vision of a world that is continually improving as it becomes more democratic. Per the website’s authors:

>The core of our problem is that there is no one with the secure authority to fix things. The core of our solution is to find a man, and put him in charge, with a real chain of command, and a clear ownership structure.

>Real leadership would undertake a proper corporate restructuring of USG: Pardon and retire all employees of the old regime; formalize obligations as simple financial instruments; nationalize and restructure the banks, media, and universities; and begin the long slow process of organic cultural recovery from centuries of dysfunction.

>Who will be the leaders? Well:The only viable path to restoration of competent government is the simple and hard way:

>Become worthy.
>Accept power.
>Rule.
>Neoreaction’s touchstones include the Scottish philosopher Thomas Carlyle, a key progenitor of the “Great Man” theory of history; the Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek, a central influence on the American libertarian movement; and Bertrand de Jouvenel, a 1930s-era French political theorist.

>Neoreaction is an ideology obsessed with both the mechanics of power and autocratic governance, and with aesthetics. Some neoreactionaries have a Tumblr devoted to their aesthetic vision, called Post-Anathema. The images tend to be futurist and hyper-masculine; soldiers with guns, tanks, spaceships, Greek gods. Cathedrals, too, a seeming reference to the Catholic traditionalist strain of the movement (“CRx”) and which, intentionally or not, calls to mind Moldbug’s use of “the Cathedral” to denote the elite academic and media establishment.

>>9086911
>If it’s a little in the weeds compared to the by-now-familiar alt-right aesthetic—Pepe the frog, fashy haircuts, and the like—that’s on purpose. Neoreaction is explicitly and purposefully opaque, and has no interest in appealing to a wider audience. This puts it at odds with some of the alt-right or “new right” leaders who seek to take their ideas mainstream.

>"NRx was a prophetic warning about the rise of the Alt-Right,” said Nick Land, the English philosopher whose Dark Enlightenment series is considered a foundational neoreactionary text. “As a populist, and in significant ways anti-capitalist movement, the Alt-Right is a very different beast to NRx.”

>“The Alt-Right, I guess, is a 'movement'––NRx isn't,” Land said in an email when asked about how influential NRx is at this point. “As far as influence is concerned, it's still probably a little early to tell. I think it's fair to say that early signs are surprisingly NRx-positive. That's to say, the libertarian themes of the administration (de-regulation, appointments that "question the very existence of their own departments ...) are far stronger than might have been expected from the Trump election platform. Also, Steven [sic] Bannon is looking far less of an Alt-Right sympathizer than had been suggested (‘Judeao-Christian’ is a term that gives them the hives, even if his defense of Capitalism is far more hedged than NRx ex-libertarian types would see as ideal).”

>>9086918
>Nick Land says Bannon has never reached out to him. “I have no reason to think he is familiar with my work.”

>Bannon, the former chairman of Breitbart News, a site which under his tenure wrote indignantly about Yarvin being barred from a programming conference, didn’t respond to requests for comment. Of course, his reported contact with Moldbug isn’t the only sign of his radical vision; in public statements over the years, he has described a view of a world undergoing nothing less than a clash of civilizations, featuring a struggle between globalism and a downtrodden working class as well as between the Islamic and Western worlds.

>The hiring of Michael Anton, a former George W. Bush speechwriter, to serve on the National Security Council staff is another indicator of this White House’s openness to decidedly non-traditional ideas on the right. Anton was recently revealed by The Weekly Standard as the writer behind Publius Decius Mus, the pseudonym Anton used for a widely circulated essay in September titled “The Flight 93 Election.”

>In “The Flight 93 Election,” Anton compared the American voter’s choice in November 2016 to that of the passengers on Flight 93 on September 11. “2016 is the Flight 93 election: charge the cockpit or you die,” Anton began. “You may die anyway. You—or the leader of your party—may make it into the cockpit and not know how to fly or land the plane. There are no guarantees.” The essay is a bracing middle finger to conservatism, written with verve, and it inspired a critique on the NRx site Social Matter by the pseudonymous writer PT Carlo, who liked the essay except for one thing. “The only problem with Decius’ radical and brilliant analysis isn’t that its assessment of the situation is incorrect, but that its prescriptions aren’t nearly radical enough,” Carlo wrote. (The reaction among movement conservatives was much less enthusiastic. “Grotesquely irresponsible,” wrote National Review’s Jonah Goldberg. “A shoddy straw man,” offered Ben Shapiro.)

>Anton, before his unmasking, was identified by The New Yorker as one of the intellectual architects of Trumpism; The Huffington Post on Wednesday highlighted some of his more controversial writings, such as a defense of Charles Lindbergh’s America First Committee as “unfairly maligned” and an assertion that “Islam and the modern West are incompatible.” Anton has also argued that diversity is “a source of weakness, tension and disunion.”

>>9086931
>In a way, it is Moldbug who presaged Trump more than anyone else, in his writings defining his “neo-cameralist” philosophy based on Frederick the Great of Prussia’s “cameralist” administrative model. In 2007, Moldbug outlined a kind of corporation-state being run as a business: “To a neocameralist, a state is a business which owns a country. A state should be managed, like any other large business, by dividing logical ownership into negotiable shares, each of which yields a precise fraction of the state's profit. (A well-run state is very profitable.) Each share has one vote, and the shareholders elect a board, which hires and fires managers.” Moldbug even envisioned a kind of CEO at the top: “The personality cult of dictatorship is quite misleading - a totalitarian dictator has little in common with a neocameralist CEO, or even a cameralist monarch.”

>In Moldbug’s absence, new NRx nodes have sprung up: Hestia, Social Matter, and Thermidor. The post-Moldbug neoreactionaries still draw on his foundational writings, but the movement is morphing and splintering, and characterized by a conflict between nationalists and “techno-commercialists.” There is, as well, a history of mutual distrust between some alt-right and NRx figures.

>NRx doesn't think the Alt-Right (in America) is very serious. It's an essentially Anti-Anglo-American philosophy, in its (Duginist) core, which puts a firm ceiling on its potential,” Land said. “But then, the NRx analysis is that the age of the masses is virtually over. Riled-up populist movements are part of what is passing, rather than of what is slouching toward Bethlehem to be born.” (By “Duginist,” Land was referring to the ideas of the controversial Russian political scientist Aleksandr Dugin.)

>Through a friend, I connected with @kantbot2000, a NRx-connected tweeter who was willing to talk over Twitter direct message. (Kant as in Immanuel.)

>Kantbot complained that NRx is dead. “Visit the social matter forums, its an inactive scene,” he said.

>“The European New Right stuff that [Alt-Right leader Richard] Spencer peddles is secondary to the impulse given to the altright by Moldbug and the other [techno-commercialists],” Kantbot wrote. “That impulse stresses good governance over ideological consideration. Good governance perhaps consisting of the dismantling of progressive institutions.”

>“Moldbug is still very active,” Kantbot said. “More so than he lets on.” Kantbot said Moldbug is “reading comments, lurking.”

I'm more interested in what's in Trump's library.

File: 29984e0cbcef9fa95c148c20449e8eed.jpg (173KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1920x1080px

>>9086863
Nick Land didn't invent it. Moldbug is the guy. Along with a lot of other guys. Land is the most respectable philosopher in it (which is a strange role for him, because he's as far out on the lunatic fringe of left-intellectualism as can be imagined), but he got to be in that position only because he shot his own academic career in the foot years ago, disappeared to China, and then re-emerged. He brings something to it that nobody else is bringing, which is a veneer of intellectual prestige.

His career was already dead long before NRx. He killed it himself and he probably would do it again. But Moldbug's stuff connects with his, because *all* of these guys are looking at capitalism and politics in ways that mainstream discourse doesn't.

And this leads to some very interesting questions. What happens when the logic of capital begins to undermine the foundations of liberal democracy? How should statecraft take this into account? To what degree is Enlightenment thinking compatible with the logic of consumer societies?

>>9086938
>Under his real name, Yarvin did a Reddit AMA last year about his start-up Urbit, and addressed his Moldbug writings.

>“It's actually quite possible to recognize that human population genetics has a lot of impact on politics and history, and also recognize that human population genetics has nothing at all to do with your individual, personal and professional human relationships. Nor does politics,” Yarvin wrote. He added that he has lots of progressive friends.

>"Would anyone care about the 2016 election if Trump weren't running?” Yarvin wrote. “And Trump is a throwback from the past, not an omen of the future. The future is grey anonymous bureaucrats, more Brezhnev every year.”

>Kantbot began as an atheist Democrat, he said, but grew disillusioned.

>“The only thing outside of that space is conservatism and right-wing movements,” he said. “People like moldbug are going beyond that though, opening up possibilities of new cultural spaces that break out of that stagnant pattern, that can synthesize both progressive and conservative views in new ways.”

>Kantbot warned that I might also be tempted by “the forbidden fruit” of these ideas. “Be careful or you too may be tempted to walk down the dark path of the altright,” he wrote. “This is what thousands of people are taking to the streets to protest. This is the dark intellectual center.”

>>9086939

Barron's selected works Vol. I-XXVIII

>>9086943
>because *all* of these guys are looking at capitalism and politics in ways that mainstream discourse doesn't.

That's false and you're a dumb ass for thinking that.

File: 1423600832548.jpg (175KB, 900x688px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 900x688px

>>9086909
Personally I can't say, and it's likely that none of us were alive when Reaganism was happening. It was a different world; the Cold War was still going on, and the US was winning it, bigly. All that has changed now. We're leaving the era of the single American 'hyperpower' and entering into this new phase, where the US is one among three large powers, and also divided against itself.

>I'm trying to know if this Bannon intellectual environment is really a new consistent doctrine that is surfacing, or is "NRx techno-comm" amateurish gibberish that is put in front of us only because a "black swan event" happened (election of the donald), otherwise that stuff that would not be discussed at all

I think you could say that it's acquiring a consistency from a bunch of different sources. But these are reactions to globalization, 9/11, the Wall Street crash, lots of other things. The Republican party had to be in a state of total disarray before Trump could appear, and now the Democrats appear to be in an equally disorderly place.

Outside of a very small number of DE types, nobody was discussing this at all. But Trump, as you say, was the Black Swan and now a lot of things have been catapulted into the mainstream media.

The combination of tech, capital, consumerism, and so on is changing everything.

>And to all the dudes like "I saw that coming and was reading Motdgbul stuff since the beginning" : the team you support winning a game doesn't make you a genius or good at predicting the next game

I would agree with this.

>>9086969
>I would agree with this.
pretty sure everyone on the DE/Nrx agrees with you two there

>>9086954
depends on what you consider mainstream discourse.

>>9086903
>why is everyone actually discussing things instead of being a reductionist retard
Go away, kanker.

>>9086903
tech-comm and neocameralism is neoliberalism with an edge, in a very simplified way, sure, but some elements of it are completely beyond that, mainly its criticism of liberalism. Neoliberalism still needs concepts like democracy and "liberal values" to support itself. I suppose you can call Nrx as post-liberal neoliberalism, as weird as that may immediately sound.

I mean, Fukuyama certainly wouldnt like anything related to neo-reaction.

>>9086943
>What happens when the logic of capital begins to undermine the foundations of liberal democracy?

The logic of capital is nothing new. Capitalism undermining democracy is nothing new. This is just an aesthetic makeover.

>>9086939
Probably a pretty impressive collection of porno mags

Bannon is a totalitarian in disguise.

The fact that this guy has Julius Evola on his reading list doesn't bode well now that he is national security advisor to the most powerful person in the world.

File: tumblr_ndk0sbjj9R1sgnjg1o1_1280.jpg (103KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 640x427px

>>9086974
Yeah. I mean, it's not like it's a particularly brilliant point. But we're always playing catch-up, in a certain sense. Thus the appeal of the game, I suppose.

>>9086985
>Post-liberal neoliberalism
This makes sense to me. A conservative today can call themselves a classical liberal. Austrian economics is predicated on man being a rational actor, but we know that there is nothing rational about the happiness and pleasure that drives the consumer society (and which in turn drives everything else). Fukuyama's end of history argument still holds, of course; a world of mutually beneficial, free-market, varyingly social-democratic societies is a kind of ideal, provided that it doesn't undermine its own foundations from within: through climate change, through massive inequality gaps, through automation creating huge numbers of obsolescent people, and so on. But you know all this already.

>>9086990
>The logic of capital is nothing new. Capitalism undermining democracy is nothing new. This is just an aesthetic makeover.

