The Dark Enlightenment/NRx

It's barely a coherent movement. What joins them together is their common enemy: liberalism/leftism/multiculturalism/post-modernism

As they gain power, they'll splinter. You can already see this with the way Yiannopoulos has been tossed under the bus.

Nick Land has an interesting fantasy about how it might hold together, if these forces achieved power, but I'd guess it's a fantasy. The techno-commercialists will toss the "race realists" under the bus, the first chance they get.

http://www.xenosystems.net/trichotomy/
http://www.xenosystems.net/trichotomocracy/

>Is it any different to academic theorising?
This implies you have some kind of bias against "academic theorising", which I can only interpret that you would prefer action to ideas.

The answer is that they have no need for you unless you want to be a racist brownshirt goon (in which case you will be liquidated when useful) or if you are a scientific genius.

>>9191341
Why do you post an image with e-celeb twitter personas? Twitter is just a shitposting platform, it's not reflective of real life.

>>9191341
Yes to everything. Its philosophical progenitors (moldbug, land, etc.) have laid the groundwork for at least a subsection of what is now commonly referred to as the "alt-right" and neoreactionary philosophy has some indirect
influence on the current US administration (people like anton who aren't full blown NRx but have tended towards its guiding principles, thiel who funded moldbug, and people like Steve Bannon who reportedly has read some NRx tracts)

>>9191370
It's what came up on Google.

>>9191364
What's with the race-realist crowd in this dark enlightenment movement?

I can see how the techno-commercialists would be against it as it doesn't necessarily mesh together (if I understand it).

Surely Milo is just a public-level figurehead? These so-called "movements" wouldn't be able to gain traction in the mass scheme of things as they are far too esoteric and inaccessible. Are you saying that the "alt-right" stems from the "dark enlightenment"? This is what is stated on the Wikipedia page but it seems to me what has happened is a great deal of connections have been made by journalists without a proper thread.

>>9191374
Anton is the guy who wrote the Flight essay, correct?

Why is it that Thiel is funding Molbug? This is all so fucking strange and obscure.

Thiel does work for the NSA and goes to Bilderberg meetings.

>>9191364
>You can already see this with the way Yiannopoulos has been tossed under the bus.
And he is related to NRx exactly how?

>>9191392
>Anton is the guy who wrote the Flight essay, correct?

Yes. Now he has a job as a senior national security official.

>Why is it that Thiel is funding Molbug?

My understanding is that Moldbug's startup was financially backed by Thiel.

The connections are definitely all there if you do some digging. It'll be very interesting to see where the movement goes from here

>>9191392
>What's with the race-realist crowd in this dark enlightenment movement?
>I can see how the techno-commercialists would be against it as it doesn't necessarily mesh together (if I understand it).
>Surely Milo is just a public-level figurehead? These so-called "movements" wouldn't be able to gain traction in the mass scheme of things as they are far too esoteric and inaccessible. Are you saying that the "alt-right" stems from the "dark enlightenment"? This is what is stated on the Wikipedia page but it seems to me what has happened is a great deal of connections have been made by journalists without a proper thread.
>>9191397
>And he is related to NRx exactly how?


Yiannopoulous could be connected onto OPs image, his node would connect to Alternative Right. Maybe deserves a section called "Gay Reaction" much like "Feminine Reaction"

The views of all these groups vary pretty widely. What joins them together is their enemies:

All of these groups are "reacting" against Globalism and Multiculturalism. They see these leftist ideals as irrational utopias, great on paper, but disaster in practice. Their exact reasons vary.

Some of these groups seem wiser than others, when it comes to this loose knit alliance. Nick Land doesn't seem to have any illusions about this movement and it's tenous alliances (see the two articles I linked above).

the funny thing to me is that there are clear historical comparisons to be made here to the Nazi Party. Remember, Hitler didn't take power alone, he made a coalition. He got the Communists, bitter with their Socialist allies for supporting the 1st world war, to vote him into the chancellorship.

Similarly, the brownshirts, the SA, were largely led by the leftist branch of the Nazi Party, including Ernst Rohm and Strasser. When the military demanded that the militias be liquidated, to preserve the power of the generals, Hitler was happy to oblige and killed all of his homosexual and leftist allies.

Yianoppolus' fall smells like these events to me. The Left didn't destroy him, all it took was for Y to make some jokes about pedophilia and the Religious Right called for his head. There tolerance for him as a homosexual was a sham, pedophilia a convienent excuse to liquidate his power. Where was Bannon? nowhere to be found.

>>9191424
Don't you think it's strange that Peter Thiel, a guy who attends Bilderberg meetings and does work for the NSA is funding an obscure internet guy who writes against Democracy that is read by Steve Bannon, Trump's advisor and leader of Breitbart?

I'm not a conspiracy theorist but this is a bit strange.

>>9191437
Thiel is a nutjob, like a lot of the silicon valley type. They're tied up in apocalyptic doomsday theories about simulation and artificial intelligence.

It doesn't surprise me at all that Thiel is connected, it's the same paranoid crap. What joins a lot of these groups together is fear. Fear of Islam, fear of the poor, fear of disease, fear of market collapses, fear of death in any form it might take.

I find myself agreeing with a lot of Land and Moldburg write, but not their solutions. Why fear annihilation?

>>9191433
>there are clear historical comparisons to be mde here to the Nazi Party

Every time.

Why is it so hard for leftists to talk about right wing ideas without bringing in the nazis at some point?

>>9191448

>Why fear annihilation?

I don't want to linger in agony after being driven over by a Muslim truck driver.

>>9191437
Strange? Maybe insofar as how unthinkable something like this - an obscure movement of political thinkers, fringe philosophers, and a silicon valley billionaire advocating for an anti-enlightenment counterrevolution in the face of new leftist progressivism suddenly elevated to a position of influence in national politics - would have been a year ago. But a lot of what's going on behind the scenes is still nebulous. Some of these guys are getting jobs, others are reportedly in contact with Bannon, and some are advisors. We just can't say how deep the rabbit hole goes.

>>9191449
Hey, to be clear, I'm not comparing the today's alt-right to the nazi party out of a sense of "ooooh EVIL". But OP's map of the the connections betweens these movements should be acknowledged. They are temporary alliances. The Religious Right and the Technorealists are situationally allies, if only because the Religious Right is so afraid of gays and muslims that they aren't even cognizant of the threats posed by silicon valley paranoia.

