This Week in Reaction (2016/02/21)

[Hestia Society and the editors of Social Matter have asked me to bring “This Week in Reaction” here. It’s probably a step up for me in traffic. So I’m happy to oblige them. -NBS]

Tho’ I am loathe to cover current events and prefer my history aged 12 or more years in oak casks, those I read are writing about Big Social Media’s war on dissident rightists. And so it bears a mention here. Of course, we all remember Milo’s recent unceremonious Twitter De-Verification. Appointing Anita Sarkeesian to the hilariously Orwellian denotated “Trust & Safety Council” is a certain sign that Twitter places orthodoxy above profits. I and others were search shadowbanned and then apparently (always apparently because no one is actually in charge at Twitter) search un-shadowbanned once we noticed it. Chris Gale quit twitter, and expects a fork in it. (Software fork, that is. Well, maybe both.) Stacy McCain was unceremoniously banned. (It’s always unceremonious.) Apparently, March 1 is quit twitter day.

Those links are just the tip of the iceberg. The diligent student of the phenomenon will be able to dig up hundreds more. I am not a diligent student of it. Why? Because I just. Don’t. Care. Let’s get some principles straight.

  • Twitter’s House, Twitter’s Rules. One could hope Twitter might enforce their terms of service fairly without a view to the orthodoxy of the opinions expressed. But Twitter is under no moral or legal obligation to do so. Who are we kidding? It’s their house. They’ll do what they want. Don’t let the door bruise your arse on the way out if you don’t like it.

  • There is no such thing as an abstract right to free speech. There just isn’t. There is no positive right whatsoever that does not directly correspond to a moral obligation for others. And even if there was such a “right”, there wouldn’t be one on a private social media network. Maybe there is a rhetorical (or guerrilla warfare) advantage to trying to make the enemy live up to its own supposed principles, but whining about free speech is just bullshit. Stop it. You’re better than that.

  • It is really easy to not violate Twitter’s ToS. Just don’t use bad words or be an asshole to any member of a privileged group, and it’s extremely unlikely you’ll get suspended. Whether they shadowban you or not is a separate question.

  • The speed with which Twitter lifted our search shadow bans a couple weeks ago suggests that they may not intend to pursue this avenue of restriction. Maybe all one will have to do is notice it (CC: @twitter), and some SJW search lackey will be forced to remove you from a script. Who knows?

  • Big Social Media is a terrible place to have substantive discussion about political theory. Twitter because it’s too short-form. Facebook because it’s too non-anonymized. But it might be a good place to get free advertising.

  • Don’t fight with a pig. You’ll both get dirty, and the pig will like it.

Twitter is (or at least was until I moved to SM) my number one blog referrer. With the NRx aggregator and Nick Land close second and third. I’d hate to lose that number one. So I won’t go looking for the opportunity to lose it. If Trust & Safety Czar Sarkeesian gets her way, and suspends every account of anyone who’s ever had a moment of doubt about human neurological uniformity, then, hey, no big…. The people who I care most about reading me will still find me. The bottom line: Quit Twitter on March 1 (or any other day) when and only when the value it adds fails to exceed its cost.

Let’s see… what else was there…

Filed under Not Remotely This Week: Dr. John C. Rao’s pamphlet Americanism and the Collapse of the Church in the United States (Remnant Press 1984, Tan Books 1994) has been making the rounds. I loved it so much I made it a permanent page here. It is an almost perfect portrait of the occult power structure—which we have come to call The Cathedral—of Western liberal democracy that slightly predates Mencius Moldbug’s pubic hair.

It was an incredibly busy week in the sphere. Better grab a cup of coffee…

Nick Land spots Scott Alexander spotting the Cathedral—just about every last tentacle of it. Spandrell takes the psychiatrist to the psychologist’s couch. Alexander is doing a terrible job of not being eaten by his own side. His assiduous documentation of it, however, continues to prove quite valuable:

Not that I want him in my side. The dude has way too much baggage. But there’s always something to gain by denying the enemy from a good general. And the guy is smart, and he is the object of admiration of many. Look at his damn blog, he gets hundreds of comments of starry-eyed fans who go there just to share a micro-slice of his fame. I got a link from him a while ago and my referrer stats got flooded with accesses from MIT addresses. Which is very impressive. Surely beats the bunch of nazis I’ve been getting lately.