Is it really, though? I'll grant you that we know something similar happens in Germany between the wars; the Germans are looking at their destroyed economy, or looking at the need for a first-world power to not be technologically backwards, but at the same time knowing that total subservience to technology is going to be psychologically disastrous for them. Nazism enters in as a kind of a correction: supply a sufficiently powerful mythopoetic vision and you can mobilize people to do virtually anything. You can have technology, but it becomes welded to this idea of the Fatherland and so on. As you would say, it is an aesthetic makeover. But to me at least it's not *just* an aesthetic makeover. Aesthetics are very powerful things, especially in the 'post-truth world.' As the Neetch will say, life is only ever aesthetically justified. And even if he's right that kind of stuff does not bode well for the kind of secular humanism that wants to prevent atrocities and mayhem. I feel that when nation-states receive large aesthetic makeovers it's a sign that things are about to change in big and unpredictable ways.

>>9087072
>triggered tumblerina

>>9087072
Have you even read Evola?

>>9086947
Barron probably is a genius and will have literary and political talents behind our wildest imaginations.

>>9086890
>“Apparently there's a big underground movement of right-wing bodybuilders -- thousands. Their plan is to surface spectacularly this April, in a choreographed flash demo on the Mall. They'll be totally nude, but wearing MAGA hats. Goal is to intimidate Congress with pure masculine show of youth, energy.
wew lad

>>9087125
Yes I have. What's your point?

>>9087180
No homo.

>>9086890
>Their plan is to surface spectacularly this April, in a choreographed flash demo on the Mall. They'll be totally nude, but wearing MAGA hats. Goal is to intimidate Congress with pure masculine show of youth, energy.
Wow who would've guessed that, out of all things, Stalin would be right about faggotry being fascist praxis

>>9087077
And do you really see this aesthetic takeover sweeping the nation? My charge was toward your argument. Not with what we see happening through the Trump administration. Capitalism undermining democracy and vice versa has been our history for the past 200 years or so. What revelation do these thinkers bring to the table that is going to change the common man's mind into giving up his rights for the sake of capitalism that has not already been tried? Another mythopoetic vision of white nationalism? That may hold with the base but then you will have 50% of the country still in revolt against it. I'm all for alternatives to our broken democracy, but a theory built upon by tech and high finance authoritarians is going to have its fair share of self obtuse made inapplicability. And let's not pretend that this (now that it's in the white house) is not where it's going. If the 60s taught liberals anything it's that theory is not always great public policy

>>9087181
Then why would you think it doesn't bode well?

File: tumblr_o8kdc2GmEt1snc8k1o1_1280.jpg (519KB, 683x1024px) Image search: [Google]

519KB, 683x1024px

One other thought, courtesy of the XS comment section:

>The Germans were the last European nation to emerge from feudalism, which is why they are so driven now; they were on a mission to prove their equal worth, and had to work hard to catch up. That driven mission became their governing horizon and default habit. The German masculine ideal is a military man of social obligations; in other words, a good and sensitive soldier.

>The British masculine ideal is an entrepreneurial man, of asocial methodology, socially redeemed by the distribution of that methodology’s profitable results; in other words, the generosity of a pirate.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages.

Does this not make sense? Within whatever it is that we are calling 'reaction,' there are these divergent responses towards what Hitchens is describing in pic related. One (NRx) looking forward as a continuation or extension of the "British" or "maritime" logic, and another (Alt-Right) looking backwards, as a return to "German" or "terrestrial" logic. The idea of 'the Judaeo-Christian West' is predicated on other and deeper strata that don't always connect with each other.

The backwards look is to me the more robust look, but it's also more anti-intellectual: more esoteric, more spiritual. The forwards look is more nuanced, but also more conceptually fragile: Nick Land, Alrenous, whoever.

In an ideal world the kinds of fire and brimstone politics that Bannon espouses would not be necessary; we would just see NRx-style conservatism as a correction or adjustment to the excesses of neoliberal capitalism, and act accordingly: produce better-educated and more competent citizens, more adaptive systems of government, and generally work to preserve the status quo in a more or less utilitarian sense.

(cont'd)

>>9087213
Why do you think? A guy influenced by a pseudo-fascist in the most powerful institutions in the world?

What could possibly go wrong..

>>9087233
In other words you haven't read Evola. Can you fuck off back to Wikipedia now?

>>9087249
Do you have an argument at all?

File: 2479249.png (990KB, 959x720px) Image search: [Google]

990KB, 959x720px

>>9087221

Because this is the situation, as that other wise anon indicated:

>For liberals, as we have seen, the first function of Law is to guarantee a 'just order', which means ensuring the peaceful coexistence of liberties that are inevitably rival, since by hypothesis each is bent on pursuing his or her own particular interest. Hence its fundamental axiological neutrality. Whereas the different traditional forms of Law always took care to articulate their normative work of a foundational moral reference-point (whether this was the word of God, devotion to the common good, popular custom or the natural order), liberal Law sets out to formulate its decisions without ever drawing support from the least value judgement. If it claimed to pronounce what was 'good' or 'evil', i.e. if it claimed to judge in the old sense of the term, this Law would reintroduce into collective existence the ideological positions that always led individuals and groups into violent confrontation. The rationality that liberal Law vaunts is thus essentially calculating and procedural. It has no other use than to maintain the conditions of civil peace ('public order') by bringing back into equilibrium the disorderly movement of opposing liberties, without ever having to question the metaphysical credentials of the demands being made. The strictly positivist character of such a programme is sufficient of itself to explain the ever-growing technicality of the modern legal industry, and the characteristic way in which it now tends to manufacture its norms. As Jacques Commaille asserts, contemporary Law is in constant transition from a 'dogmatic finalist' model (that of traditional Law) to a 'pragmatic-manegerial' model, with business managment providing its most appropiate image.

In that world, Harris-style utilitarianism does make sense as a way of moderating between ideologies and psychological contexts that are necessarily going to be shifting and coming into friction.

>>9087195
>And do you really see this aesthetic takeover sweeping the nation?

I don't know about 'sweeping the nation,' but it's definitely part of the Bannon side of things. My point was that there is this clash of values.

Nothing in a way is capable of sweeping a nation so deeply divided against itself and becoming so entrenched. Conflicting visions of liberalism are going to be messy.

>What revelation do these thinkers bring to the table that is going to change the common man's mind into giving up his rights for the sake of capitalism that has not already been tried? Another mythopoetic vision of white nationalism?

That's what Bannon (and Richard Spencer) is offering. I'm not saying I'm agreeing with it. All I'm trying to do is look at where it comes from and predict where it's going. The fact that it's already been tried doesn't prevent it from happening again; people will revere Hitler as a perennially failed romantic hero. Make America Great Again is a deeply nostalgic sentiment.

(cont'd)

>>9087252
>Evola-inspired advisor is bad news
>Why
>Because
>Go on
>Do you have any argument at all
Is this one of those "Why aren't we 50 points ahead" movements?

>>9087260
Saying I haven't read someone isn't an argument you faggot.

How is an anti-liberal, anti-democratic, pro-monarchist aristocratic, not a pseudo-fascist?

Literally the *ONLY* thing that differentiates absolute monarchy and fascism is the fucking word.

File: 1483944018648.jpg (163KB, 1024x714px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1024x714px

>>9087213
Not that guy but Evola is kind of a big hack. Guenon is a lot better and even still I have problems with him. Even Evola describes himself as being a pleb rabble-rouser while he describes Guenon as the intellectual (it is accurate).

Evola is just not that good. Bannon citing Evola is like the cringe-worthy pandering Hillary Clinton would do on television. Bannon is basically the "How is it going, my fellow reactionary and neo-fascist internet kids?"

Bannon is on record stating his admiration for Sarah Palin's courage and intellect. Wow. It's fucking nothing.

File: 13397042_626537824164610_452562600_o-620x330.jpg (52KB, 620x330px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 620x330px

>>9087195
>I'm all for alternatives to our broken democracy, but a theory built upon by tech and high finance authoritarians is going to have its fair share of self obtuse made inapplicability. And let's not pretend that this (now that it's in the white house) is not where it's going. If the 60s taught liberals anything it's that theory is not always great public policy.

I agree with all of this. I don't think that NRx itself is a kind of a cure or a hot fix for what's going on. I just happen to drift that way because it seems to me that that is where I find the kind of thinking that is able to diagnose the problems of the elephants in the room: technological acceleration, capital accumulation, human obsolescence, and so on. In the absence of anything like a serious Marxist engagement (and I do not want a centrally planned, totalitarian state either), it seems to me necessary to try to think through how capital as a planetary process is going to continue to transform and accelerate the best (and the worst!) aspects of the society in which we live. There are no ideological solutions when ideology is itself the problem.

We should resist single and unifying ideologies and metanarratives. These are incredibly powerful and mobilize people, but they are the fruit of economic as well as psychological forces, and they reproduce themselves mimetically (that is, ideologically). We should know enough about these things in order to see where and how disastrous fault lines are likely to emerge.

But probably there will have to be a lot of global conflict first. The Thirty Years' War was what inaugurated the Enlightenment. Everybody believed in God, but in the end it left Europe a shattered mess. Capitalism was actually introduced as a check on the ambitions of princes, originally; there's some good scholarship on this by Thomas Cavanaugh. I feel like that's where things are heading, if you substitute God for whatever is meant today by the term 'liberalism' or 'Enlightenment' or so on.

So I'm not saying we should abandon these ideas. What I'm saying is that we should abandon the idea that anything other than warfare will be the result of trying to distinguish between truth and falsity rather than truth or deceit. But these are just my own cranky shitposts.

File: 51RMo6P-FlL.jpg (42KB, 324x500px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 324x500px

>>9087286
>Not that guy but
Sure you aren't senpai, me too.

If they had read any of either Bannon or Evola you would know they're the antithesis of each other.

It isn't long, only 272~ pages.

File: distain.jpg (57KB, 373x480px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 373x480px

>>9087272
not that anon, but this must be bait
>using literally unironically
pleb confirmed

File: nopenotanargumenthere.jpg (230KB, 598x792px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 598x792px

>>9087308

File: schath.jpg (22KB, 256x273px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 256x273px

>>9087308
anti-liberal, anti-democratic, pro-monarchist aristocratic is bad don't you know.

File: macdaddy.jpg (50KB, 284x300px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 284x300px

>>9087312
> muh Molyneux

not that guy but read MacIntyre

File: bait_matrix_edition.png (73KB, 618x618px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 618x618px

>>9087312

>>9087314
Not that anon, but how willingly clueless can you be to imagine we're going to have some kind of aristocratic monarchist rebirth in USA because some neocon says "Dude, things are bad LMAO, read Evola!"

USA will have a monarchy? On what planet do you live on?

File: 1jzhmav.jpg (266KB, 2362x1575px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 2362x1575px

>>9087221
I also included the wrong picture in that post, like a dumbass.

File: 21632194_0.JPG?itok=s3xIIm36.jpg (30KB, 785x588px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 785x588px

>>9087321
See
>>9087307

Bannon doesn't want a aristocratic monarchy, the guy is anti-establishmentarianism.

>>9086883
It's the same camp so it doesn't matter

File: 10.jpg (66KB, 350x483px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 350x483px

Still trying to figure out what about Bannon is Evola-esque, or if he's read him at all.

Evola, on Islam:

Finally, Islam presents a traditional completeness, since the shariah and the sunna, that is, the exoteric law and tradition, have their complement not in vague mysticism, but in full-fledged initiatory organizations (turuq) that are categorized by an esoteric teaching (tawil) and by the metaphysical doctrine of the Supreme Identity (tawhid). In these organizations, and in general in the shia, the recurrent notions of the masum, of the double perogative of the isma (doctrinal infallibility), and of the impossibility of being stained by any sin (which is the perogative of the leaders, the visible and invisible Imams and the mujtahid), lead back to the line of an unbroken race shaped by a tradition at a higher level than both Judaism and the religious beliefs that conquered the West.

File: 1484102057348.png (159KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1920x1080px

>>9087332
>the guy is anti-establishmentarianism.

Ah, now I see, THAT explains Trump's cabinet choices!

#notallswamps

>>9087351
>Babbys first election cycle

>>9087332
>Bannon doesn't want a aristocratic monarchy, the guy is anti-establishmentarianism.
Wow really, I didnt know Bannon was opposed to the withdrawal of state support or recognition from an established church, especially the Anglican Church in 19th-century England.

>>9087360
not an argument nor a denial

So can you guys finally shut up about Moldbug and Land?