I suppose I could use the Allied Powers as a similar example, but I don't think Churchil, Stalin and Truman were ignorant of the situational nature of the alliance. Everyone expected it to fall apart the second hitler and the japanese surrendered.

I still stand by the Yiannopollus/Rohm comparison.

>>9191448
Thiel fears these things yet he continues such a system by creating software for the NSA through his company Palantir and funnelling money into products which shift social order and bring about the collapse of traditional values.

What a dumb hypocrite and no, I'm not a commie. I just recognise that social change is inherent to Capitalism. This will only get worse with our age of the internet as things move at a much more rapid pace.

Not to mention that the simulation theory is fucking stupid as it can never be falsified.

>le dark enlighment
did a 12 yo boy named this shit

>>9191455
You're being paranoid of a few events which are shot into your brain by the MSM. You are statistically very unlikely to die in such a way.

Don't bother responding with a meme. You know it's true. One moment you'll deride the media and the next you'll accept what they say as long as it fits in with your biases.

>>9191433

Yiannapolous is the author of his own misfortune. He became an embarrassment and a liability, it wasn't a power struggle at all. The religious right has never been comfortable with the "alt right," in fact most of them are "cuckservatives" who voted for Cruz in the primaries. Strasser wasn't a leftist, and Rohm's homosexuality was not a big part of his identity. As you yourself pointed out, he wasn't killed for being gay, he was killed because other elites were jealous of his power.

To be frank, the situation in Weimar Germany and the contemporary US are not comparable. Where are the demobilized troops? Where is the civil war? Where is the hyperinflation? Where is the Treaty of Versailles?

>>9191455
exactly, fear of death, fear of pain. I'm sure being killed in painful ways would be painful. I'm just a realist and know that I'm probably going to die of cancer, heart disease, or a car crash. To waste my energy on paranoia about terrorists is stupid. Do you have the same fear or lightning or cars?

>>9191465
I think Thiel has a "better us than them" mentality to AI. A lot in the technofuturist community live by the idea that whoever invents it first will rule the world.

There are some more pleasant multiculturalist types in that realm. Zoltan Istvan, the transhumanist presidential candidate, now running as a libertarian for governor of california, supports the idea of an international body like the UN directing a collaborative effort to build AI, to avoid a new cold-war situation or another hiroshima.

>>9191471
I love you

>>9191473

We don't have anything to gain by allowing them into the country, and a lot to lose. There is no objective reason for Muslim immigration, if we need laborers, we can get them elsewhere. The burden of proof is on you to prove why we should admit these people.

I really don't see the downside of adopting a Hungarian approach to Muslim migration.

>>9191476
You can prevent muslim crime and terrorism. You can't prevent getting struck by lightning or getting into a random car crash.

>>9191475
>i am just pretending to be retarded

>>9191475
> He became an embarrassment and a liability, it wasn't a power struggle at all.

I'd say the same happened to Rohm. Once political revolution was complete and democracy abolished, the brownshirts were just liabilities. There's an account that Mussolinni was disgusted that Hitler tolerated gays in the SA. To which Hitler reportedly responded: "They're a band of warriors, not a moral institution." Hitler had no intention of following through on the "second revolution", overthrowing capitalism. Once he achieved power, he didn't need the Brownshirts.

Yiannoppolus was a token gay boy to attract angry white gay men to the Trump cause. He isn't useful anymore, so when the pedophilia jokes come out, Bannon/Brietbart have no reason to back him up or defend him.

The demobilized troops: disgruntled white voters. The civil war: the 2008 economic crisis. The Treaty of Versailles: our purported "economic recovery" without any real change for average people.

>>9191487
But you can prevent car crashes! Don't use a car! Similarly, there is nothing YOU can do to prevent terrorism or violent crime. If someone wants to kill you, it's probably going to happen.

>>9191485
not the guy you're replying to, but I'd argue we have a moral obligation to accept refugees. After all, we're the ones that overthrew their governments and promised them peace and safety.

There is no excusing the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or Pakistan. The War on Terror has been an overreaction to a single terrorist attack. 3000 died in 9/11 and 300,000 have died in the War on Terror. We even killed people who had nothing to do with sept 11th.

Accepting refugees is the bare minimum or reconciliation we can do, when it comes to practical solutions to alleviate the suffering of people we've harmed. Some symbolic solutions wouldn't be terrible either, like letting the ICJ prosecute Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Obama for war crimes.

File: 1468788236548.jpg (634KB, 760x1175px) Image search: [Google]

634KB, 760x1175px

>>9191495

Cars are a useful means of conveyance, they do more good than harm. Muslims are a destructive, unassimilable race that on a world scale does much, much, more harm than good. We can prevent terrorism and violent crime by voting for candidate that promise to reduce immigration from Muslim countries. You're talking about Muslim immigration as if it's this unstoppable force of nature, when in reality it's not that hard to just turn them away.

>>9191510
Cars do more harm than good. There are safer ways to move things, including trains, airplanes, horses or even bicycles. Some stats from the CDC

Heart disease: 614,348
• Cancer: 591,699
• Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 147,101
• Accidents (unintentional injuries): 136,053
• Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 133,103
• Alzheimer's disease: 93,541
• Diabetes: 76,488
• Influenza and pneumonia: 55,227
• Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,146
• Intentional self-harm (suicide): 42,773

Car crashes are the 3rd highest cause of death in America. Car crashes will kill more people this year than muslim terrorists will kill in a century. Are you still concerned about muslims?

And they're often quite nice people! The typical muslim in america is really no different than any other typical american. They like TV, they like fuck, they like to eat food, they like wear nice clothes. Go meet some, it'll be a good experience for you.

>>9191525
sorry, 4th highest cause of death.

>>9191501
>we're the ones that overthrew their governments
Hmm I'm not sure if I remember doing that actually

>>9191532
You don't remember the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya?

>>9191501

I'm not American. Most of the victims of the "War on Terror" were killed by various local militias, not US troops. The worst thing you did was allow the Iraqis and Libyans to kill each other, but it wasn't intentional, and as the saying goes, you can't rape the willing.

Muslims are violent and sectarian lot, it's understandable you thought they'd behave like civilized humans when you liberated them. Naivety is forgivable.

>>9191525

Read the Pew reports, they're not the same as Americans. I live in a high immigration area so don't lecture me on "meeting" some, I've met quite enough already.