Scott Alexander news draws Richard A. Brookes into the fray as well with Tribes and Parties. An important bit of NRx evo-psych here:

Selena Gomez not in a fishtail dress

Selena Gomez not in a fishtail dress

The modern left is primarily a culture. Its political positions are emanations of that culture, not its central or essential elements. What unites the culture is not any set of political propositions, but the social elements of belonging to an in-group and following a set of fashions.

As far as membership of the culture is concerned, opposing abortion or supporting gun ownership are exactly as bad as listening to Nickelback. Political positions are fashionable or unfashionable first, and subject to rational or ideological analysis second.

This is really important, because of what it says about the motive (or rather, lack of motive) behind the direction of dominant political thought.

It is that it is a direction. Or rather a pose approving of whatever direction in which the fashionable people happen to be leaning. Progressivism is not specific content. Remember when Moldbug was on ycombinator during the Strange Loop Affair, trolling the SJWs with “What positive declaration must I make, then, so that I might be invited to your conferences?” The entire point was that no positive affirmation of creed is possible. Any creed will be outdated in an increasingly small number of years. What is necessary is devotion to the Progressive Clade. Be one of us, and all will be forgiven. Refuse to be one of us, and no number of apologies will ever be enough.

But back to Spandrell. This was him being brilliant: A biological case against democracy. Not so much a novel argument as supremely well and concisely put. Democracy is basically a free market on power. And since we all know there’s no such thing as an actual free market, it really means democracy is just a market for power where traditional restraints have been burnt to the ground. Who wins in such an environment? Clintons, broadly construed.

Monarchies can have a bad king. But Democracies always have a bad king.

An ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ RTWT.

Malcolm Pollack asks What am I doing here? He’s not absolutely sure. His posts used to be more cultural and technical, less political, like How To Explain Special Relativity To Anyone Of Normal Intelligence In Ten Minutes. Anyone would burn out on outrage porn. Or at least should. Understanding the mind of the enemy and knowing where and how best to attack is a different thing. What I am doing here is trying to build a future for my people and my children. Glancing at the multi-car pileup on the other side of the road is natural, understandable, and forgivable, but let’s try to keep it from holding up too much traffic on our side of the road.

Interesting reportage and opinion from Sydney Trads: The Petty Circular Firing Squads of Feminist Journalism in Australia. A “major disservice to feminism” is apparently a new way to pronounce “sacrilege”. Circular firing squad. Yup.

Australian news presenter Sam Armytage

Australian news presenter Sam Armytage

This tit-for-tat chest-beating exercise in feminist pontificating between two female journalists serves to highlight the misdirected and narrow-sighted ideology feminism has become. In the middle of the war of words is Kristen Davis, whose purpose for the interview was to promote her work concerning the widespread sexual abuse of women and children. These women and children have conveniently been forgotten by Haussegger, whose point was solely about the backwards steps the female Sunrise presenters, in one small segment, have allegedly caused modern, contemporary feminism. Never mind the refugee women and children who truly are suffering – it’s female journalists and their place in the hearts and minds of the Australian public, their profession and television executives which truly matter.

Also at Sydney Trads, a nice quote from Alexis de Tocqueville. And applause for Poland’s conservative wSieci mainstream news magazine.

Mark Citadel applauds as Abkhazia Outlaws Abortion. And also from Mark, the Vendée finally gets the attention it deserves: Jacques Cathelineau & Diamonds in the Rough.

The hero waits in every man, but only in a true warrior manifests itself to the greatest height, whether that warrior triumph on the ruins of enemy strongholds, or die honorably in battle. The surprise hero, the unexpected soldier, is a gift of divine grace and intervention, and this is what makes the story of the Vendée inspiring. The case for Cathelineau’s sainthood is not merely based on his martyrdom, but in his transformation from a man who sold tchotchkes off the back of a wagon, to a towering combatant in defense of Catholic Monarchism.

With God, all things are possible, that are logically possible. Hats off to Mark Citadel for recounting this inspiring story and winning the ☀☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Award☀☀. Pursue virtue for one can never know whether he might somehow be a blessing in disguise.