>>9087369
That's antidisestablishmentarianism. What are you even doing?

>>9087419
You're totally right dude, these pointless Moldbug discussions are distracting us from our hourly "rate my bookshelf" thread.

>>9087297

How do you feel then about a clear ideology already co-opting the NRx then? I'm not trying to be subversive but already- what is it, 3? - prominent bloggers of NRx are allegedly working for the white house, while Bannon claims to be a fan. Do you believe that a small handful of individuals can successfully resist institutions and emerge with Nrx ideology free? I found it fascinating that out of all the figureheads of the movement that were reached for comment in the Atlantic article only Nick Land, the non American, actually responded.

File: das_rite.png (222KB, 555x295px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 555x295px

>>9087442
Here you go, retard. Arrighi was right. RIP Murrican capitalism. China take over is imminent. Trump just got his ass handed to him by China, 3 weeks in.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/10/world/asia/trump-one-china-taiwan.html

>>9087454
>I found it fascinating that out of all the figureheads of the movement that were reached for comment in the Atlantic article only Nick Land, the non American, actually responded.
You shouldn't, Nick Land is the only non-successful "prominent NRx blogger", the guy fucking teaches high school in China.

File: 21785519._SX540_.jpg (70KB, 540x409px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 540x409px

>>9087343
I think he would probably be receptive to him, if only because the revolt against modernity is the original red pill that primes you for ideological counter-programming. It means that you have to pick a side, and he's got the rhetorical skills (and now, the political power) to make a persuasive case for his own. No doubt he finds himself in an unusual position: the cultural revolutionary now suddenly become chief strategist to the President of the United States. That's a situation that would be a mindfuck for anyone.

Reactionary politics are, virtually by definition, reactionary. Since the second world war there hasn't been a far-right administration in power in Europe or in the United States, least of all one which is channeling the Bhagavad Gita as source material. Trump and Bannon wound up in power a lot sooner than either of them suspected, and they're still talking in terms of gnostic warfare and ultranationalism in ways that nobody's heard in the West since the Third Reich.

The other thing is that when you read Guenon on Islam: how is this not basically the same kind of vision that a guy like Spencer has? Traditional roles for men and women, doctrinal unity, esoteric thought and a kind of historical-cultural re-alignment against modernity, a re-absorption of technology under a national or supra-national prerogative. Islam is itself a core set of beliefs or principles, but codifying the cultural prerogatives of a large group of people under a core of beliefs is something that conservative rulers have always done and will continue to do. It's just that keeping up with the Joneses in a technological sense means liberalism, which is where everything comes back to.

In Bannon's case his own vision is also going to be rather deeply divided. It would stand to reason that the 'Judaeo-Christian West' *would include Jews,* but these guys aren't subtle about their disdain for the left, either. I'm kind of surprised nobody has pointed this out yet. But this is why there are rifts between Spencer and Bannon, why Spencer has distanced himself from Trump. Spencer doesn't really matter all that much, apart from the times where he gets punched (and which is a terrible idea, because it feeds their own narrative of victimization). But no doubt Bannon has his own complicated understanding of what he means by these terms.

I hope the world doesn't melt in the process of trying to come to the understanding that people do not always mean what they say or want what they really want. There's nothing that prevents the escalation to extremes with this stuff. But of course I'm just some random anon and I have no real idea.

File: barbara_home_quote.png (288KB, 929x326px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 929x326px

>>9087454
It's a good question. You're hardly being subversive!

To me the best ideology is no ideology, but this is a complicated stance. What we need are less ideological drones and more skilled, competent, valuable people. Also, of course, healthier and more co-operative nation-states working together to co-produce these. To me, and this will no doubt sound naive and dreamy, there is only one human species and one earth. Everything meets at the level of consciousness, the great mystics all say the same things, we all have potentially acrobatic bodies, and so on. Nietzsche himself, in a sense, can function as a kind of an Aristotle in this regard, and I would be just fine if he had a thousand-year reign over philosophy in the way that Aristotle had one over the Middle Ages: Become Who You Are is entirely sufficient as a planetary ethos. With an emphasis on trying to produce more Goethes than Cesare Borgias. Global poverty, climate change, international terrorism, *safe* forms of artificial intelligence are issues that matter for everyone. We can and should have, to my mind, global/holistic perspectives on this stuff. Yes, in a sense, life is all about money, but...there's more to it than that, right?

>Do you believe that a small handful of individuals can successfully resist institutions and emerge with Nrx ideology free?

The drift of NRx thought into the white house is indeed interesting. Nobody is ever really ideology-free: that takes a collective effort. Being ideologically neutral is a kind of achievement, and nobody really gets there on their own. Anybody can radicalize in whatever direction they please. But that's not really answering your question.

The thing with this philosophical transformation (can we call it that?) taking place in the White House is that to me I see it as part of a historical process. The left gets angry about it, and the right gets angry about the left getting angry at it, and so on. The problem is precisely there in this duality and in this division, which is why it is so rancorous: both sides are fighting over the same thing, which is this legacy of American liberalism, the Enlightenment, what it means to be free, be democratic, and so on. Bannonism is co-opting the white house, and NRx was the forerunner to the alt-right. Now that they are actually *in* power, it is distressing to hear people like Bannon continue to speak as essentially revolutionary figures. But of course, this is what Trump campaigned on and what his electorate desires.

When Thiel, for instance, came out in support of Trump, it surprised me (and Thiel is a Girardian, and Girard is one of my absolutely most beloved guys). So some of those things are in some sense hopeful to me. Trump/Bannon rhetoric is incendiary and provocative, but they are part of big, big cycles of history, to my mind.

I was surprised that NL responded as well.

(cont'd)

>>9087610
>Now that they are actually *in* power
They aren't "in power", they indirectly influence the President. Trump isn't some kind of monarch, he certainly has way less power than what Moldbug calls the Iron Polygon.

File: spectrum of consciousness.jpg (241KB, 930x586px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 930x586px

>>9087454

I mean, people say that in the 20C, capitalism is the revolution that succeeded. Underneath this, or bound up with it, is something called liberalism: it's what Z talks about when he says we think of ourselves as not being ideological, because we think all we should do is have fun, maximize our possibilities, and so on. But that *is* our ideology, and moreover, that ideology is a kind of a planetary one. It drives the consumer society, which drives everything. Conservative values want to reign this in - and sometimes this is necessary! - but really there is no higher check or balance on this, which is why I think we have the situation in America today. It's a kind of a class warfare between middle-class individuals (including upper-class individuals with still essentially middle-class sensibilities).

This is why the term 'fascist' is so misleading. Peterson has been dealing with this too. If we eventually come to believe that *any* imposition on our freedoms and self-expression is somehow oppressive or marginalizing, we're going to wind up in some very strange and radical places, looking for scapegoats or playing games of identity politics that lead nowhere except to partisan political theatre which is invariably going to find a target or an enemy to blame.

As flaky as some of this new-age stuff sounds, it's not all that far removed from what Peterson is talking about, either. We need a kind of post-ideological form of conceiving of ourselves as subjects. Peterson likes Jung, but my own sensibilities are formed (more like fossilized, sadly) by a kind of Freudo-Marxism that I think has reached its limits. I completely believe that Lacan is correct, but beyond a certain horizon people need an attitude of radical sincerity rather than radical paranoia. However we achieve that - and more importantly, maintain a kind of equilibrium in that place - is up to us. Petersonian depth psychology, psychoanalysis, Nietzschean/Sloterdijk acrobatics, Stoicism, the Tao, whatever...all of these kind of situate you in the same place. And I think they're mainly compatible with each other in a cosmopolitan sense. The spice must flow, and as long as the spice is flowing (and not just flowing directly and infinitely into Swiss bank accounts or secret companies in Panama) everybody can and should be able to get along.

Ideology is something to be overcome, ultimately, I would say. But as long as you have economic inequalities, technological acceleration going out of control, and so on, people are going to go *backwards* to 20C mass populism to rectify the balance in ways that are hard to argue with.

What I like about Thiel is that he's going to say that there is this dual nature of American exceptionalism: Americans are exceptional in many ways, but they're also exceptionally fat, for instance. The US has always been a land of hope and possibility and even political experimentation. It should remain that way. That's worth defending and protecting.

>>9087454
>>9087610

The thought that NRx thought is going to anything outside of the sphere of spectacle is absurd, Trump's rise to power is bringing us back to 1950s level of conservativeism...which makes him still only just left of center in regards to classical politics. Trump's/Bannons hacks at the problems of globalism are laughable, the government is still bought and paid for by companies and organizations that pull the strings, and the sheer multitude of these companies across the globe and their various distribution systems, power hierarchies, and cross-comparability with international laws ensures that the fundamental problems of bureaucratic technocractic globalism aren't solved and will continue to be externalized to nations. Trump has yet to assume role of CEO of America, he's still just the Republican party's game show host.

>>9087521
>Islam is itself a core set of beliefs or principles
No it's not, it's a totalitarian cult founded because some dude wanted to steal shit and rape kids. A 7th century Scientology.

File: 1473798595736.jpg (3MB, 6000x3773px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 6000x3773px

>>9087637
I don't know about you, but if Steve Bannon is not In Power right now then I don't know what being in power means. He is indirectly influencing the president, but he's doing so from a closer proximity than many, which is why people get so nervous about him. The inauguration speech has Bannon's thumb-prints all over it (the not-so-subtle Bane reference, 'open our hearts to patriotism,' 'God will protect us'...I'm pretty sure it wasn't The Donald writing that.)

True, Trump isn't a monarch, but he's a populist with an electoral base the likes of which the white house hasn't seen in a while. And he's also a complete political outsider who can be expected to rely (as he has said) on the advice of his closest counsel...which, if you're not counting his family, is the Mentat.

It's not like pic related was a monarch either.

File: 300.jpg (44KB, 300x399px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 300x399px

>>9077138'
>/deutsch/ memes in my /lit/

>>9087683

> but if Steve Bannon is not In Power right now then I don't know what being in power means

the federal government is administrative unit, a primary school school board has power over how kids are taught, but do school boards have Power?

DARPA, NSA, and CIA are powerful, DynCorp, Monsanto, and Lockheed are powerful, read about them, then read about who the presidents and their aides listen to, and read about those people

>>9087233
Evola is literally a reactionary hippie, who wants to adopt kids. Not totalitarian in the big-state sense.

>>9087649
Interesting points all around. You do a very good job of articulating an actual humanist appreciation for NRx underneath it's cold surface. Perhaps it's because of your synthesis of it with Jordan Peterson, idk, but you would do well to start a blog. The NRx blogosphere tends to be an uppity little place full of ego. A humanist heart is lacking

>>9087272
Jesus christ, absolute monarchy and fascism have literally nothing to do with each. The historic context for both is entirely different, you can just equate them because they are both authoritarian.

Bannon is kinda weird ideologically. He's not fascist, he's not a classic conservative, he's not a marxist although he can't stop talking about the crisis of capitalism. He invokes judeo-christian values but doesn't seem very interested in actual religion. I'd call him a classic reactionary but there's all these oddities. I guess in that sense he fits in with quirky guys like Evola that never really belonged with anyone.

File: 51-uplIVBEL._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (46KB, 328x499px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 328x499px

>>9087657
> Trump's/Bannons hacks at the problems of globalism are laughable, the government is still bought and paid for by companies and organizations that pull the strings, and the sheer multitude of these companies across the globe and their various distribution systems, power hierarchies, and cross-comparability with international laws ensures that the fundamental problems of bureaucratic technocractic globalism aren't solved and will continue to be externalized to nations

These are all good points.

So one thing that I would like to know: what did Trump say to all of those tech guys and corporate leaders that summoned to Trump Tower the day after taking office? How did that conversation go? Was Silicon Valley really as independent as people thought? They're talking about Calexit now, and that's a part of it. Is that a serious possibility? Time will tell.

My feeling is that he's doing what Xi Jinping is doing in China (and probably what Putin is doing in Russia), when he summoned all those tech guys a couple of years ago. They were both saying, or trying to say, if you want to do business with our people, you have to play by our rules. It was a position that many people thought (and probably continue to think) would be untenable, since the horizons of capital go everywhere. But it worked for China (for now). Arrighi's book on this really good. Business wants to go exploring, crowned heads want to stay put. That brand of nationalistic power politics is the rock to the scissors of multinational corporations; populist leaders can always say, look, you have to do business somewhere, you have to sell to somebody. Trump is already doing this, having fights with ESPN, Kellogg's, whoever. You wouldn't have thought it could be done (certainly I didn't), but if he tweets and somebody's share price drops 8% or whatever, he's showing how the game can be played.