>>9191495
We need cars, unlike muslim immigrants and an accident doesn't happen with intent to harm. Intent matters. A car is just a tool, just like a gun. It matters who wields it and for what reasons.

>>9191535
Sure I remember them, but I don't remember doing them.

>>9191541
okay, but do you fear cars? because you should. Even if you feel you need one, you should recongize that it is a machine of death.

I'm a delivery driver, I do about 300 miles a week. I don't see an accident everyday, but most weeks I see 3 or 4.

It's all so casual too. The emergency vehicles roll up. People carted away on stretchers, flaming cars extinguished. Then the tow trucks arrive, they hitch up the cars and sweep up the debris. Traffic slows for 15 minutes, then it's over. Often times, I'll pass an accident, and when I'm driving back 5 minutes later it's completely gone. You'd never know an accident had happened.

If the media reported on car accidents, giving us the graphic details that they give us about terrorist attacks, we'd all be terrified of cars. I'm kind of terrified of cars, but hey, a job's a job I guess.

The aztec's had pyramids. We have highways. When automated cars do finally replace human drivers, we're going to have an enormous organ donor shortage.

If you're not scared of cars. But you are scared of muslims, then I think you need some exposure to car accidents. Go watch some videos until you're properly sensitized.

>>9191544
>>9191539
Ah well, if you're not American or part of the "Coalition of the Willing", then I suppose it's not your fault. Any sympathy you might have for people fleeing war zones would be pure charity. I'm glad your hands are so clean.

As an American, I find the current wave of xenophobia disgusting. We didn't "liberate" anyone, we demolished their societies. If someone has to shoulder the weight of the current refugee crisis, it should be countries that started these wars.

>>9191558
I don't fear car. I fear reckless car drivers and truck drivers of peace of course. I respect cars and the physical forces behind their function, but only a fool fears a tool.

Its a bunch of beta cucks mad at normies and girls

>>9191569
"reckless drivers". The act of driving itself is reckless, a risk. Forget intent, or whether a cause of death is intentional or accidental. How are you most likely to die? Heart Disease, Cancer, Respiratory Infection and CARS.

Fear of muslims is irrational. If you get murdered, it's going to be a lover or a parent or a coworker or a child. You will be struck by lightning before a muslim kills you.

>>9191566
Seriously what do you mean by "we" and "country"? You realise that the US population had literally nothing to do with the military intervention by the US government right? Western governments fuck as at home, fuck other people in their homes and then we pay the consequences. You're just going to take responsibility for what they've done to others, on top of the shit they already do to you?

It's pretty creepy that leftists think that an occasional massacre is an acceptable price to pay for diversity.

>>9191570
I mean, I kind of agree, but it also feels a little dismissive, especially since Trump installed Bannon as chief strategist.

A year ago, I considered the Alt-Right (and also the Antifa) as delusional LARPers. They were jousting windmills, going on witch hunts for imaginary witches.

I think the video of Richard Spencer getting punched really highlights how much has changed in a year. The Fringe is now in the spotlight, the centrists are losing control.

I think Zizek has it right, that we need destabilization in order to have substantial change, but it's a risky venture. Lenin told the German Communists to back Hitler. The Communists knew they couldn't trust the Nazis, and planned on having a counter-revolution of their own. Communism did come to Germany, but there weren't any original German Communists remaining to enjoy it.

I don't think we need to fear a genocide in america, we'll surely find someway to displace the violence abroad.

We can laugh at the alt-right all we want, but we shouldn't under estimate it.

>>9191576
Everything in in life is a risk-reward calculation and immigration from the middle east is a bad deal. It's that simple.

>Fear of muslims is irrational
It's not irrational. Half of british muslims think homosexuals should be illegal. That's a measurable threat to gay people's liberty and even existence.

Not to mention the muslim countries where being gay gets you a life or death sentence. Red and dark red in the map:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/World_laws_pertaining_to_homosexual_relationships_and_expression.svg

Muslims also pose a tenable threat to women, alternative religious devotees, atheists (again life threat) and bring a wide spread anti-democratic sentiment.

The high crime rates and terrorism are only a small part of the threat posed by mass muslim immigration.

The risk reward calculation does not pay out in the end.

>>9191600

These obsessive fantasies about the Third Reich are laughable desu. You need to expand your repertoire and find some other historical atrocities that "might happen again" under Trump.

Americans must consume more Holocaust media per capita than any other nation aside from Israel.

>>9191599
That's actually a kind of useful insight to me. Gives me an idea of how things are seen from the right.

But I just don't see those as the terms of the equation. I think it's disturbing that the right has no such little compassion for people fleeing war. We accept thousands of immigrants and refugees every year, and the vast majority of their are peaceful people. When I look at the safety and security I am able to enjoy, I can offer no rationale for why I deserve this peace over any other person enjoying such peace.

I'm not special, just lucky to be born in one place and not another. Their is surely plenty of food and shelter and safety to share with others. The idea that all this safety and comfort is mine, that I deserve these possessions, is a joke. You can't own atoms, you can't own land. It exists without your ownership.

If a dollar bill was lying on the ground, it'd be absurd to shout "THATS MINE", it's a piece of paper blowing in the wind. No one owns it. That's how I see the earth. It'd ridiculous to demand that others can't enjoy what I'm enjoying.

Similarly, it's silly to say the pain others endure is special to them. Why should they suffer while I do not suffer? If the happenstance of the universe drops a bomb on their house and not my house, it's silly to say they deserved that pain and I did not deserve that pain.

To me, compassion is about recognizing that I am not special, and behaving accordingly. Any pleasure I experience is undeserved, any pain I suffer undeserved. To feel otherwise, that I deserve pleasure and others deserve pain, is just cruel and arrogant.

File: lol.jpg (137KB, 500x510px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 500x510px

>>9191632
reminder that your side lost and your ideas and culture will be extinct in 3-6 years

it will be forceful, too

>>9191643
I don't know man. People have been reading Jesus and Buddha for a few thousand years. I doubt philosophies of compassion will die out.

I don't know that I ever expect the other side to die out either. Fear of death is real.

File: index.jpg (6KB, 184x274px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 184x274px

>>9191632

This kind of thinking is derived from Christianity. It's a textbook case of Protestant guilt.