Mark continues to make the podcast rounds. Here he is talking with Adam Wallace of West Coast Reactionaries.

RF savages Sanquine on ostensible definitions of “science” and “capitalism”. And pretty much rightly so. RF’s only error is in supposing that NRx doesn’t agree with him, or perhaps only does so with Insufficient Puritah®. Capitalism is “double-entry accounting”, BTW, and describes human actions. Thinking it has a mind and will of its own is, I think, an error equal but opposite to the idea that it should be outlawed. Moar thrashing of Popper. <Slowclap.gif>

RF also considers The Eastern Europe dominated future of Europe. And welcomes it. He also goes deep in an anaylysis of Gentile’s essay on the philosophy of Fascism.

Seth Long discusses Syria, Iraq, and the Need for a Corporate State. Also: Ash Carter on 21st century warfare. “High-tech, low-grunt.” Should be good for the economy.

Reactionary Ferret takes a look in Might, Right, and Whatnot, in which positive rights (deontology) takes another fine drubbing.

Neovictorian names Matthew Crawford, Philosopher for the Dark Enlightenment. The author of Shop Class as Soul Craft and The World Beyond Your Head has some positively reactionary points to make.

Land considers Cathedralism—which amounts approximately to the power to govern on the back of so-called “public relations” alone.

A quick note from Jim on what Leftism is, as illustrated by the destruction of GitHub. And Poland goes alt right. Or something in that general direction. It’s apparently still legal to ask the JQ there. And even answer it.


As promised last week, Slumlord comes through with his big brain dump on Rethinking Race and Identity. Based on experimental data, like the doll experiments, he posits a layer of in-built reasoning that he dubs “arational”. Like primordial subroutines that tell young children of any color white dolls are “better” than brown dolls, or humans of any race or sex that Hayden Panettier is more “desirable” than Rosie O’Donnell. Blank slate theorizing is quite obviously bunkum. But I’m not sure I’m ready to lay modern excesses of it at the feet of Plato and Aristotle.

Butch Leghorn points to a Black Pigeon video that I too had linked on twitter: Why Women Destroy Civilizations. Very high quality stuff. DefinATEly worth 18 minutes of your time. Even if it’s mostly review.

Lawrence Glarus is reading his Bible. KJV. A man of good taste. He offers Thoughts on Proverbs Chapter 2.

E. Antony Gray pens two songs: The Song at the Great Chasm and The Song of The Shacks on the Shore .

Esoteric Trad registers an objection to the idea the modern corporations are a good model for governance: Business ‘leaders’ and Company ‘followers’. He notes:

Businesses and large companies are not good examples of governance. If this needs elucidating to you, clearly you’ve never worked with a big company, for a big company, or even had a few drinks with someone who has.

I work for a large company. He’s right. But I’d add a modifier “Businesses and large companies are not good examples of governance today.” Corporate governance suffers many of the same pathologies that sovereign governance does. Modern pseudo-religious psychology is more than sufficient to doom an otherwise competitive model. Seeking and getting political favors in lieu of genuine competitiveness artificially prolongs the dying process of many large corporations. A government is a corporation. That’s just a definition. Running it like one will only be as successful as running any other corporation, which is to say, it still must be run well.

Neocolonial add superb viewgraphs to his bullet points considering the Elements of Production under Feudal hierarchy versus democracy.

Free Northerner notes that while individual men may or may not be disposable, any way you slice it Sperm is Cheap. This fact has, for better or worse, rather stubbornly shaped human psychology and civilization. Also, filed under White People Problems: Sparing the Rod.

Giovanni Alighieri was kind enough to link (and imbed) “Christian Google Hangout #2” in which he and I and Mark Citadel and Antidem among others participated. Thanks to Reactionary Ian for coordinating and hosting it. Citadel also makes note of the hangout, whilst celebrating his 100,000th pageview and his new account on The Twitter.

CWNY considers the The Woman of Calais.