>Trump has yet to assume role of CEO of America, he's still just the Republican party's game show host.

To me Trump is much more than the Republican party's game show host. He is the Republican party, for the time being. If things go well for him, populism will be the way that that side has to campaign for cycles to come (just as anti-populism will be the response from the Democrats). No doubt, he's giving everyone plenty of anti-Trump material to campaign on...but that will only work if he's not successful in what he's doing. The Dow responded more favourably to him than anyone suspected. That tells you something.

What makes all of this crazier of course is also that Bannon and China are squaring up for some kind of confrontation in the South China Sea. I have no idea how the multinationals and other guys are responding to this, or who really in the end benefits from a war...but there's always a logic to this stuff. It's hard to predict, but this is what makes finance and investor guys like Taleb and others the wizards that they are. They see where the politics and economics intersect.

>>9087716
Isn't the whole point of it to be anti-humanist? Humanism is what brought us the modern subject which is arguably responsible for this whole mess of capitalism and modernity. And to me these NRx guys are trying to solve the problem of the modern subject by just getting rid of it (and replacing it with some weird techno-AI shit in the case of nick land?). When you add humanism, the whole project fails, I think?

File: 1395174775001.png (58KB, 200x179px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 200x179px

>>9087491
get the fuck back to /pol/, shareblue, lmao.

>ass handed to him

Trump played a gambit and came up neutral, he acknowledged the status quo for no gain or loss except in terms of losing face in the political kabuki theatre which he clearly doesn't give a shit about. If you're going to mock Trump for being foolish there are a hundred other instances of him making ten times an ass of himself. If we're going to talk politics here please be intelligent about it.

File: ken-wilber-map-20001.jpg (2MB, 2977x1967px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2977x1967px

>>9087703
>do school boards have Power?

Power takes many forms, as well you know. There's cultural capital, intellectual capital, capital capital...and so on. Have you read de Jouvenel? He's not to be missed.

>DARPA, NSA, and CIA are powerful, DynCorp, Monsanto, and Lockheed are powerful, read about them, then read about who the presidents and their aides listen to, and read about those people

I agree. It's all connected. It is in fact so interconnected that you almost can't see the edges or the outsides of it. It's why I'm so opposed to ideology and cynicism in the media, because there's a tendency to obfuscate things for the sake of profit that makes the situation far worse, inhibiting the kind of objectivity and critical perspective that will allow us to make sense of all of this madness. We do need transparency both in government and in the media, but the press has a bad tendency to stack up along party lines. Fortunately we have the internet now, and no end of kick-ass bloggers (some of them insane) who are able to offer illuminating perspectives on this.

I would indeed like to know what those guys are up to as well.

>>9087716
Thank ye sir, that's much appreciated. That I should start a blog is becoming something of a refrain.

I admire Peterson quite a lot. Because it *is* humanism - after Nietzsche, of course, that's not quite the warm and fuzzy concept it used to be - that drives all of this stuff. There's nothing we can do about that: the world is not a matter of indifference to us.

One of the other turning points is, to me, this need to transition away from a kind of continental philosophy which is rooted in criticism and victimization and towards precisely that deeper humanism (knowing, of course, that we know we we are no angels). This is very near to what Peterson talks about, which is developmental psychology and the postmodern individual's search for meaning. Some of these guys go too far, I think, in linking individual development patterns to historical tendencies, but the thrust of the argument was the same: there are patterns of development and growth which human beings follow, and we are stuck at the threshold of the postmodern. We have in that sense a choice whether to revert and go backwards or continue pressing forward. The most important thing about all of this is that at each stage we become convinced, this is it, this is the last one; until we get on to the next one and go, wow, crazy. In some sense it is Hegelian as well...

I don't want to shill because like all wisdom traditions they become pretty flaky as soon as they become fixes or cure-alls (or what Derrida and Stiegler would call, I believe, a pharmakon). That's not the idea. But big deep archetypal patterns of human growth and development mirrored in culture and history? That aid in the development of sane, happy and intelligent world-citizens? Sign me up. Even if it's just to clean the bathrooms and get coffee. I want to be a part of that.

File: china.jpg (525KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 1200x800px

>>9087767
>But it worked for China (for now)

Are you joking. China's job market is volatile, engineers move from position to position or run away to foreign countries for stability. China's increasingly unemployed mass of mainland peasants are thirsty for blood. Whatever models of economic stability you can shoehorn into a description of China are tied to a doomed export economy and its flimsy mob-military. China's labor conditions are terrible. Entire genetic lines are being catastrophically mutated from the environment, work exposure, and psychological factors.

The top Chinese manufacturers are world superpowers only because of their relations to foreign capital. The giants of capital are going to (have already) establish states within states using nations as parasites, and politicians have no bargaining power to change this.

>>9087832

After reading your long posts in these threads and your two pic references to plastic shaman Ken Wilber and others, you're far too metaphysical and the time for that is over, it's also very annoying. Political theoreticians are complacent enough, you need to bring some factual analysis to the table if you want to have a truly valuable discussion, Jung and co. won't save the west anymore than Confucius "saved" China.

File: conan-vs-boba.jpg (466KB, 960x754px) Image search: [Google]

466KB, 960x754px

>>9087809
I actually think this question gets right to the root of things in this new right movement. Nick Land is fine with abandoning humanity, but a guy like Bannon (or Spencer, any number of others) to my mind is going in the opposite direction: they want warm-blooded bodies and plenty of them. If you look at a lot of reactionary/traditional aesthetics, you will see a lot of nature and a lot of women. That's telling you something. The enduring aesthetic of fascism derives its strength from beauty, virility, and strength, just as much as it does from technology and machines. These are emphatically and unapologetically 'phallogocentric,' but my antipathy to Derrida (and admiration for Peterson) derives from the fact that I do not believe a thoroughly or exclusively anti-male or feminist or whatever criticism can disavow these without being extremely uncharitable, even cynical.

The Logos is not an exclusively rationalist phenomenon; it is also a deeply, even primordially, *sacred* one: and that is something that goes even beyond religion. This is what the great depth psychologists and readers and teachers of literature have always known and tried to get to. To some degree, part of the blame for this can be laid on Freud, who finds the Oedipus complex everywhere; and this is what Peterson is responding to, by moving towards Jung. Deleuze and Guattari react in a similar way. As does everyone who invokes Nietzsche.

So I would say that the point is not to be resolutely anti-humanist (although of course this has its merits), but to be pro-humanist in perhaps a more guarded way than previous. You can always make an argument heaping all of the ills of history on the male biological imperative, but where does lead but to a kind of rabid hysteria? We need something better, something more charitable and more unifying, something which is practical and pragmatic. Some part of us that needs to survive depends in the final analysis on romanticism, but fascism is a kind of debased form of that. There are better ways, but they are not ideological. I would say they are both pre-ideological and post-ideological. Ideologues are failed individuals (and many philosophers are failed artists), but no individual is immune from ideology. It's something to be overcome, not something which is supposed to become an instrument of violence. But because ideologies multiply and strengthen when they come into conflict, my own feeling would be that you want to have a society which allows for a kind of *self-disarmament* of ideologies once they outgrow their use, which is in the end I would say nothing more than to provide a sense of stability for the individual, a sense of collective meaning and purpose, stages on a journey towards increasing self-consciousness and other-consciousness.

The pic I have used is, admittedly, ridiculous. But most of my collected tumblr-art is on another PC.

>>9087876
I don't think you necessarily have go full techno if you want to be anti-humanist, if we take humanism in it's historical, rather than psycho-analytic, sense - the portrait wasn't always there, it had to be invented, or rather, be rediscovered first. I don't think we can just take back Pandora's box, but I think it's worth thinking about. I'm a history student and the most powerful class i've ever taken was with this really old professor that had a quite heavy anti-modernist stance, he made me question so many things I just took for granted. Western pre-enlightment society had, in a certain sense, all these things you are longing for by just not really concerning itself with the human individual but rather units and collectives. But then again, going back in that kind of way is no more realistic than going forward and somehow achieving the grand emancipatory project.

File: jd.jpg (62KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 500x500px

>>9087852
>Are you joking...

Did I give the impression that it was the recipe for long-term growth and sustainability? I said it worked, and it is. My point is that strong-arm nationalism *is* a kind of corrective for multinational corporatism. Not a great one, but it is an option. Beyond that who knows? China's economy has been volatile and no doubt the possibility of a war with the US will only exacerbate that. They're not a perfect society, they're trying to balance growth and tech and capital like everyone else. I'm sure they're in for some rocky times ahead.

>After reading your long posts in these threads and your two pic references to plastic shaman Ken Wilber and others, you're far too metaphysical and the time for that is over, it's also very annoying. Political theoreticians are complacent enough, you need to bring some factual analysis to the table if you want to have a truly valuable discussion, Jung and co. won't save the west anymore than Confucius "saved" China.

Fair enough. What I would like to say then, in response (more here: >>9087876) is that 'Saving the West' is a kind of a utopian ideal that I am skeptical about. I won't deny that Wilber has his flaws; surely he does. But I like the position he ends up in, as well as his whole project. It's not unlike Peterson's at all, to my mind. Developmental psychology is not only interesting, I think it's worth paying attention to today. Because there is always going to be the accursed share, resolved in some squandering; and in the end that's something everybody has to find a way to make peace with on their own.

>you're far too metaphysical and the time for that is over, it's also very annoying

For me it's always a good time for metaphysics, but I try not to be annoying about it. In the end I just don't think metaphysics are something that people can escape from. Telling people to 'get real' always raises my hackles: it's a way of shutting thought down instead of opening it up. Peterson is right, in that if you cannot speak, your choices are to fight or submit. On the current trajectory of things, it looks like Fight is getting the most votes. I'm skeptical about the outcome, but everyone's free to wear sunscreen.

Get rid of metaphysics and you lose the dialogue. Once that happens it's time to start stockpiling ammo. True, sometimes you have to fight. I get that. But the big fights always come back to the war of ideas in the end, and to me the concept of a 'war of ideas' is at some level contradiction in terms.

I'm not a hysterical pacifist. But there is no intellectual Darwinism, to my mind. The cockroaches and the rats and the bacterium that can live in volcanoes survive. All the interesting and complex stuff just dies. True, you get your occasional Ernst Junger. Pic related isn't completely wrong. But the House of Wisdom gets sacked by the grandson of Ghengis Khan Because Reasons. It's hardly heroic; it's a fucking waste of people, wealth, and literature.

>>9087824
>Trump played a gambit and came up neutral
> of losing face in the political kabuki theatre which he clearly doesn't give a shit about

Jinping owns him now. They played a game of chicken and Trump backed down first. Xi looked him in the eyes and Trump stared at his shoes. Good luck in the "south china sea" showdown.

China no fuck around, but they are laughing at U.S.

>>9087947
>Good luck in the "south china sea" showdown.

Japan has a better navy than China, current US forces in the area combined with Taiwan defense forces alone could take the Chinese navy, Trump is playing the long game with China

>>9087947
>Good luck in the "south china sea" showdown.
What did he mean by this?

>>9086818
If this is true then the irony of /pol/s affiliation to Breitbart is sublime.

>>9088080
Wait till you you see 10s of 1000s of chinese drones blot out the sun.

>>9088226
China is building naval bases in international and foreign waters in the South China Sea, and it's likely that the US will intervene at some point. The winner of that conflict will gain hegemony over Southeast Asia for the following several decades.

File: 1484924726294.png (1MB, 2332x1232px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2332x1232px

>>9088349

File: tumblr_njrr66BZFm1tc7hsjo1_1280.jpg (170KB, 736x980px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 736x980px

>>9087941
>the portrait wasn't always there, it had to be invented, or rather, be rediscovered first.

This is actually quite a beautiful thought, one I'd like to try and remember. There's a lot going on in that statement.

Whether we take things from a top-down or bottom-up perspective, whether we look at the individual or the society, whatever, it's the same kind of process going on: looking for a better way to do things. The ultimate working project is the individual themselves, and the society in which they live. So while on the one hand there is this need to be aware of our own actions, there is also no consciousness of self which is not at the same time consciousness of the other. I think there is a way of striking a kind of a balance between these, but it depends on both this idea of inventing and re-discovering that 'portrait' you suggest, which is a kind of simultaneous backwards and forwards motion.