Have you ever noticed how Catholic countries (and regions) are less big on diversity? Think of how "islamophobic" the French, Bavarians, Italians, are compared to the English, Americans, and Nordics. Same story with Orthodox Hungary and Catholic Poland. You can read a whole book on this phenomenon if you like.

>>9191646
>(((((compassion)))))

white people are getting tired of being trampled on, chaim

File: 1473702721691.jpg (53KB, 675x450px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 675x450px

>>9191632
Some advanced memetics here lad

>>9191647
It's not entirely derived from Christianity, but yeah, Jesus is one of the larger examples of such a philosophy. The whole "put your sword away paul", letting himself be crucified. I don't believe in the resurrection or life after death, but I think Jesus had some pretty solid ideas about nonviolence.

But it goes way back, Buddhism, Greek Cynicism, Plato drinking poison, etc

It's a solid way to live. Give up your fear of death. Have compassion for others.

For me, it's not that all people are equally good, that all cultures are great, it's more of a negative egalitarianism. There is nothing special about me. There is nothing special about my culture/race. We're all equally deserving and undeserving of pain and pleasure.

File: vargus.png (140KB, 208x206px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 208x206px

>>9191658
stop posting from the synagogue

>>9191658
I think his point is that this strain of thought, your strain of thought, derives itself from Protestantism, and that Catholicism and Orthodoxy foster very different outlooks on the world.

>>9191658
fuck me, Socrates drinking poison, you know what I'm talking about

>>9191654
it's the opposite kind of thinking that is really pathetic. The whole Icycalm, "Orgy of the Will", shit. Group Tribalism is no different, whether it's religion or race or nation. It's just unfounded, "I'm better than you" taken to a group level.

File: tacticalbladeofnihilism.png (29KB, 500x464px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 500x464px

The problem with NRx is it's intrinsic nihilistic postmodernism.

If it argues that the axioms of liberalism and democracy are untenable and easy to deconstruct, the same applies to their own shitty ideology.

>>9191658

You can atone for your guilt however you like, but don't drag the rest of us along with you. If you're as selfless as you claim, you won't mind doing it alone.

>>9191632
>If a dollar bill was lying on the ground, it'd be absurd to shout "THATS MINE", it's a piece of paper blowing in the wind. No one owns it. That's how I see the earth. It'd ridiculous to demand that others can't enjoy what I'm enjoying.

The problem is you are importing people who see the dollar bill and think 'It's mine' and you end up with zero dollars. You can't have open border globalism if all participants aren't on the same page about it.

Social systems, equality and democracy don't work if you mass import people who don't like democracy, liberty and socialist systems. It's completely inane. You can't be pro-welfare and pro-globalism at the same time, these concepts are mutually exclusive as long as there is not a somewhat homogeneous level education and wealth around the globe, while that isn't the case open borders are a horrible idea.

Nobody is arguing against controlled immigration by the way. This leftist strawman that enforcing border and immigration laws is somehow anti-immigration is ridiculous.

>Why should they suffer while I do not suffer?
Here is your problem. Why should you suffer just because they suffer? It's not a zero sum game, suffering is not a commodity that is shared around like blankets. You don't have to suffer yourself to help others, you don't have to punish yourself to help others. Foreign aid, anti-war policies and charities can help with all of their suffering without you having to fuck up your own country in the process.

>>9191669
>t. just read Baudrillard

>>9191433
>He got the Communists, bitter with their Socialist allies for supporting the 1st world war, to vote him into the chancellorship.
American education everybody.

>>9191675
How is Baudrillard relevant to what I said?

>>9191683
because what you just said is pomo retardation that went out of style 15 years ago

Anyway, I'll stop babbling about compassion. I've derailed the thread.

>>9191600
>Lenin told the German Communists to back Hitler.
Source me up, bucko. Oh wait, you can't. Because that's horse shit.

>>9191665
I'm not talking about who's pathetic or not, I genuinely thought you were baiting by your entire pseudo-intellectual way of explaining your phiosophy.

>>9191688
>I accuse NRx of being too pomo
>"lol dude you're so pomo"

Wew, extreme autism.

>>9191669
yeah, so just how nihilistic is NRx?

Like, if they despise democracy and liberalism so much, have such little faith in government, what's the gameplan?

Are they just waiting for the "hard reboot" that Land talks about? Is there no positive plan?

Because then yeah, I'd agree in calling it nihilistic.

>>9191696
pomo retards like yourself are logic-absent, so you'll do anything to make it look like you've torn down your opposition

nrx is really only "pomo" in some circles to destroy pomo; it's a facade. sad that modern postmodernists can't see this- or perhaps they can and they're just powerless to stop their own abolition

>>9191698
>Is there no positive plan?

It's a lose coalition of anti-establishment ideological movements. They all have different positive plans. But all of them require the establishment to get out of the way.

>>9191658

Your posts are interesting to me because I've followed similar trails of thought and arrived at the opposite conclusion.

I imagine that everything that is good in my life, not just pleasures but my skills and character, ultimately are possible because of total happenstance. What in an earlier era might be called the grace of God must now be, in the age of Marxism, attributed to the society at large, and more myopically to my immediate family. I want this society that has given me everything to be preserved, and it's plain to see that generally people who are ardently pro-refugee care less about helping people in need and more about indirectly attacking the foundation of this society. I don't imagine for a minute that there is any intention whatsoever to ensure that refugees be sent back even in the unlikely scenario that the Middle East knows peace in the near future.

What is "special" about my culture? Maybe nothing except that I benefit from it. But I also belong to it, and what little power I have as an individual in my country is forfeited if I leave it - or if it leaves me. I have to wonder what the European response to the migrant crisis would have been if Europe had not already been taking a staggering migrants for decades prior to it. The right is, generally, not angry about the idea of helping vulnerable people avoid being killed, but with the entire idea of bolstering the declining European population with entirely different people and expecting that things will not fundamentally change as a consequence somewhere down the road.

>>9191700
>nrx is really only "pomo" in some circles to destroy pomo; it's a facade

Stupidest bullshit I've ever heard. So what's hiding under that facade then? Values that are impervious to deconstructive nihilism?

I sincerely doubt it.

>>9191566
The people pushing the war were politicians and the elite, not the average voter. There was no vote for going to war. Yet the refugees rape and steal from the working class in the countries they arrive in. While the elites who ruin their countries sit safely behind fences

File: pwned.png (236KB, 506x507px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 506x507px

>>9191717
Whatever it is, it must be preferable to whatever came pre-Trump :^)

>>9191719
Right, so globalism vs nationalism then.