Let’s see what was up over at Social Matter, the Flagship Publication of Neoreaction. (Oh, that’s here now…)

This Week at Social Matter

Ryan Landry’s Big Sunday Think Piece™ is about how The Media Cosbyed Their Porn Hero. I won’t spoil it by defining the verb “to cosby”. The “hero” in question is James Deen. Well… was James Deen, whom I mentioned in passing way back here. Not that we care too much about Deen, of course…


Deen is a slimeball. Porn is a sordid business. The scary part about the media Cosbying him using flimsy accusations that never lead to criminal charges is how recently they were using him and how eagerly he pushed all of their lines. The progressive narratives are collapsing fast. The progressive martyrs are always angels with dirty faces. The heroes that they are putting forth are expendable. Progressives must use whatever weapon at hand to push whatever meme they need to at the moment.

The story is, as usual, what’s behind the story. And Landry is 5th Degree Black Belt in ferreting those out.

Thomas Barghest, whom we only met for the first time last week, is back on Monday with a second effort: The Radioactivity Of Atomic Individualism. The juggernaut continues. Barghest derives an analogy between chemical atoms and social atoms—a mapping made all the more salient over the last hundred years in which man has developed the means to split them. It’s an article hard to summarize, but he outlines multiple failure modes of individualism, each of which bear inedible fruit in the wastelands of modernity. This was an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

On Tuesday, inspired by David Grants 3-part series on Star Trek TNG episode “Chain of Command”, James Rustler returns for a guest appearance with We Are The Borg. The “we” being the Federation, who seemed to have its own ways of adding the biological and technological distinctiveness of Alpha Quadrant peoples to itself. And the “we” is also today’s, yet earthbound, progressive cosmopolitan elite:

It is no great challenge to the imagination to look at the spread of globalist “Last Man” values around the world, and to hear a voice saying: We are the liberals. You will adopt our form of government, our philosophy, our cultural norms, our morals, our sexual practices, our attitudes toward religious faith, our materialist and consumerist lifestyles, our idea of proper relations between the sexes and between parents and children, and even our assessment of the value of human life. You will dress like us, eat like us, work like us, play like us, be educated like us, listen to the music and watch the movies we create, buy the products that we make (or at least, have made for us in Chinese factories), and communicate with each other through channels we control (like Facebook and Instagram).

Landry returns on Wednesday for the next installment of Weimerica Weekly—featuring Kevin (Based) MacDonald.

Finally, on Friday, Mark Citadel is Declaring War On Sustainable Development Goals. And not just him, but it seems the earth itself. Or at least the humans in it. Our Globalist Masters are swimming very much against the tide:

Remember when nationalism was a pillar of left-wing thought? They walked that off the plank pretty quickly, so don’t be surprised when what’s left of participatory democracy gets given the boot, as well. If it’s in the way of Progress, dump it. Again, I will emphasize that this project of theirs, while succeeding in some areas, is failing in the macro. The world doesn’t want to play ball and achieve those sustainable development goals, and why should it? Why should China stunt its own economy to ensure the welfare of Gabon? That isn’t how the world works. People are already predicting the failure of this effort, and it is barely out of the gate.

So then has Davos man overplayed his hand? Is chaos more his enemy than our own? I’m not quite as sure about that as Mark.

So let’s see what Ryan Landry was up to over at his home blog, shall we?

This Week at 28 Sherman

Fresh off his Social Matter article on porn hero turned porn heel James Deen, Ryan Landry’s Monday post considers The Future of Pornography. It’s interesting, I won’t spoil it for you. But both trends he identifies were seemed at first surprising, and completely unsurprising in retrospect. Whether these trends restrict or consolidate the power of pornographers is not entirely clear.

Landry has a fitting and reverent remembrance for Antonin Scalia: The Last Of The Lions Died:


The Italian thing was the charm. Scalia was like a mob movie character who made good, like had Michael Corleone stayed in the Ivy league and become Senator Corleone, Governor Corleone[…]. Scalia did not hold back. He made it to the Supreme Court but was still a sarcastic son of a bitch. His opinions were labelled sarcastic at orders of magnitude higher than his peers. The man renamed Obamacare “SCOTUScare” when skewering Chief Justice Roberts and the merry band of liberals for all the legal gymnastics they performed to make Obamacare constitutional. You know Scalia was a ball buster.