In the end, there really is nothing superior to that concept of the grand emancipatory project. This is, in a sense, pure Hegel (and I'm not a Hegel guy). Historical consciousness has probably rendered many people paralyzed, in some sense, by the disastrous failures of utopian social projects. And that of course is not a terrible thing; those are valuable historical lessons. But in the absence of something that feels worth striving for, it's very difficult to live and kind of bear up under the weight of things.

Probably the right thing to do today, for that reason, is concentrate on the individual; certainly this is what Peterson says (and Nietzsche!). I get personally rather hung up on mimesis and ideology because 'individualism' is, I think, itself an ideology - this is all Zizek - that kind of skates over the most important aspects of being an individual, which is not in fact enjoyment but *suffering,* and suffering for an ideal. Or, as Joseph Campbell would say, it's not always about following your bliss but following your blisters. These guys all seem to sort of say the same things.

Being lazy, I prefer to throw around helpful advice about what other people should do, rather than look after my own rather small and unimportant stuff; it's more exciting and interesting to get caught up in the grand struggle to save Western civilization. But you've given me something really interesting to think about - the concept of the ever-invented/rediscovered portrait - so cheers, anon.

Pic not related, but it is a portrait, the age of sail is dope as fuck and nautical fiction rules.

>>9088349
>>9088406

It's pretty simple to understand if you don't see /pol/ or the alt-right as a monolithic bloc. I love how we're not supposed to lump all Muslims together into one basket of savages but it's okay to do that to white conservatives of a certain bent.

It's not like the alt-right has a yearly convention that votes on membership and policy.

>>9087767
>If things go well for him, populism will be the way that that side has to campaign for cycles to come (just as anti-populism will be the response from the Democrats). No doubt, he's giving everyone plenty of anti-Trump material to campaign on...but that will only work if he's not successful in what he's doing. The Dow responded more favourably to him than anyone suspected. That tells you something.

I was reading some article today, I believe it was on The Hill, and it talked about how some Democrats have begun to consider Trump as a great recruitment tool. This is especially the case with the immigration issue. It might work for the 2020 election, depending on what Trump does and just how history unfolds, but I can't believe this is a viable long-term strategy for the Democrats, because the pro-mass immigration wing is growing increasingly vocal and taking increasingly extreme positions, which are bound to alienate not just white people, but large numbers of all American citizens. Mexican-Americans may feel that illegal immigration is in part a racial issue (and it is for white nationalists, at least) and may have sympathies towards it due to a family member who lives or came illegally, but as generations start to put root down in the US, many will quickly realize that an "open borders" policy, with no immigration caps and little room for national security as a counterweight, will just result in them, their children, and their grandchildren being replaced by poor migrants from other parts of the world. They came to the US for a better life not only for them, but also for future generations of their family.

The Democrats will continue to cast it as a racial or xenophobia issue, with perhaps some success over the next 4 years and in the 2020 election, with talk about how changing demographics will "finally end white and/or Christian supremacy", but that narrative will eventually fracture as immigrant groups cease to think of themselves as "immigrants", first and foremost, and start to focus on other considerations. This effect could be exacerbated by automation, too.

>>9088406

Very succinct coverage, (((Kestenbaum))).

This is journalism we need!

>>9085903
The threads are a reflection of the recent and concerted attention his thought has received from the establishment liberal groupthink bubble e.g. Politico, NYT, Atlantic, and Buzzfeed all over the past couple of days. If you actually read Bannon himself it's pretty clear he wants to avoid the limelight as much as possible

>>9086796

>Even if Bannon isn't an "intellectual" (and honestly, how debased is this term anyways? What tiny slice of the population does it actually apply to today?

The anon on this board deriding him on this front and implying that he isn't are actual and legitimate pseuds themselves.

Remember that the median age of posters here is something like 22 years old.. Remember that.

>>9087492
No he doesn't. And the guy is internationally known in philosophical circles.

>>9088632
It isn't actually about age, urban folk have way more free time but spend little of it outdoors so they naturally gravitate towards reading; liberals have a lot of trouble accepting the concept of a conservative intellectual.

>>9088598
I never said it was all of /pol/ but it does feature there, besides a lot of the comments on Breitbart's website are heavily antisemtic as well.

>>9088626
Even if that's true, it doesn't change the fact that he's a fucking lunatic.

>>9088626
I thought these threads were more of a reaction against the increasingly obvious Shareblue activity on /lit/ recently honestly.

>>9088609
Yes. Fucking exactly this, and very well said. Immigration and border security shouldn't be hot-button issues that make people explode in rage and fury. A nation-state is still ultimately a super-organism, and the people who live in it have a right as citizens to be productive and reasonably happy, regardless of their skin color.

It's also worth bearing in mind how little the Democrats seemed to have learned from this past election, since they were the ones who had the most blinkered perspectives on all of this. They were convinced that their female candidate and her glass ceiling combined with "Grab 'em by the pussy" and whatever other mud they could sling would swing it for them. And yet women still preferred Trump, because people don't always act or think in terms of the idpol groups they are expected to identify with. Go figure. But still the rhetoric continues, unimpeded. I find it very disingenuous. And it will probably only continue to escalate.

>This effect could be exacerbated by automation, too.
No doubt.

http://nextshark.com/kunshun-factory-robots-replace-humans/

It's economics that matters. Neocameralism makes sense to me (granted, it will not be implemented in our lifetimes) but it also runs up against the problem of the IQ shredder (>>9084272). The more education you require for your population to keep up with the Joneses, the longer you put off having children and the fewer you wind up having, which leads to declining birth rates the need for increased immigration. We can all conceptualize of a dynamic and self-sustaining, self-replicating system. But few ideals survive the encounter with reality (whatever the fuck that is).

It's not like these are insoluble problems. They are eminently soluble problems, but moreso when they are understood to be pragmatic ones rather than flash-points for conflicts of ideas that are rooted in thousands of years of intellectual history and ideology. Which, sadly, they presently are.

>>9088632
Good point.

>>9086985

>tech-comm and neocameralism is neoliberalism with an edge

More like a politico-philosophical completion of palaeo-libertarianism.

>>9087077

The free market is fundamentally incompatible with democracy: democracy and social democracy are synonymous and indistinguishable from Leftward-ratcheted statism.

File: biopower.jpg (196KB, 1296x968px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 1296x968px

>>9088904

the free market fundamentally requires social democracy because the consumer choices of uneducated idiots that fall into monopolistic herds will eventually mirror those predetermined by a state

>>9087321

>Not that anon, but how willingly clueless can you be to imagine we're going to have some kind of aristocratic monarchist rebirth in USA because some neocon says "Dude, things are bad LMAO, read Evola!"

>USA will have a monarchy? On what planet do you live on?

This is basically why we advance neocameralism; resuscitating sacral kingship in America is impossible ergo a world of innumerable small techno-feudal autocracies is our ultimate political objective.

Is it true Steve Miller and Richard Spencer were friends in college?

>>9088967
>Steve Miller
The space cowboy?

I'm so lost with this Rnx/dark enlightenment. where the hell do I start?

>>9087747

>absolute monarchy and fascism have literally nothing to do with each.

Exactly: classical liberalism was fond of monarcho-absolutism. The politico-philosophical synthesis thereof was 'enlightened absolutism' which Moldbug draws inspiration from. Classical liberalism was reactionary and only The French Enlightenment enshrined demotism (thereby corrupting classical liberalism until neoreactionaries rediscovered enlightened absolutism through Hoppe). Libertarian monarcho-absolutism and fascism are on opposing political poles; crucially, both fascism and progressive are variations of demotic ideology.

File: 1234871234.jpg (47KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1920x1080px

>>9089003
Right here.

http://www.thedarkenlightenment.com/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land/

>>9089003
The Greeks

File: ifnb4lyfe.jpg (48KB, 645x282px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 645x282px

>>9086890
>>9087180
>>9087192

>not being a musclenut

>>9089085
I mean Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were reactionaries, at least according to Popper

>kantbot and BAP featured in The Atlantic

Is this the best timeline or what?

>>9086796
I kept misreading Bannon as Barron and thought for a minute that the kid was already a genius level intellect at 10. wew

>>9088988
Trump's speech writer

>>9089003
Start with Moldbug. http://moldbuggery.blogspot.com/2009/03/collected-writings-of-mencius-moldbug.html?m=1
You can dive write in if you want but best place to start would probably be the "Open Letter" or "Gentle Introduction" series. Keep in mind he is very prolific so there's a lot to read. Once you get a good grasp of him read Nick Land's "Dark Enlightenment" essay (alternatively, you can start with this essay as it summarizes parts of Moldbug.) After that, http://hestiasociety.org/bestofnrx.html

File: joan-of-arc.jpg (862KB, 1522x2000px) Image search: [Google]

862KB, 1522x2000px

>>9089259
If at ten years old Barron Trump was redpilled enough to have developed an overriding obsession with the crises of capitalism, the moral imperatives of a Christian nation and the general fate of Western society then you could probably persuade me without much difficulty that he was in fact the second coming of Joan of Arc.

>>9089343
>alternatively, you can start with this essay as it summarizes parts of Moldbug.) After that, http://hestiasociety.org/bestofnrx.html


Fuck that: Hestia are palaeo-reactionaries who egregiously bastardize, misconstrue, misrepresent, desecrate, and otherwise shitify Moldbug. Those imbeciles would now consider what he wrote in 'From Mises To Carlyle' as sacrilegious 'entryism'. Fuck Hestia.

>>9089328

You mean that dude /pol/ meme'd with Gobble's quotes?

>For a group of people whose writings tend towards the verbose, neoreactionaries don’t show much interest in talking to reporters. Yarvin declined to cooperate when I reached out to ask about his alleged contact with Bannon, instead choosing to try to troll me into believing a Twitter user called @BronzeAgePerv is his contact with the White House.
>“Think you should speak directly to my WH cutout / cell leader,” Yarvin said in an email. “I've never met him and don't know his identity, we just DM on Twitter. He's said to be ‘very close’ to Bannon. There are several levels, but most people just start out with his public persona.” @BronzeAgePerv’s avatar is of a muscular, shirtless man and his account’s biography reads: “Steppe barbarian. Nationalist, Fascist, Nudist Bodybuilder! Purification of world. Revolt of the damned. Destruction of the cities!”
>“I know nothing about BAP personally, except that he lifts. DM him. He may not give you any info but he always responds,” Yarvin said. “Apparently there's a big underground movement of right-wing bodybuilders -- thousands. Their plan is to surface spectacularly this April, in a choreographed flash demo on the Mall. They'll be totally nude, but wearing MAGA hats. Goal is to intimidate Congress with pure masculine show of youth, energy. Trump is said to know, will coordinate with powerful EOs…” Yarvin denied to Vox that he has been in any contact with Bannon.

>>9090001
this is hilarious!

>>9090033

I kek'd.

>>9088747
would you say it's a neo-reaction?

>>9088349
>>9088406
The thing is that these right types view Israel as the gold standard of statecraft.

Not only it is a Jewish And Democratic (ethno-)State for the Jews, not only it turns desert into fertile ground by the power of SCIENCE! - but think about it: it's the only country that actually does old-fashioned conquest. And gets away with it.

Hamas' rockets notwithstanding, the Israeli are living the dream.

File: IMG_1527.jpg (72KB, 550x742px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 550x742px

>>9086463

>>9087333
triple three can't lie

File: C4VeBeJVMAEWVD6.jpg (95KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 900x600px

All we need is a futurism for the 21st century...

>>9085903
t. 4th int

>>9090503
Putin's hackers are the cultural marxists of democrat voters

>>9090001
Surprisingly good article. I wonder if being preemptively scolded about inaccuracy made the journalist try hard t prove them wrong?

>>9090001
https://twitter.com/michikokakutani/status/830274541045817344

We live in a world where Michiko Kakutani reads about frogtwitter shitposters in The Atlantic.

File: tumblr_oi3sf3OwMy1soxwgpo1_1280.jpg (96KB, 564x564px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 564x564px

Isn't the atheistic of "NRx" interesting? there doesn't seem to be interconnecting art-style but instead a near total focus on theme.

>>9090951
I've noticed this too. Not being an art guy I don't know how to describe this kind of aesthetic but it's interesting. It doesn't have a defined or consistent style, but there is some kind of aesthetic. But I enjoy the mix of classical with futuristic or sci-fi themes.

I've seen a bunch of more traditionalist or fine art tumblrs, and more cyberpunk/sci-fi tumblrs, but these are somewhere in between.