>>9191723
An extreme simplification, but those are the lines in the sand for what could be the coming war

Do you know which side will win?

>>9191726
I doubt there will be such a conflict, unless people actually want there to be such a conflict e.g a self-fulfilling prophecy.

File: antifa berks.webm (612KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

612KB, 1280x720px

>>9191734
Watch the news more closel.

>>9191734
It just requires things to continue the way they are going at the moment.

>>9191736
Looks like a bunch of highschoolers LARPing.

>>9191726
My money is on globalism

Even in the Syrian War, the condition of winning is to have your side accepted into the legitamacy of the world order. It's a proxy war for sure, but only one of the 3 (2?) groups will emerge as a legitimate state: Assad, ISIS or some hypothetical 3rd party of "moderates rebels". All three of these outcomes will be a win for the global order.

The only possible nationalist wins would be for Assad to achieve victory without western/russian backing, or for ISIS to exist as a tolerated, permanent, rogue state.

To be clear, if Assad wins with the blessing of Russia, this is a win for Globalism. If he becomes Kim Jung Un, then it's a win for nationalism.

I do not think you can consider Trump, Brexit or even the current French election situations as true wins for nationalism. These countries are the epitome of the global order. Brexit will be a joke. Wall Street survives Trump.

>>9191742
Not really. It requires that people who have different opinions talk to each and reach a compromise.

I mean, if you're not willing to reach a compromise with anyone, you are contributing to the self-fulfilling prophecy I am talking about.

>>9191752
>Not really. It requires that people who have different opinions talk to each and reach a compromise.
Yeah so it's probably going to continue the way it is going right now. So far there is no sign of any willingness to find a compromise.

>>9191600
>Lenin told the German Communists to back Hitler.
Hitler was basically a nobody when Lenin was alive

>>9191760
Gotta start somewhere.

>>9191751
>the syrian war
>remotely comparable to the coming western conflict

your post comes off as desperate

>>9191775
>my autistic fantasies are so much more epic than you could imagine

File: you.png (252KB, 688x631px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 688x631px

>>9191767
the reason for the surge and victory of "altright" politics is partly because people naturally have an inherent sense of hierarchy, order and logic, and the sheltered postmodern left represents the destruction of these things because they believe they can ignore reality because "wow i read baudrillard in psych once LOL #CriticalTheory sent from my iPhone"

>>9191780
if I could, i'd post 2 images- the one attached and the other a smug Trump holding a child photoshopped to have the face of pepe- you know the one :)

>>9191433
You're good at expressing yourself, but I've come away from your post a bit disappointed, nothing original or interesting in there

>>9191783
Or maybe it's because they are genuinely progressive people. It's not like all people on the Left are deluded, but I get that it's easier to strawman every opposition to your own values.

I mean, there have always been people who have valued "hierarchy, order and logic" in every single century, as there have always been people who have valued social and legal justice, liberty and openness to new ideas.

The question is, what is it really that you want? Do you want to live in a better society, or do you simply want to destroy your enemies?

>>9191783
>talks about logic
>while committing illogicies
Ew.

>>9191783
>let me post a picture of delusional person with fringe opinion to defend my own delusional fringe opinion
>I wish a could post a picture of a frog too to emphasize my complete divorce from reality outside the internet and college

>>9191600
>Lenin told the German Communists to back Hitler. The Communists knew they couldn't trust the Nazis, and planned on having a counter-revolution of their own.

Where the fuck are you getting these fantasies from?

File: 53435.png (423KB, 554x432px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 554x432px

>>9191795
now western society has conceded so many things- "hate speech" disallowed in many countries, fag marriage, gun control in many countries- what even is "progressive" any more? the "progressiveness" that you espouse is actually the growth of a cultural cancer that many people recognize and are seeking to cut out.

We will.

>>9191800
good argument

>>9191806
>"fringe" opinion

did you watch the DNC?

>says i'm divorced from reality outside of internet and college

LMAO

need a safe space, snowflake?

>>9191341
Should have just called it the 'endarkenment' to be frank.

Also:
>being openly, proudly and unashamedly this much of a reactionary.

>>9191818
when a chimp has ripped your guts out, it's best to try to put them back in and seek medical attention, not just sit there bleeding out

File: Archip_Iwanowitsch_Kuindshi_morning on the dnepr.jpg (122KB, 2048x1249px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 2048x1249px

Well, similar things happen at the outset of every big political change (I'm hesitant to use the word revolution), groups holding formerly fringe positions coalesce around their opposition to the mostly united establishment (that's maybe more habitually and pragmatically united than politically and ideologically). They unite under a vague moniker and proceed to splinter, compete and develop until a dominant force appears.
All this reminds me much more of the period before and during the Russian Civil war, look at all the different leftist/socialist/communist groups that existed at the time, and then look at the groups on the other side, there's not much there apart from the Black Hundreds and the Russian government, it will give you a rough idea of what this is.

>>9191825
Back to analogy school with you.

>>9191818
>implying being reactionary is inherently bad

The people who resisted national socialism in nazi germany and wanted to return to democracy were reactionaries too you know?

>>9191810
>uses 'safe space' and 'snowflake'
Yeah, you da mature man living in reality, not preoccupied with silly teenage problems in a college-bubble at all.

>>9191829
I thought everything was relative dude weed lmao cultural relativism it's great to read poetry by 60 IQ blacks in high school lmao #FuckWHITEPEOPLE #FUCKDRUMPF

>>9191837
jesus bro, that's a few too many strawmen in one post

>>9191832
>implying there's such a thing as an objective good/bad dichotomy

>>9191836
>he says, also preoccupied with the same problems, arguing against them on /lit/ with his utterly reductive adhoms

>>9191839
your mom had too many of my dicks in her p*ssy last night kid

>>9191832
So what you're saying is that NatSocs were progressive?

lul

>>9191840
>implying the subjective/objective dichotomy is useful in this regard

>>9191844
No, that's not what he said at all
They represented the evolution of society and the state while their opponents largely represented the status quo

>>9191525
The comparison between terrorism and some totally unrelated way to die is fallacious. Most of the things you listed are statistically thin tailed. That is to say they are stable, predictive events. Terrorism is fat tailed and past numbers are in no way telling of future ones. You may have in a given country 3 deaths in 10 years from terrorism and then 5 million deaths the next year. A record of the people who died the last few years has very very little predictive powers of how many will die the next year, and is biased downward.