This wins an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

Thursday he gets in the big, fancy chair over at Daily Caller with How Hillary Clinton Learned To Love The Muslim Brotherhood. This was a fantastic bit of investigative reporting. What Obama knew and when is hard to say, but only because it is not at all apparent he provided any leadership whatsoever over his own State Department. Clinton was, and by all accounts still is, very tight with Huma Abedin, whose mother is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood, which is as close as you get to the Muslim Brotherhood without a Y-chromosome. You’d think at the very least, Hillary’s image would suffer in the eyes of the Israel-loving media and donors from this revelation. Extremely hard not to give this one an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀. So we did.

This week in WW1 pics: First Battle Of The Marne .

This Week in Kakistocracy

When I die, I hope Porter can be troubled to say a few words. He has a send off for the great Antonin Scalia, and thoughts about what now: Requiem for a Ghost Shirt

One of the many sources of liberal apoplexy toward Scalia was his recalcitrance toward judicial imposition of progress. This historically being the left’s preferred mode of implementation. When the public refuses to plunge a knife into its neck, that’s when the court steps in. And when Scalia declined to add weight against the hilt, the left was left to howl.

Because most liberals are certain the terms virtuous and constitutional are synonyms.

Next up: What I Like About You. Larry Summers was sufficiently white to get well… Larry Summersed… by Harvard when I thought biological differences betwixt men and women might explain some of the respective differences of interest in STEM fields, but insufficiently white to be held down for long.


The topic tonight is Larry Summers’ helpful departure from his base of expertise in economics into law enforcement. I don’t think any of us like crime, and Larry has alighted on an almost elementary approach to achieving its reduction: do away with high denomination currency. That sensation you are experiencing of why didn’t I think of that? is the reason he is a former president of Harvard and you merely work for a living.

Since fighting crime has become so difficult since the advent of paper money, especially admixed with the newest crime fighting technique of paying overly much attention to disparate impact, our cultural masters have come up with a solution to ban money. At least in demonations necessary to conduct business transactions any larger than tipping your door man. Who could possibly want to create untraceable transactions? Except criminals of course.

[W]ith the $100 bill reportedly representing 78% of the total dollar currency in circulation, its removal starts getting the Federal Reserve very close to de facto cash elimination. And you very close to paying the bank to borrow your money.

Also from Porter: Do Robots Dream of Revenues?

This Week in Evolutionist X


Evolutionist X has a big series this week on the Scandal that should have never been: Satanic Daycares. Part 1 sets the background. How to set up the cultural environment so people will be more disposed to believe in Satanic (purely evil) conspiracies; how to convince someone that they too have been victims of Satanic ritual abuse; and how to dig up evidence (and/or time your exposés just right) for it for fun and profit. Mostly profit. Part 2 looks at the effects of the collective insanity.

Part Three is a nice wrap-up that looks at the extent to which this “big fat nothing” grew, and a litany of people harmed, and conversely not at all harmed by their association in the abuse cases. This depended, of course, upon whether they were on the whom or the who end of jurisprudence. And all of this is peppered with insightful commentary:

A prosecutor who wins cases gets promoted or at least keeps their job. A prosecutor who loses cases loses their job. An honest prosecutor, therefore, is more likely to get fired than one who suppresses evidence of the defendant’s guilt or is otherwise willing to act unethically. […] Even if most prosecutors are truly well-intentioned, such a system rewards the unethical and punishes the honest.

There are many cases where a well-meaning person might make an honest mistake. The police failure to properly gather forensic evidence in the “West Memphis Three” murders, for example, may have been a mistake.

The Ritual Satanic Daycare scandals, however, involves cases of such mind-bogglingly absurd proportions that no such benefit of the doubt can be extended. If these people genuinely did not realize they were coercing children into lying in order to put innocent people in prison, then they are not mentally fit to manage their own affairs and should have been put into an institution for the intellectually disabled. If they are not mentally unfit, then they are monsters.

Excellent research and commentary in this series. And certainly worthy of an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

She also has this brief note contrasting 1911 Psychoanalitic Congress vs. 1927 Solvay Conference.

Next, Evolutionist X looks at Turkey, finding it Not very Turkic (a genetic history of the Turkic peoples).

This Week around The Orthosphere

Matt Briggs has Scalia Dissents: Some Favorites. He also pokes some fun at a study of Planned Parenthood Outfits in Texas: What Happens If You Take Away Women’s Birth Control? He considers the Grammys a Triumph Of The Vulgar. “Vulgar” used to mean simply “low”, “common”, “of or belonging to the masses”. This is not really that. Very nearly the opposite, in fact.