If you know any other good tumblrs with this kind of style or aesthetic, I'd be interested in seeing them. This seems to be the most popular one with the most NRx style. It seems to be mainly used for headers in articles.

http://post-anathema.tumblr.com

>>9089003
I've started reading Moldbug's blog chronologically here http://www.unqualified-reservations.com/

>>9084245
He basically wants to create a totalitarian state to restore our "glory". We didn't have a gigantic windfall after WWII because of Judeo Christian values, and there's no evidence to believe that a WWIII would take us back to the 50s.

File: 1486322225481.png (775KB, 824x684px) Image search: [Google]

775KB, 824x684px

>>9091057
There's also "fashwave", plenty of that.

File: 1486820604763.jpg (24KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x480px

>WE ARE THE SEX ORGANS OF THE ROBOTS

Did Alex go full Landian in this interview?

File: 623bfb0fc98ae74fe614062d5a5e2ffbb63c3465.jpg (169KB, 736x490px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 736x490px

>>9091173

Good call, that stuff is interesting too.

And you're right, it's a totally different look. None of the fine art or classical stuff. Just a whole lot of love for the 1980s.

File: karsh-portrait.jpg (43KB, 457x336px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 457x336px

>>9091257

I never realized how much it was actually Marshall McLuhan who says a lot of this stuff first. Even before Land, Baudrillard...

>Man becomes, as it were, the sex organs of the machine world, as the bee of the plant world, enabling it to fecundate and to evolve ever new forms. The machine world reciprocates man's love by expediting his wishes and desires, namely, in providing him with wealth.

>Once we have surrendered our senses and nervous systems to the private manipulation of those who would try to benefit from taking a lease on our eyes and ears and nerves, we don't really have any rights left. Leasing our eyes and ears and nerves to commercial interests is like handing over the common speech to a private corporation, or like giving the earth's atmosphere to a company as a monopoly.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan

>>9085711
Obama admin may have played a role, but that's also when Moldbug started writing.

>>9085711
It sounds like he's try to see power from every possible angle: military; intelligentsia; media; financial; and now office. I'd pay a handsome penny for his autobiography.

>>9090001
That fucking Moldbug wit desu

File: %7B2E90C5FC-02EB-4F19-83C0-391D313BADDF%7DImg100.jpg (60KB, 510x680px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 510x680px

>>9091340
>Obama admin may have played a role
It absolutely did, he makes it obvious in his documentary generation zero.

>>9091383
Makes the causes of his private change of heart obvious? I'm legitimately asking: I haven't seen the doc.

>>9089027
I just read the Land NRx essay and while I find it interesting how he combines so many influences that should contradict each other it makes no fucking sense to me in many parts. He spends all this time whining about the state but is too pussy to actually abolish it - he thinks some kind of zombie apocalypse or some weird techno event horizon is more likely. Fucking really? Aren't you a reactionary that's sceptical of the enlightment? Humans did fine for thousands of years without the modern state. He spends so much time analyzing this state-ideology but really, he's so taken in by it that he can't think of an alternative. His techno-fetish would make much more sense in the context of some kind of techno-anarchism (which I think he was into before he went insane?), there's nothing that intrinsically connects it to this half-assed reactionary (I'd like to see an reactionary movement that ditches capitalism) movement, it just feels tacked together.

Steve Bannon is a goy who KNOWS, and that's what makes him dangerous

>>9091492
>Humans did fine for thousands of years without the modern state
But the groups who succeeded in prevailing over all the others tended to have something like it

>>9091502
I would argue a vague "state-like" construct is not the same as the modern national state. The state apparatus didn't really evolve until the national state of the 18th/19th century. In the HRE, sovereigns first took an interest in expanding state power around the time of the reformation but they literally couldn't because they barely had an apparatus big enough to control their local residience.

>>9091538
To illustrate this point, I know from a class I took on the 16th century HRE that the sovereign of the Mark Brandenburg had five people dedicated as a kind of executive, to deliver messages and to control things. Five people for hundreds and hundreds of kilometers of territory. The sovereign didn't even have a standing army to enforce things, he had to ask his aristrocrats for militaric help or hire mercenaries.

>>9091538
No, I don't think you're as good at thinking as you might like to believe, but I can see the energy is there; you feel the need to sequence arguments and that's healthy. You've got a good chance yet of noticing your contradictions and pushing the frontier to dark-thought. I'd rec a gentle introduction to unqualified reservations - maybe even skip to the heavier stuff about human biological groups.

>>9091573
How about you argue instead of being all smug? But then again, the text you recommended unironically is even more smug and ironically uses the matrix red pill meme. At least Land can still properly write despite being clinically insane.

>>9088626
Establishment Journos are a sheltered class of people who live on twittter and are totally detached from reality, seriously some of the dumbest people around, they are just being fed memes by 4chan teens by this point.

>>9090834
>tfw 4chan is now the wellspring of World Civilisation

>>9085903
On the one hand there's some blatant shilling/damage control regarding portraying Bannon as some kind of intellectual: "donald may be an idiot but Bannon has some brains.....so it'll be ok"..... to pretend that organizations like brietbart don't take more then a passing interest in sites like 4chan, especially /pol/, would be naive.

On the other hand these threads act like a containment thread which is good.

Anyhow, sage.

>>9092166
>When you say "sage" but you really want to bump the thread

>>9092182
Ooops

>>9091257

Joe said that.

Jones believes the modern world is largely made by an invasive species that gives us off world technology.
This is extremely Lovecraftian and I'm afraid it's the truth.

>>9092336
I think it's the opposite. If there is an invasive species, they leech off of the technology that we create. Except in certain circumstances.

I'm allied with the view that God is real though, so this force, or forces, would have to be with Satan.

File: Ex-Machina.jpg (2MB, 4860x2470px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4860x2470px

>>9091675
Hey, I'm the anon who actually recommended that text in the first place.

Your comments on it are good, and hats off to you for reading the whole thing. In terms of abolishing the state, that's an interesting question for Land. It's why I think he prefers neocameralism, because it's the political form most amenable to capital and business deals that advance technology (which advances, admittedly, whether we like it or not). For all of his misanthropy, he is an accelerationist; he wants tech to hurry up and get where it's going, and I think that is his answer to a lot of social problems that he sees. Getting rid of capital is not for him an option, because it would be tantamount to getting rid of tech progress. And because that tech runs (I am extrapolating here to some degree) on the internal logic of consumption, we basically consume our way towards the future.

There is for me kind of an interesting intersection between him and Zizek, which is why I like reading them both. The whole legacy of Freudianism says that your desires go first; to some degree this is there in Heidegger also. This is what makes up ideology: anxiety, pleasure, jouissance. Zizek, being a Hegelian and still kinda-sorta a communist, thinks that some form of radical leftist politics can be founded on these insights; Land prefers Deleuze and does not arrive at the same conclusions. But in their thought they are both quite near to each other. Land does not do critique of ideology because for him the only ideology that makes sense is a sort of inhuman one; your desire to enjoy does come from something outside of you, and for Land that thing is something like the essence of technology itself, which is steadily unfolding as we feed it with our desires. Not unlike, in a sense, aspects of pic related.

So reaction *is* in a sense a movement that ditches capitalism; it's just in the inverse sense that the Marxists understood it (and NL is important reading in this regard, because he is like the William Weir of Marxist thought). Landian reaction ditches the classical Marxist concept of capital without ditching capital itself; instead, it doubles down on it as a kind of historical imperative, and for accelerationists this would perhaps be the only historical imperative.

>>9091538
>>9091564

That 'state-like' construct is to me analogous to neocameralism, but perhaps you have something else in mind. It's worth thinking about. This whole question of how reconcile political sovereignty and some question of self-determination within the capitalist system is important. Reaction is counter-Marxism, but it preserves certain fundamental notions of Marxist (and perhaps even poststructural) thought. So the state remains, and would ideally preserve those aspects of social democracy that I like. But it would probably need a sovereign head to go along with that body.

>>9086903
>LITERALLY neo-liberalism
No. Right wing populism, neoconservatism, the "alt-right" etc, are reactions, symptoms, of neoliberalism, but not really neoliberalism themselves.

They're not fully in control, they don't act according to the neoliberal logic, but they sure are more beneficial to capital than a true revolt would be, and often the old populist becomes a tool of the neoliberal elite once the old populist is in power. It has happened in some European countries: the "revolt" of the populists is first successful, they secure plenty of support, but when they hold office, they form coalition governments with the old right and basically just merge there. They're just like the old conservatives or liberal capitalists, just in ill-fitting suits and with certain forms of rhetortic.

But still, neoliberals don't want these people. Just look at the media; how it, for the most part, is fully against them. Capital has no reason to like anti-immigrant sentiments or "our nation first" sentiments or anything like that. They're dangerous to neoliberal goals if they're really implemented.

File: conrad-black.jpg (227KB, 1180x664px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 1180x664px

Also; no a Bannon link, but still an interesting half-hour,

http://tvo.org/video/programs/the-agenda-with-steve-paikin/black-on-trump

Why do we allow these threads?

>>9084193
Must watch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nTd2ZAX_tc

>>9093127
Fuck off, this is /lit/'s best thread in a long while.

>>9093234
>A Board filled almost entirely of Neo-Marxists are managing to have a proper conservation about Bannon and the Alt-Right
I don't know how we've managed to get this far.

>>9093224
Everything about him screams Lee Kuan Yew, seriously just watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8rPofi-AUw

>>9093239
its not difficult being a guy like that if you're running a small country with a mostly homogenous racial and cultural makeup.

>>9093127

First reason: if you combined the previous thread and this one there would be over 500 responses. Clearly people want to talk about this stuff, and so far they've done a pretty good job with a minimum of shitposting.

Second reason: because Steve Bannon says this is the great Fourth Turning and whether you believe him or not, whether you think that is the case or not, may not actually matter. Because he's the #1 guy in the White House. We're in for some wild times ahead. Nobody actually knows what's going to happen, but it's interesting as fuck to think about. Bannon might be the most interesting man in America right now.

>>9093284
I agree, in part, but the problem with being a small country is that when the big countries want you to do something it's hard to say no. This is what people find impressive about LKY: he didn't allow Singapore to wind up in the pocket of Washington or the Communists.

So in addition to steering the ship of state through some rough waters, he *also* did wonders for their economy. In terms of statecraft he pretty much achieves the maximum score.

So it's true, that he does have an advantage in being a small country with a culturally homogenous population. And he's the ultimate stern Confucian grandfather. Those are advantages (just as the disadvantages were, he had a tiny island right next door to some very big and scary other powers). But holy fuck did the man make things happen with those perks.

File: e13-644.jpg (92KB, 580x404px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 580x404px

>>9093321
tired: lee kwan yew Singapore muh technocommercialism
wired: brutalistic hyperMaoism, dialectical antihumanism, GPCR 2.0

File: yeT47.jpg (73KB, 538x465px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 538x465px

>>9093337
Kek. Let's face it, is there any doubt where this goes in the end?

>one with all the people

File: Josef Bannin.jpg (215KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 800x1200px

What if I told you everything you knew was a lie?

File: CxZZPHXXgAES1it.jpg (57KB, 628x738px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 628x738px

>>9093374
No *shit.* That's the part of Bannon's thought I find the most unusual: his admiration for Lenin (and...Stalin?).

So he wants to take over the establishment, in order to destroy the establishment, in order to... preserve the establishment (Judaeo-Christian culture/the West/American capitalism)...yes?

>>9093398
there's an extremely low frequency transmisor array installation over in the Kamchatka peninsula in the Russian Far East. Officially its a medium of communication between Russia's submarine fleet and the command center over in Moscow. But there are reasons to doubt that. Have you heard of Vladimir Vernadsky? his theory of the Earth's development from geosphere to biosphere and on to the noosphere, ie. the sphere of thought? He was also an adviser for the Soviet nuclear program. His ideas have been embraced by the Cosmist, Eursianist and hardline Stalinist factions within the Russian Deep State. Some say they plan on bringing about the final judgement through radiopsychic means...

>people feel like adults if they discuss politics: the thread: the sequel
Over 500 posts. Not a single thing worth reading or saying in them.

>>9093457
There's only 232 posts here though. And discussing politics is always good, I'm certain that the late-twentieth century delusion that you could run society and an economy without politics is falling apart.

File: 7 Noosphere by Tatiana Plakhova.jpg (120KB, 512x404px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 512x404px

>>9093440
Cool, I didn't know about Vernadsky at all. I can see on the wiki that he's another noosphere guy, too. I love those dudes.

Your whole post is awesome as fuck, by the way.