>>9191844
No. Being reactionary just means you oppose the current status quo and you want to return to a previous status quo.

>>9191847
>They represented the evolution of society

They represented no such thing. It was an extreme regression back to essentially absolute monarchy, which is what fascism is; secular absolute monarchy.

File: 1478994853403.jpg (43KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 960x720px

>>9191860
>which is what fascism is; secular absolute monarchy.

>>9191856
Not really. That's traditionalism or conservativism.

Can someone answer OP's question, thanks?

>>9191860
>It was an extreme regression back to absolute monarchy

What the fuck man, you are completely out of your depth.

>>9191860
>which is what fascism is; secular absolute monarchy.
jizz, that's a silly simplification dude, don't you think so?

>>9191863
>>9191869
Literally ZERO arguments.

Fuck off back to /pol/ retards.

>>9191860
Hardly, and I feel this response is clearly coloured by your political ideology

>>9191856
And this does not describe the opponents of the Nazis? Then call them counter revolutionaries if you want ;^)

File: image.jpg (35KB, 517x407px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 517x407px

>>9191867

File: 1478810866899.jpg (55KB, 630x394px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 630x394px

>>9191872
muh /lit/ ssssSSSSAFE SPAAAAAAACE!

it was hhhHHHHHER TURRRRRRN!

*autistic screeching*

>>9191842
I'm not preoccupied with them at all. You're the one that thinks that natural opposition between batshit insane leftist tumblrinas and autistic internet fascism larpers is a progenitor of 'great western conflict'.

This thread stinks

>>9191865
No. Traditionalists can be and often are reactionaries if the traditions that they support have been abolished, but that is not necessarily the case.

Conservatism originally wants to preserve the status quo. So it is the opposite of reactionary. Though the american 'conservative' movement mostly only holds that name out of tradition.

Please actually look up the terms you are using.

>>9191860
>fascism is; secular absolute monarchy.
This is your brain on American education.

>>9191886
>This is your brain on American education.

So what you're saying is that George Orwell was educated in America? Because he made essentially the same argument.

>>9191889
LOL definitely not

>>9191880
once again I encourage you to look to reality

>>9191889
He most definitely did not. You're only further supporting the case by showing that you can't comprehend a thousand word article.

>>9191890
Actually I checked it myself. It's even more specific. Orwell argued that fascism was essentially a theocracy.

>>9191904
Are you going to try and explain how he argued it? Or just ignore that this totally contradicts your previous point?

>>9191898
>once again I have zero arguments
Just post some frog pictures, infowars articles and fuck off.

>>9191910
Well both absolute monarchy and a theocracy both need a grand narrative in which one single individual is the source of all authority and cannot be challenged.

You know, just like the Führerprinzip.

>>9191885
>Conservatism originally wants to preserve the status quo
Nice try with your sophistry. What you're talking about is named Capitalism. Conservatism just wants to preserve the values it believes in, but those values are not necessairly in the present. They can belong in the past.

>Conservatism originally wants to preserve the status quo. So it is the opposite of reactionary
Oops, look at here:
>Reactionary: of, pertaining to, marked by, or favoring reaction, especially extreme conservatism or rightism in politics; opposing political or social change (dictionary.com)
>Reactionary means "characterized by reaction", especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative (thefreedictionary.com)
Try harder the next time

>>9191917
Monarchy is hereditary and divine right. Theocracy is religious based. Fascism (which only meaningfully existed in Italy, NSDAP was different and Iberian rightist authoritarianism was just tinpot dictatorship shit not fascism fuck off Trotsky) was a might is right ideology. We also have nothing to say that Mussolini was going to appoint a blood relative as a successor. It was in no meaningful way a monarchy. It was also secular though it had some support from the clergy. Italian nationalism historically was quite anti-clerical

>>9191917
>A, B and C all share some traits
>that means A is both B and C
Are you actually mentally retarded?

>>9191917
Same applies to all implementations of communism that we have seen in the past. Saying all forms of totalitarian regimes are the same thing is a gross simplification.

>>9191926
THIS. Seriously, you took the words right out of my mouth. Perfect post in reply to an absolute cuck

>>9191926
>Monarchy is hereditary and divine right. Theocracy is religious based.

So what? I know that there is a quantitative difference between religion and ideology, but if both of the manifest in the same insanely radical way, there's practically no difference.

You really think people didn't worship Hitler in the same way people worshipped Jesus? Because they certainly did. The most radical of the NatSocs anyway.

>>9191917
>totalitarianism = monarchism
lmao get the fuck out kid

>>9191917
Well, that's incredibly broad and imprecise. Both Absolute monarchies and Theocracies (not that there are many of those) have an idea of natural (or intrinsic) rights and a certain set of duties toward their subjects, largely grounded in a historical, pre-existent, chiefly religious idea.
The Führerprinzip is grounded more in Biologism, Social Darwinist ideas and military hierarchies as well as the need to have a coherent structure inside a given movement or party due to the political conditions of the laet 1920's and 1930's.

More like Dork Enlightenment.

>>9191923
That's like quoting the dictionary definition that gives 'figuratively' as a valid definition of 'literally' because people keep misusing it to that effect.

People like you kept misusing the term to a point where it becomes pretty much meaningless, as seen in the shitty online dictionary definitions you have quoted.

The definition I am using is the definition from the New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought.

>Nice try with your sophistry. What you are talking about is named Capitalism

Jesus Christ man, please stop. Sophistry means a valid logical argument based on false assumptions. Capitalism is an economical system.

>>9191939
>both of the manifest in the same insanely radical way, there's practically no difference.
Because something is radical doesn't mean it is the same. In practice or theory. the old le nazis are just le sjws xd makes me want to have a bath with a toaster.
>You really think people didn't worship Hitler in the same way people worshipped Jesus?
People worship Neil deGrasse Tyson like a prophet on reddit. Now if as you say
>both of the manifest in the same insanely radical way, there's practically no difference
What is the difference between Muhammad and Neil deGrasse Tyson?

>>9191939
How can a person be this stupid yet still be able to operate a computer?