Filed under Hey I Disbelieve in Those gods Too, Briggs is in The Stream with Dice Games Prove Evolution Because Humans Believed In Punitive Gods?

At Orthosphere Central, J. M. Smith is back contrasting Ogygia and Patmos. He sees apocalypse—literally “remove Calypso’s spell”—as a synonym for “red pill”.


An apocalypse removes the delusive and phantasmal veil of Calypso, the artificial fabric of history seen sub specie temporis. It is no coincidence that Calypso is a weaver as well as a seductress, for what she weaves upon her loom is the curtain she will draw over the gates of eternity. She weaves this curtain, hangs it and draws it shut, in order to trap men on Ogygia, to make them what St. John called “kindreds of the earth.”

Also from Smith: The Maelstrom of Modern Magic. This was quite good and an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀:

It should be obvious that modern technology is magic that works. You may object that magic, unlike technology, operates by way of occult forces; but this objection confuses ontology and epistemology. An occult force is not a kind of force, but a force that humans understand in a particular way. It is a force that humans understand very poorly, or that is well understood by only a small cabal of adepts. Electricity was once an occult force, and for a great many of us still is.

Understood this way, we are awash in magic these days. And far from all of it is the good kind.

Bonald is logically compelled by recent popes’ (that’s plural) statements to wonder: Does the post-Vatican II Church demand cultural genocide? He’s mostly quoting Christopher Ferrara:

Funny, isn’t it, how the same Pope [Francis] who refuses involve himself in political affairs when it comes to the mass murder of unborn children or the legalization of “unions” based on sodomy—precisely where he should be involved—not only wants to talk politics but also to suggest how Catholics in America should vote when it comes to ending all state barriers to illegal immigration (except in the Vatican State, of course).

And my good friend Jim Kalb:

Neo-Catholic Brute Squad

But what of the local culture? The Pope [Saint JPII] “also invite[s] the immigrants to recognize the duty to honor the countries which receive them and to respect the laws, culture, and traditions of the people who have welcomed them.” So it appears the net effect is to be a world without boundaries of any kind, in which each is equally present to all others and each respects and honors the particularities of all.

By calling for such a thing the Pope [Saint JPII] is saying nothing new but simply repeating with his usual intellectual and moral fervor the view all official moral teachers hold today. What he and other moral teachers leave unexplained, however, is how the particularities that are to be honored will be able to exist as anything but individual idiosycrasies in a world utterly without boundaries in which no culture is authoritative because each is equally present and equally honored.

Never was there a better cure for ultramontanism than several recent occupants of the “mountains” of Rome.

And Bonald is fantastic here in The laity’s day, or night. His preface is the startling, yet unassailable point that “Vatican II, together with the movement preceding and following it, destroyed all the laity’s major means of agency.” What would a renewal led by the laity look like? Nothing like the liberals hope. Past reforms were led by religious orders and called for higher standards not greater laxity. Suppose the laity did lead a renewal. Would they be treading on the authority of the Church? Not at all, says Bonald:

[W]e either have a Magisterium or we don’t. The authority of the Church doesn’t mean that I can’t decide for myself whether or not someone is a heretic. The authority of the Church means that I can make that decision, because the Church has put out into the public all the tools I need for such an evaluation. The Church has either proclaimed her teaching or she hasn’t. If she has, anyone in principle can determine with the tools of logic whether someone else is contradicting that teaching. If she hasn’t, then what’s the point of speaking to us at all?

Catholics are not compelled by Scripture or Tradition to believe that a priest or a bishop or a pope has better reading comprehension than any faithful layman. On the contrary, given recent history, and the personal experiences of many of us, it’s almost a sure bet against it.

Over at Imaginative Conservative, Bruce Frohnen wonders Is the Republican Party Splitting Apart? Well, I certainly hope so. Frohnen also asks Should Christians Apologize for the Crusades? Heavens no! More from Birzer on Eric Voegelin’s Gnosticism. Vogelin’s critique of it that is.