File: c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800.jpg (50KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 800x533px

>>9084193
Bannon is not even the wackiest/most postmodern member of Trump's inner circle.

>tfw deep state cia links via Palantir Corporation
>tfw biometric and psychological profiles of every internet user
>tfw The autist's ultimate revenge against chads and normies
>tfw bros with Moldbug and Rene Girard
>tfw overcoming death
>tfw irl John Galt
>tfw harem of subcon twink programmers
>tfw floating hi-tech seastead autistopia
>tfw drinking the blood of the young

>>9091492

>He spends all this time whining about the state but is too pussy to actually abolish it

The issue is production of security without sovereign property. Land asserts secondary property protecting itself is impossible and commercializing sovereign properties is more realistic.

> he thinks some kind of zombie apocalypse or some weird techno event horizon is more likely. Fucking really? Aren't you a reactionary that's sceptical of the enlightment? Humans did fine for thousands of years without the modern state.

Land very much opposes modern democratic statism.

>he's so taken in by it that he can't think of an alternative.

He describes an alternative: neocameralism.

>His techno-fetish would make much more sense in the context of some kind of techno-anarchism (which I think he was into before he went insane?)

Land predicts his techno-feudal micro-autocracies shall become techno-anarchic via cryptographic finance.

>connects it to this half-assed reactionary

Any sane libertarian is a reactionary because democracy incentives an authoritarian state.

File: theil-gawker-2.png (237KB, 595x298px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 595x298px

>>9093561
also

>absolutely brought the lightning down on Gawker, leaving it a smoking crater in the earth and with its ashes scattered to the four winds
>crushed his enemies, saw them driven before him, heard the lamentations of their women
>technically stronger than hulkamania

>>9091720
I think it's ever been so. The KKK started off as a deliberately ridiculous organisation with a handful of mem(b)ers that sent reconstruction journalists wild.
Everything I've known about in some detail has been wildly misrepresented by journalists throughout history. This is a profession geared towards people who are willing to make things up, rush to meet deadlines and were unemployed in other domains. It takes a certain stupidity and wilful self delusion and gullibility to do that job.

>>9093295
>Second reason: because Steve Bannon says this is the great Fourth Turning and whether you believe him or not, whether you think that is the case or not, may not actually matter. Because he's the #1 guy in the White House. We're in for some wild times ahead. Nobody actually knows what's going to happen, but it's interesting as fuck to think about. Bannon might be the most interesting man in America right now.
I don't think so. He's just a pathetic guy with power.

So what outcomes is restoring a monarchy or appointing a CEO of America, or whatever, supposed to accomplish that a democracy cannot?

>>9093626

>So what outcomes is restoring a monarchy or appointing a CEO of America, or whatever, supposed to accomplish that a democracy cannot?

Effective governance whose indexes of implementation include: parsimonious regulatory usage, low taxation, eugenic migration policies, sound money, low time-preferences, and fiscal frugality.

>>9093648
None of the richest countries in the Western world have parsimonious regulation, low taxes, "sound money" whatever that means, or fiscal frugality. The US, for instance, cannot run out of money until it somehow ceases to print the world reserve currency. The last time the US ran a budget surplus, we had the 2008 recession about 10 years down the line.

>>9093663

>None of the richest countries in the Western world have parsimonious regulation, low taxes, "sound money" whatever that means, or fiscal frugality. The US, for instance

This is precisely The Dark Enlightenment thesis: contemporaneous Occidental democracies are deeply dysfunctional and only seemingly successful by virtue of bio-cultural capital as yet undissolved.

>The last time the US ran a budget surplus, we had the 2008 recession about 10 years down the line.

Are you seriously asserting budget surpluses cause economic crisis?

>>9093702
I think the concerns about the US budget deficit are vastly overblown. If you aren't the US, then you might have a problem.

>contemporaneous Occidental democracies are deeply dysfunctional
Are they really, though? They deliver the highest quality of life to their citizens (barring a few exceptions), and aside from the idiotic Muslim immigration policy the EU is running at the moment, I don't have too many qualms with it, certainly not enough to let the country be completely run by the rich without even the facade of the state to check them.

On top of this, is there a good reason to suspect the CEO of America will actually implement eugenic migration policies, since genetic hygiene appears to be one of the prime goals of neoreaction? As far as I know, neoreactionaries think the State should be run for profit which is generated by taxes due to attracting businesses. Won't a eugenic migration policy run counter to businesses' desire to minimize labor costs through third world immigration?

>>9093727
capitalist democracies have managed to turn conditions of absolute abundance into inverted totalitarian human lab rat hell. Neoreaction is somewhat more honest at least

>>9087610
You're the revered Girardfag aren't you?

>>9093737
>capitalist democracies have managed to turn conditions of absolute abundance into inverted totalitarian human lab rat hell. Neoreaction is somewhat more honest at least
I wouldn't really call it human lab rat hell, but at least it's honest about who is running the show.

>>9093727

>Are they really, though? They deliver the highest quality of life to their citizens (barring a few exceptions)

Really? Better than Macau, Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Dubai, Qatar, or Monaco?

>I don't have too many qualms with it, certainly not enough to let the country be completely run by the rich without even the facade of the state to check them.

Then you are a short-sighted idiot. You really think plundering an economy for crude subsidization of base consummation, destruction of purchasing power through inflationary macroeconomics, and techno-economic retardation through undue regulatory burden is a good thing? Why?

>On top of this, is there a good reason to suspect the CEO of America will actually implement eugenic migration policies, since genetic hygiene appears to be one of the prime goals of neoreaction? As far as I know, neoreactionaries think the State should be run for profit which is generated by taxes due to attracting businesses. Won't a eugenic migration policy run counter to businesses' desire to minimize labor costs through third world immigration?

Migration --- when and if it occurs --- would be neo-feudal: migrants would have no rights and would be sealed off from society.

>>9093765
Singapore does have the advantage of being a small island and not having to manage backwards rural populations. Don't the cities in China also have a huge smog problem?

I could be wrong here, but aren't the Gulf Arab states basically just welfare states funded by oil? I don't really hear about a whole lot of innovative companies coming out of Saudi Arabia or Qatar.

>You really think plundering an economy for crude subsidization of base consummation, destruction of purchasing power through inflationary macroeconomics, and techno-economic retardation through undue regulatory burden is a good thing? Why?
I'm sure that the US, in many ways, has unnecessary regulations that could be cut, but, given what right libertarians seem to think about the environment, I'm not really enthusiastic about seeing what this would look like.

Also, if you're talking about the gold standard here (I don't know if this is the case) why don't any countries still use it if it's superior? You would think mainstream economists would have figured this shit out by now. Or are they all simply retarded?

>Migration --- when and if it occurs --- would be neo-feudal: migrants would have no rights and would be sealed off from society.
Hopefully you have a good security force so that you can keep the gene pool clean.

>the right wing is anti-intellectual
>is literally saving intellectualism and maybe even the human race

Regardless of what you think of their specific end-goals and conclusions, these guys are fucking light years ahead of contemporary left wing thinkers.

File: 32981471.png (365KB, 600x561px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 600x561px

>>9093741
That's me senpai.

>>9093803

>Singapore does have the advantage of being a small island and not having to manage backwards rural populations. Don't the cities in China also have a huge smog problem?

The techno-urban micro-state is an ideal geopolitical unit.

>Don't the cities in China also have a huge smog problem?

Some worse than others.

>I'm sure that the US, in many ways, has unnecessary regulations that could be cut,

Yes.

>but, given what right libertarians seem to think about the environment, I'm not really enthusiastic about seeing what this would look like.

You are erroneous then because we believe pollution violates property rights.

>I could be wrong here, but aren't the Gulf Arab states basically just welfare states funded by oil? I don't really hear about a whole lot of innovative companies coming out of Saudi Arabia or Qatar.

The smart ones economically diversified; Whites --- in general --- are more innovative than other races (obvious exceptions notwithstanding).

>Also, if you're talking about the gold standard here (I don't know if this is the case) why don't any countries still use it if it's superior? You would think mainstream economists would have figured this shit out by now. Or are they all simply retarded?

Interesting question. The economics of The Gold Standard are sound but why it has seen such little adoption is a great politico-economic quandary.

>Hopefully you have a good security force so that you can keep the gene pool clean.

Agreed: tracker-implants sound good,

>>9084201
fpbp

God bless this thread.

>>9093284
>mostly homogenous racial and cultural makeup.

%Chinese in Singapore is ~= %White in the US.

>>9093374
zizek interview of bannon when???

>>9093803
>not having to manage backwards rural populations
You've been absorbing to much Reddit, the "backwards rural populations" get fucked over hard by the cityfolk.

Gangs from major cities get caught poaching pets from small towns and villages and get beaten to death all the time.

>>9093561
Can someone give me a quick rundown on Girard? Is he a standard conservative thinker or does he say things that are actually controversial?

>>9095324
Christianity is not a myth

All societies/culture are formed on sacrifice of a scape goat

>>9095324
Girardfag here. Please stand by.

>>9095651
Go ahead, speak in parables. Utter things hidden since the foundations of the world.

I dare you.

>>9095697
No need to dare me, I'm very happy to do it. No parables necessary. And fortunately I don't have much else going on today.

It's going to take a few hours, though. Check back later.

>>9095721
Don't forget about us

>>9095721
so you have something for us yet?

>>9097261
>>9095697
>>9097261
&others

I'm still working on it. I have sixteen fucking pages of notes and I am trying to condense that down to a maximum of 4 posts. What I am realizing is that what I would like to do is write a really substantive essay all about Girard and the Age of Trump and so on. That would be long. Very long.

This is not really the place to do something like that; and yet, where else?

So I did come across this. For anyone looking for a very concise synopsis of Girard's work and thought, go here and read this. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200. What I will eventually be posting here is a combination of notes I have from his books, my own various thoughts, thinly veiled paranoia, and so on. I should have it up later this evening.

http://faculty.arts.ubc.ca/pmahon/Girard.html

I'm saying this because essentially everything you need to know about Girard is there in summa. I won't be saying anything really different; I'll just be talking about mimetic desire, scapegoating, collective murder and the logic of the duel. With pictures!

Once again: /lit/ is Not My Blog and I get that. I'll be back soonish with my own screed on all of this. It will hopefully be up tonight. If the thread archives, I'll start a new thread tomorrow and link this one to it.

Just thought that was worth mentioning. You won't really learn a lot from what I'm going to post that you can't learn from that above link; I'm just supplementing some of those ideas with notes from the books I have (and some various musings on Trump). I will be putting that up, however, as soon as it's finished.

>>9097408
Do you think it would be better to post in a new thread?

>>9086911
>Cathedrals, too, a seeming reference to the Catholic traditionalist strain of the movement (“CRx”)

Tell me more about these guys.

>>9097574
Yeah, I think I will be doing that. Basically I'm now just writing a long essay about the guy and his theory that has sections on desire, ritual, scapegoating, Marx, Freud, Clausewitz, and Trump. That other link has basically everything you need to know about the man.

Having come this far - the clock tells me I've now been working on this for eight hours - I'll post it when it's finished. Probably not in this thread. But by God if I'm going to be known as the Girardfag I have to be able to back that up with *something,* right?

>tfw pseudointellectual posturing on 4chan is a hilaribad idea & basically exactly what Girard himself would tell you *not* to do
>tfw yeah well that's like, your opinion, man

>>9098051
I like you anon, I'd follow your posts

>>9098051
can't wait to read it desu

>>9091340
>Obama admin may have played a role, but that's also when Moldbug started writing.
both were symptomatic of the GFC

>>9095697
>>9096168
>>9097261
>>9097574
>>9098078
>>9098255

see

>>9098555

Wasn't exactly how I planned to spend the day, but...well, whatever.

What is Girardfag's opinion on spengler?

>>9098051
you're never going to post shit, stfu

>>9098701
I just finished, about a half hour ago. It's extra-pseudy but at least it's there.

see
>>9098555

>>9098051
put up a patreon already, if sargon of akkad can do it so can you

>>9098867
That's very kind, thanks anon. Sargon of Akkad entirely deserves his 500k subscribers. He's very talented and very good at what he does. I'm definitely glad he's out there injecting a little wit and sanity into the whole mess.

File: 9239429349.jpg (16KB, 390x310px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 390x310px

>>9090503
>P-putin hacked DA ELECTION

I thought /lit/ was supposed to be the rational board, what the fuck happened?