>>9191928
I didn't precisely say they are the same. I said they mimic the same thing as have existed in the past, e.g authoritarian religious political systems, such as absolute monarchy.

It obviously wasn't identical because it was based on nationalism, and not religion, but I mean, so what? It was a replacement of any transcendent reality or God with the State and the Führer.

>>9191968
Seems like somehow who roughly knows how to argue but really doesn't have much to say and was told by their mother and peers "how smart they sound"

>>9191968
If you don't have any arguments, why don't you just kill yourself instead?

>>9191974
I'm waiting for him to start up with the high school debate tier shit. Although we're already there really

>>9191963
>What is the difference between Muhammad and Neil deGrasse Tyson?

You mean apart from the fact that Muhammad's story and Tyson's life literally don't correlate in any way?

>>9191974
>projecting this much

>>9191984
i don't really know how to argue

>>9191961
>The definition I am using is the definition from the New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought
Post it, faggot

>Sophistry means a valid logical argument based on false assumptions
Maybe in America, where you're still retarded on many philosophical implications, haha. Look:
>Sophistry: a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning (dictionary.com)
Yeah, I keep quoting online "shitty" dictionary, upsy-daisies!!!

>Capitalism is an economical system.
Uh, so if Communism is an economical system, Marx is not a philosopher! Nice to know!

>>9191982
You said in this post >>9191939 that quantitative differences between two things don't matter so long as the amount of radicalism between the two is comparable.

File: 1478807901415.jpg (133KB, 601x601px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 601x601px

>>9191914
the butthurt emanating from this post

mm it is delicious mmm mmmm yummy

>>9192000
Yeah, and no amount of apotheosis of Neil deGrasse Tyson has yet produced a world war.

>>9191974
>implying your mix of incoherent verbal diarrhea and logical fallacies warrants an actual discussion
Come back when you're less retarded.

>>9191995
It's even on the top of the wikipedia article for reactionary man:

A reactionary is a person who holds political views that favor a return to the status quo ante, the previous political state of society, which they believe possessed characteristics (discipline, respect for authority, etc.) that are negatively absent from the contemporary status quo of a society. As an adjective, the word reactionary describes points of view and policies meant to restore the status quo ante.

>Maybe in America
I am German.

>so if Communism is an economical system
Marxism is an economical system. Communism is a government system based on Marxism. Marx is a socioeconomical philosopher.

>>9192006
Doesn't matter you said that quantitative differences don't matter. Either admit that was a fucking retarded thing to say or close this tab right now

>>9192005
>delicious butthurte
Oh no le 9gag army has come for me.

As a rule of thumb

Anything contrarian that's hip is shit

>>9192017
I'm not admitting anything.

The radicalism adherence to Hitlerism or religious extremism isn't even comparable to millennial fanboying of a astrophysicist you huge faggot.

File: 1478808570963.png (857KB, 996x760px) Image search: [Google]

857KB, 996x760px

>>9192022
The bestest way to tell
If anon has a sore rump
Is whether or not he fell
For "don't vote for Trump!!"

>>9192025
>The radicalism adherence to Hitlerism or religious extremism isn't even comparable to millennial fanboying of a astrophysicist you huge faggot.
I'm not playing a game of semantics here. If you want I can just say that terrorists aren't real muslims :^)

The point is that quantitative differences matter otherwise you're trying to tell me that Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Pope Leo X, Mao and Mussolini are all the same thing. I don't know the mindset of a 21st century Trot but look they're all different in nuanced and massive ways alike

>>9192033
What I meant by quantitative difference is that a belief in God can actually stop you from committing horrible actions, as much as it can cause you to commit horrible actions.

Meanwhile, Hitlerism obviously cannot do such a thing.

>>9192010
You're just creating confusion. My first post was in reply to your statement:
>Being reactionary just means you oppose the current status quo and you want to return to a previous status quo
That's inaccurate and incomplete. The term reactionary is modelled on "reaction", therefore it indicates a violent behavior towards progress, especially when that progress starts to happen (like a revolution, for example). If there's not a fuse being lighted, you can't really call yourself a reactionary. Traditionalists, for example, always want to return to a previous status quo (they're usually nostalgic), but this doesn't make them reactionary.

>Marxism is an economical system
Yeah, and it's inspired by a philosophy. So it's Capitalism. I know it hasn't much to do with our topic, but I named it because it's a good example of a political thought/behavior that wants to preserve the status quo. Conservatism might want to return to values that don't belong in the present (status quo) but in the past (status quo ante). That's why conservatists often turn out to be reactionary (as soon as the opportunity arises).

>I am German
Nice to know I'm not talking with a redneck

>>9191632
>I'm not special, just lucky to be born in one place and not another. Their is surely plenty of food and shelter and safety to share with others. The idea that all this safety and comfort is mine, that I deserve these possessions, is a joke. You can't own atoms, you can't own land. It exists without your ownership.

Top fucking kek this has to be a meme.

File: pollit.jpg (1000KB, 4000x3549px) Image search: [Google]

1000KB, 4000x3549px

>>9191341
It's far too fragmented to be called a movement, not to mention all the people trying to claim they're at it's head
This is effectively the Protestant/Lutherian deviation of the Religion of Equality and Laissez-faire capitalism

WE LUTHER NOW

>another alt-right meme

Go take your red pills, I hope you choke on'em.

>>9192072
How is what I said earlier not compatible with the definition given above? Status quo ante means previous status quo by the way if you didn't get it. And traditionalists don't always want to return to a previous status quo. For instance most of the opposition against gay marriage in the US was based on tradition arguments, but gay marriage wasn't the status quo yet at that point.

Marxists want to preserve the status quo too when the act in a marxist system and capitalist opposition arises, so I don't know what you are getting at.

Conservatives often turn into reactionaries when they lose a political battle for preservation, e.g. gay marriage. But usually they were already opposed to the change before it happened.