The goal of the gnostic in this world becomes one of re-ordering it towards his own vision: namely, that material is evil and spirit is good. Gnostics, of whatever variety, therefore, desire to reorder man, history, and society, all of which are traditionally unjust.

Sound familiar?

Also at Imaginative Conservative, a mixed review of “The Revenant”.

Chris Gale applauds Australia’s ability to Keep the Orcs out and notes that now New Zealand must do the same, or else inherit all the Australia-bound Orcs. Also this Quote of the day was pretty funny. And true.

This Week… Elsewhere

Kill to Party considers “Freddy’s Revenge” (1985) and Homophobia. And it really is better than any review of a 30-year-old slasher film has a right to be.

Completely gratuitous picture of Lisa Welchel

Completely gratuitous picture of Lisa Welchel

Freddy Kruger is the Progressive response to Dracula. While Dracula played on the beta’s anxiety of being usurped sexually by the handsome and powerful Alpha, after the Sexual Revolution this anxiety was pushed below the surface (yet is still very real). If a woman has no restrictions on her sexuality, and realizing that sexuality in terms of selective promiscuity has become what defines the fully realized woman, fearing the powerful Alpha seducing women away from the pandering beta, and in-turn, ruining these women as prospective wives and mothers, must be redefined as the vile beta rapist.

Women have come to feel entitled to a night with sexy Dracula, regardless of what her future husband may think, but greatly fears the grotesque Freddy Kruger using trickery and force to steal and sully her sexuality.

That was the first edition of Nightmare on Elm Street. “But what if Freddy Kruger were gay?” That brings us to the sequel. Well, if Kruger was haunting your dreams trying to make you gay, then the happy ending would be…? Yup.

The Progressive loathes war as she understands it as toxic-masculinity and the exploitation of the powerless for the personal gain of the powerful; to the Progressive, this is immoral. The Progressive loves abortion, and recognizes it as a woman’s right to dodge responsibility for her own personal gain; this is freedom.

What separates one from the other is sophistry and language manipulation, and Iron Maiden is deliberate in their mentioning this “madman play on words.” The listener is challenged on issues of freedom, responsibility, and morality. Where does one draw the line?

Along the way, we get impressive drops on deracinated suburban life, Iron Maiden, and female sexual selection, to name only a few. Excellent article and an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

And Kill to Party was on a roll this week. He has some moar sex realism in The Cool Girl and the White Knight: Sexual Strategy and Identity:

Traditional sexual strategy for women involves those cursed beauty standards which keep feminists up at night. Girly hair and make-up, a charming feminine demeanor, and a sexually alluring body-type which may necessitate trips to the gym or a reasonably controlled diet. Not foul-language, not cigarette smoking, not beer swilling, nor an ego-obsessed girl bent on proving how cool and smart she is.

He compares Cool Girl strategy to that of the White Night.

Did I mention Kill to Party was on a roll? Here’s another in his “Under the Rainbow” series: Genocidal Emasculation and Big Budget American Rape:


The only point of commonality between real rape and American Rape are the letters. Anything else is as distant as a real event compared to the TV movie; all similarities are coincidental.


Women say rape is about power because white men are powerful, and only white men commit rape. This has become a hallmark of American Rape. The feminist radio silence on the migrant rape epidemic in Europe is clear indication of this; migrant rape is real, and American Rape isn’t. Migrant rape doesn’t fit the American Rape narrative, and American women only care about American Rape.

Killto (mind if I call ye “Killto”?) then goes on to tear Harper Mayella Lee a new one on the question of racism vs. rape. Why not have it both ways? I tell ya, if Killto keeps up this pace, I might just have to give him his own “This week in…” sub-heading someday.

Dante takes nicely composed Quick Shots. Also: Jason Brennan is a Fag and the NAP is Retarded. LOL.

Ace has a window into the female soul: “That’s why I cut you just to heal you.” Among other things he sees:

Brother, it’s no coincidence that “cutting” and women’s lib ended up on the same commuter train into town.

If you won’t hurt them, someone else else will.

And a bit more on that theme: “… if you’ll hand me my crayons, I’ll be glad to take your name…”.