File: Cute+animals+comp_7f913e_6177154.jpg (51KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 600x800px

>>9085596
8 years, no meme. Clinton will at least make it to the big enchilada in the Dem primaries 2020, and it will be overall a race-baiting shit-show for them. Screencap this with my apologies for a /pol/ post.

>>9099128
please go back to your home board

These threads are on par with tumblr's self-aggrandizement and insularity. What a gigantic waste of time and effort.

>>9099187
I agree

Case in point:
>>9099160

>>9086954
>human beings, and civilization as an extension of them, are a failed project and we need to hurry up and usher in our robot overlords to save this abortion before it starves to death
>something being discussed in mainstream discourse

I feel like the combination of right-wing beliefs and lack of Harvard, Yale, Cambridge, etc. credentials is triggering the fuck out of /lit/ in this thread and preventing anyone from digging into it.

File: 1482183979492.jpg (245KB, 1280x1109px) Image search: [Google]

245KB, 1280x1109px

>>9099187

>>9087343
You can be influenced and like a thinker and be completely opposed to their conclusions and ideas.
Evola provides and impetus for Bannon. That Islam is complete and powerful vis a vis contemporary Western Christianity is what makes it dangerous to someone like Bannon.

>>9099266
Please explain to me how (1) self-aggrandizing and (2) insular don't apply this thread

>>9099327
There's no self-promotion in this thread that I can see. It's mostly just an examination of thinkers and ideas as they relate to some recent news stories. It's also very much /lit/ related, because many of these thinkers have been posted on /lit/ before over the years.

Bannon Bump. Let's keep this up on the daily.

File: x453lei.jpg (869KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

869KB, 1920x1080px

>>9087610
>To me the best ideology is no ideology, but this is a complicated stance.
How is such a thing possible? Share your definition of ideology.
I hold the view you will always have ideology since the psychological nature of humans does not change.

My definition of ideology comes down to "ideas, group identity and worldview", but maybe that is not a good enough definition. I also think that ideology, as psychology suggests, is full of biases and motivated reasoning.

File: tumblr_mdz0sdDEv21qznej8o1_500.jpg (92KB, 500x750px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 500x750px

>>9100716
When I think of ideology I think of something like that space station I alluded to earlier: an artificial gravity, a way of maintaining the balance of things, keeping things moving all around in order to simulate terrestrial gravity in the centre. Because one is in fact floating in space. Ideology is that field produced by the projection of your own consciousness onto the public sphere.

Now we can be as overt or as guarded about this as we wish. There is nothing inherently wrong with having an ideology; my own regular objection is with the cynical countermeasures that are usually deployed when an ideology becomes challenged. And, after Girard, my increasingly grim conviction that the final authority on all human questions is a violence which at best can serve to reproduce the necessary pre-conditions of a culture that at the same time is required to mask that violence behind a mythological or persecutory text.

This is not to say that it is impossible for human civilization to move forward; I only mean that I don't think there is anything enormously rosy about moving backwards. We advance, we develop, we grow, we expand our horizons, or we regress.

Of course it's not so simple as that. Just as people can overreach themselves, cultures can as well; there is an organic principle for me in all of this. But what would be most refreshing to me today, and which is the principle I espouse, is a way of taking into account the profound interrelationship of the ideologies which, as postmodern individuals, we all possess, so that we are not constantly involved in a push-pull of conflict: that I only got the part that I needed at your expense.

Now I won't deny that this is a hopelessly utopian proposition. Indeed, life is hard, and Peterson's ideal of the brave individual leaving home and going out into the unknown is important. In a sense, I might say that what I find most objectionable about ideology is how it sacrifices this concept of the individual in order to reproduce them as the subject of ideology, a Universal Person.

But we are not universal persons. Nobody lives their lives in capital letters. Only phones, fakes, frauds, and hucksters do - often without realizing it. We are always particular beings, mysteries even to ourselves. Does that make sense? You've met people who talk about themselves in Capital Letters. That's ideology at work; the I at the centre of the universe, and everything else just out there. The motto: It Is What It Is.

Well, it's not. That kind of thinking is just cosmic maintenance. When you are at the centre of the universe: that's ideology. Enlightened paranoia. Because Reasons. All of this.

But we're all connected...and anything that affects one part of a culture comes in time to affect every other part. Who knows, maybe the present mimetic crisis will eventually wake people up to that.

>>9100829
You are almost a kind of theologist to me, and that is both a compliment and a critique

>>9091300
I've been seeing /pol/ produce a lot videos lately with a weird characteristic: under or over clipping videos by a couple of seconds and just generally letting certain scenes or sound effects go on unnaturally long by slowing them down.

for example check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3D6viZ2Pf0

>>9099187

girarfag won't keep his posts relevant to the topic and instead is keeping some sort of "my self-grandiose metaphysics explaining the news" blog that isn't bringing anything to the discussion that hasn't been already said, IE

>>9100829
>We advance, we develop, we grow, we expand our horizons, or we regress.

woah man thats deep

>We are always particular beings, mysteries even to ourselves.

woah man THATS deep

>That kind of thinking is just cosmic maintenance. When you are at the centre of the universe: that's ideology. Enlightened paranoia. Because Reasons. All of this.

WOAH man THATS deep


>But we're all connected...and anything that affects one part of a culture comes in time to affect every other part.

YOU'RE BLOWING MY DARN MIND HERE

>>9091143
>Judeo Christian
Stop this meme.

File: tumblr_n831qycBmx1rnh54wo1_500.jpg (68KB, 450x652px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 450x652px

>>9100716
Basically, my own feeling would be that we are living in a kind of zero-G environment today. I don't really believe it's possible to formulate a concept of truth which is completely independent of other human beings. Wittgenstein and Heidegger, no slouches either, both end in aporias; so did Socrates; so does Lacan; so does Badiou (who also offers the injunction: Keep Going!).

This is where I think we are today. In a sense, radically alone, in the sense in which we are learning more and more about the fragility of thought and the vagaries of language; in another sense, never more interconnected, even overconnected. Like Alice (or Marshall McLuhan) in Wonderland. It is that very sense of overconnectivity, of reactivity, of mimesis which can become paralyzing - or, potentially, be a great speculative opportunity. But it requires depths of courage, as well as compassion, and intelligence, that I think exceed the boundaries of any ideology, which is at best going to selectively mobilize a certain form of compassion in the name of a greater good that is always going to be lacking that one extra part: you.

It's always tempting to see the world in black and white. Metaphysical dualism is powerful stuff. And when all around you people seem to forming up the battle lines it's almost impossible not to choose a side, and that is to some degree my own problem. I have a kind of perverse and irritating insistence that people get along with each other, that we not look for someone to blame or to kill, that we try to let the other guy have the last word instead of closing the circle ourselves. It was Girard who alerted me to the fact that I was not alone in this, or how deep that rabbit hole went. Our problems are economic, scientific, technological, social...and perhaps they are beginning to show up the interconnectedness of the world. Maybe the explosive times ahead are a part of that understanding revealing itself. Whatever ideology I have, I would like to think it is one that pays attention to that. The idea that humans are just the planetary nervous network of the earth is an interesting idea.

There's a good essay here on Deleuze and Girard, if anyone is interested in reading it.

http://plasticites-sciences-arts.org/PLASTIR/King%20P33.pdf

I also want to say that I was in an incredibly dark mood this morning, and thinking about your question and being prompted to think about it has actually cheered me up considerably. So thanks for asking, anon.

>>9100953
I'm not bothered by political correctness but Judeo-Christian is absolutely such a thing. If you want to be correct it would be something along the lines of pagan-Greek-Judeo-Christian culture

>>9100964
Judeo is the meme. Hebrew would be more correct. The Jews of today are not the same sort of 'Jew' that Jesus was. The collection of tales that make up the Old Testament isn't Jewish because Jews of today only came into existence after they were diaspora-ed across the Roman Empire and formed their new ethno-religion based on the Rabbinical teachings.

Christianity and Judaism share the same root which is the ancestral Hebrew religion.

>>9100964
The catchall term is just "Western." "Western culture," that is, the culture that started with Homer.

>mfw all these alt-righters that call for tradition and a return to old social values yet spend all day on the internet masturbating to degenerate porn and posting memes

Never met more dorky contradictory people, don't even get me started on that hack Evola that used to attend orgies

>>9100990
In fairness to Evola, his "tradition" was old pagan shit. He didn't exactly like Christianity.

>>9100994
The very same people will also call for the use of Christianity as a vice to achieve their ideals

The Nazis did the same thing and they failed as Spengler predicted

>>9100841
That's an insightful thought and I won't disagree. I am more crypto-theologian than philosopher. It has its faults.

>>9100895
It looks like a horror movie. And that main guy looks like some kind of alternate-history version of Shia himself back from the future.

>>9100907
In fairness, that anon asked for my definition of ideology, so I explained. I don't mean to pontificate. I hate giving advice, and a lot of my posts no doubt sound like that's what I'm doing. Not really my intention.

>>9100907
> implying Girardfag isn't Peter Thiel himself

>>9101016
Of course they failed. Christianity can't be anything but what it is, and those who try to co-opt it for their own purposes are eventually undone.

Bannon will probably eventually fail too, unless his aim actually is to restore Christendom. I can't be confident that's the case, though.

while the last thread was certainly interesting (it made me realize how split the right is and that such web of thought is only present in the left) it ended up like another jerk circle.

All of these romantic vision of transhuman, turbo capitalist world are fun to read but blatantly, most of them ignored the fact that people might turn left again. Except this time it might actually change from voting to some liberal pieces of literal garbage to some sort of new, yet unpredicted rise of new left neo revolutionists.

>>9099356
I didnt say people were self-promoting in this thread. I said they are making more of themselves than they are. And they are. Look at all the posters talking about how 4chan is "the zeitgeist." And how bloggers read exclusively by neets are now shaping the world. Its all wrong. Its sad. Its people wanting to be powerful and relevant. "Hurr /ourguy/ is making the decisions now. Fucking always loved moldbug lol!" Two or three articles have completely gone to peoples' heads here. Just take a step back and actually look out the window and talk to people before saying shit like "the future is technat neocameral states with designer genders and neotribal street warfare." You post on 4chan. I get it. You know all the lingo. Its just not as relevant as these threads are making it out to be.

File: Kauffman.jpg (44KB, 285x189px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 285x189px

>>9100961
>Our problems are economic, scientific, technological, social...and perhaps they are beginning to show up the interconnectedness of the world. Maybe the explosive times ahead are a part of that understanding revealing itself.
What makes you think that?

I think the main problems are climate change, resource depletion and food security, which are connected. New problems might be created by technology, that are improbable to predict.

It seems you've had some interest in systems theory. I've too, but don't think I yet understand it well and maybe I never will. There are some books I got to read about it, but the one is so analytic and dry that I'm struggling with it.

Picture somewhat related, though it is not his book which I struggle with, though Kauffman is another difficult writer.

>>9101129
also
>there are people right now, on this planet who dream of authoritharian gov
lol

>>9101142
>talk to people

The people you could "talk to" by looking out your window are relatively unimportant in the ebb and flow of history.

>>9101121
He's a charlatan. I've watched his talks and he is certainly not an intellectual.

>>9101149
Yes. They are the biggest cuckolds on the planet.

They need an authoritarian government to tell them how to live as they have no direction in their own lives.

>>9101129
Leftism to me doesn't actually have a coherent political goal anymore; I think that's what the problem is. All they can do is oppose a general trend towards the increasing and perhaps inevitable technologization of human society, a kind of total scientific understanding and management of human beings. In a sense, that would be a kind of 'end of philosophy.' Or at least the inauguration of a very new era of it. On the other hand, you could say that that's what we've been doing since the beginning...

>>9101147
Having no math brain at all, I struggle with guys like this also...but perhaps more systems theory stuff would be illuminating.

>I think the main problems are climate change, resource depletion and food security, which are connected. New problems might be created by technology, that are improbable to predict.

I agree. What's interesting is that all of these problems are created by, and for, human beings in a recursive system that nobody really stands anterior to (although people think they do). Capitalism upends almost every political system there is by being more free than people are, and the exportation of not only Western products but also Western thought over the world I think has accelerated this process. Capital and economic logic, more than anything, has united the world, but it's united it in a very unstable way. It's created a kind of planetary economic ecosystem.

Kauffman looks like a really interesting writer, just the kind of guy I like to read. I'm going to look into this.

>>9086796
>>9084245
Yeah, I came here to just skim the thread and read through angry people shitting on each other

Now I'm going to dedicate tonight to researching this. I'm agreeing with alot of what I'm reading