File: Wittgenstein-Quietist-Mystic.png (139KB, 830x334px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 830x334px

>>9191341
So I keep noticing these increasingly desperate and pathetic pop philosophers, like Richard Kulisz, the transhumanists and HBD morons, the "dark enlightenment" dudes and the retardosphere scribblers. Like pop musicians, who have no musical training and talent whatsoever, no rigor, no real and sustained discipline and drive in what they do, so do these "casual philosophers" and pop philosophers seem to me to be related to the domain of actual thought. "Self-taught hobbyism" is the most benign label that I could apply to them, and they all take such great pride in being self-taught! (whereas, among all the genuinely educated, having no teachers in such an advanced culture as ours counts, not as an honor, but as an intellectual death sentence). And like pop musicians, who borrow concepts, instruments, styles and techniques from real music, but never getting any far with them, never producing anything lasting, forever mired in and condemned to an eternal primitivism, so do these pop philosophers fare in the realm of thought. One could say the same thing for their writings as for Osho's poorly written and conceptually detestable mishmash of third-hand accounts of Western and Eastern philosophies: they are all, more or less, equally irredeemable and worthless. These pop philosophers show not the slightest acknowledgement in their writings that a philosophical tradition even exists, and that the intractable problems with which they are so incompetently grappling have been discussed ad nauseam for millennia by all the geniuses. — The aforementioned, by the way, should be distinguished from characters such as the French "New Philosophers", who at least acknowledge the philosophical tradition in their works, but simply SUCK UNFATHOMABLY in doing anything with it, thus restricting themselves to expensive shirts and fine dining, or straight up bad philosophy like the "analytic" Anglo-Saxons, and so on. — All these efforts, at the end of the day, are obviously inherently abortive, since contrary to what all these people seem to think, you can't defeat a beast by RUNNING AWAY FROM IT. There's only one solution: to GRAPPLE with the beast, which is to say, WITH THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, which of course presupposes that you have at least some inkling of it! In short: Don't be a pseud. Don't abortive. Be a man. Be a genius. — Or at least try to be one, the first step of which attempt would be... to see how you measure up against past geniuses, by making at least some kind of an effort to read them.
Or keep scribbling mountains of stuff that will be washed away and be forgotten the moment you stop scribbling so much and some other blog starts getting more popular than yours. Whatever makes you happy, I guess — I am just sayin'.

File: nicktweet1.jpg (35KB, 630x303px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 630x303px

fuck me this thread is shit
NRx (as seen through Moldbug/Land) isn't a movement so much as it is an analytical framework
it has no political aims
the closest thing to a goal is the 'neocameral framework' or 'patchwork' but this is seen more as where the world is headed as opposed to a suggestion on where it should head
Land did not endorse Trump and does not like the American embarrassment known as the 'alt right'
Land/Moldbug are the only ones that matter, don't bother with that graph

The European New Right is so much more interesting than NRx.

>>9192166
>Land did not endorse Trump and does not like the American embarrassment known as the 'alt right'

That's because they are closet Marxists e.g accelerationists.

>>9192188

This.
NRx are mostly ex-libertarians gloating about their STEM god tierness.
And these people have nothing interesting to say or add to philosophy.

>>9192166
Oh so it's kind of like Occupy Wall Street?

>>9192141
>How is what I said earlier not compatible with the definition given above?
It's not uncompatible, I just wanted to complete it.
>Status quo ante means previous status quo by the way if you didn't get it
I studied Latin, I know what it means. And I can't see where I used it improperly in my previous post.

>For instance most of the opposition against gay marriage in the US was based on tradition arguments, but gay marriage wasn't the status quo yet at that point.
The opposition against gay marriage is an example of Conservatism, even if they appeal to tradition. (In practical terms there's very little difference between conservatists and traditionalists).

>But usually they were already opposed to the change before it happened.
That's clear.

Since I think we're now stating the same, I change the subject and ask you: are Trump supporters reactionary? Just curious about your opinion.

>>9191566
America deserves to burn, that doesn't stop bleeding hearts demanding neutral countries accept an unending flow of migrants into their territory. It would make sense if open border fetishists were at least consistent in their rhetoric but they're not

>>9192188
Even the madmen in the ENR like Dugin look calm and considered in comparison to NRx edgelords

>>9192213
Occupy Bitcoin

>>9191433
>>9191460
The issue with your whole claim that what happened to Milo shows that the alliance is fracturing, though, is that the Religious Right is in no way part of the alt-right or NRx. It's probably the oldest remaining part of the GOP establishment, dating back to the mid-70s or even earlier, older than even the neocons. The Religious Right is a core part of the conservative movement guided by the likes of Reagan and William F. Buckley, which is everything NRx'ers and the alt-right are reacting against.

Is it me or has the right innovated much more as any other political spectrum?

>>9192272
>are Trump supporters reactionary?
That's a pretty vague question. What is a Trump supporter? Everyone who voted for him? Because that would be a very big slize of the population with a huge variety of different people with different ideologies and reasoning behind their support that it would be pointless to try and categorize them all collectively as one thing.

There certainly are reactionaries under his supporters.
If Trump and his policies are reactionary is a different question altogether.

>>9192877
Oh my god, why are you Germans that persnickety? No wonder you're the country of autistic philosophers kek

Yeah, I meant who voted for him.

>>9192937
Well, I will try and dissect the biggest groups of supporters then.

His entire campaign message was designed to pander to and invoke reactionary sentiments in the population. 'Make America Great Again' and speeches of a return to the imaginary good old days where anyone could get a job and rise to the middle class or even get rich through hard work and persistence. Jobs for everyone instead of welfare/socialism for everyone. A return to christian values and the western tradition instead of the globalist neo-lib and neo-con status quo.

This message resonated with christian conservatives, working class people outside of the coasts, poor black inner city people in Detroit and other ruined metropoleis and so-called white trash welfare reliant people. Which could all be defined as reactionary in this context. Most of these people are probably not really involved in politics though and aren't actively trying to be ideologically reactionary. Hence Trump got called a populist quite a lot.

There are other parts of his following that aren't reactionary though. Huge parts of millennial right wingers and parts of the so-called alt-right are outright revolutionary and wish a rebuild conservative party which, one could say, would not be conservative at all.

His strong border policies and middle east immigration stop resonated obviously not only with general anti-globalists but also with the small minority of overhyped boogey-men 'deplorable' white nationalists and white identitarians. I wouldn't necessarily call them reactionary either. I don't think we have ever seen a fascist white ethnostate form of the US before.

His perceived pro free speech and anti-PC messages found a following in disgruntled old-school liberals and libertarians / classical liberals. Same goes for his color blind anti-racism and pro meritocracy messages. You could probably say these people are actually purposefully reactionary and opposed to the perceived status-quo of neo-libs, neo marxists and intersectional feminist establishment in the media and education.