My favorite Spaniard, Carlos Esteban predicts: No con una explosión, sino con un quejido. An expert bit of diagnosis:

Occidente muere porque desea morir. Hay una terrible pulsión de muerte en su cultura, en nuestra cultura. Todos sus impulsos parecen dirigidos contra la vida, hacia la extinción. No es meramente estéril, sino que parece poseída de un entusiasmo por promover esa esterilidad en todos sus aspectos: su arte es estéril, sus políticas son estériles, su economía es estéril, lo que enseña como bueno en sus aulas y en sus libros, películas y manifestaciones es estéril.

Toynbee, al menos en esto, tenía razón: nadie mata a las grandes civilizaciones, se suicidan.

What must be done is of course for individuals to save themselves and those they love, and in so doing save what was best, irreplaceable in Western Civilization. The Whole cannot be saved. Also a brief note: La voz del amo. And, say it ain’t so, Contra don Quijote.

Hotherus returns to West Coast Reactionaries to stir up the hornets’ nest once again with The One True Faith. Which he doesn’t hold to be Christianity. He gets an almost perfect blend of so much right and so much wrong that I can’t really make heads and tails of it.

Roman Dmowski likes Trump’s Style. Pope Francis’ not so much.

Oriental Neoreactionary has impressions of the recent Ankara car bomb attack in Traps and Swords or The Turkish Spring.

Real Gary has some video showing how some Germans really feel about Moslem invaders. The video is still up. For now.

Well, that’s all I had time for. 6200 words may be a record. Like I said, it was a busy week. It’s still Monday somewhere in the world, so I’m not sure I’d exactly call this late. But it wasn’t quite as on time as I (and now my Social Matter Overloards) would like it. I’ll strive to do better next week, but I can make no promises. Keep on reactin’! NBS… Over and out!!

Liked it? Take a second to support Social Matter on Patreon!
View All


  1. Regarding Twitter it really is their house, their rules. I managed to find the alt right without ever crossing paths with Twitter and so anyone else curious enough about the world will find it too, without Twitter. It’s another Gaurdian/HuffPo echo chamber.

  2. Thanks a lot, Nick! Social Matter has long needed some aggregation, and bringing the ‘this week’ here was a smart move.

  3. This was a great idea! It will certainly provide a centralized, more amplified platform in NRx for the top-notch writing that Nick has been aggregating for the past God knows how many weeks.

    I know the site navigation bar is a bit cluttered as is, but do you think this series will eventually get its own spot up there?

    1. Seconded. Can remove ‘Search’ seeing as the search bar on the right is pretty obvious.

    2. Thanks TS. I suppose the web lackeys are still ironing the bugs out. I’d still like to see old skyline banner image at the top of each page. Or at least the front page.

  4. I am not arguing about twitter having the legal authority to do what they are doing. I am predicting they will fail and they will disappear.

    And since they think they have power, the sooner, the better. Will not affect me: I get most of my links from Neo-reactionary sites. And thanks, again, for the links

    As Will from Patreactionary says, wimps tweet. Real men blog.

    1. As I said Twitter has its uses, but substantive conversation isn’t one of them.

      My basic contention is that none of this is important enough to care very much about. If an alternative twitter-esque medium appears, I’d be happy to use it, but numbers are key. I’m using it mostly for exposure.

      Now, of course there may very well be a strategic advantage in embarrassing twitter (and other big social media sites) for cowtowing to SJWs. But I’m quite averse to muh free speech rhetoric.

  5. We’ve noticed that we’re no longer getting pingbacks at our website. Nothing from Neoreactive, Reactiontimes or anywhere else (i.e. Social Matter or This Week in Reaction).

    1. Did you get them from my home blog: It seems is not getting pingbacks either. But I always got plenty at my home site. Could be something wrong in the settings here, I’ll check.

      1. We’ve stopped getting any from anywhere. Last year we did indeed receive pingbacks from your blog, and others that mentioned us too.

        … almost as if some blog-based shadow banning was going on …

        This is indeed building up to be an interesting year.

        1. SM doesn’t seem to get or give trackbacks. Probably local settings here. My blog continues to give and receive ample ones. I wouldn’t rule out shadow banning, but it’s hard to believe when the stakes are so low.

  6. Speaking of which…

    I averred in OP that Twitter was my #1 referrer (to my home blog). With the NRx aggregator and xenosystems being a close #2 and 3. That IS correct over the last year. But there has been a sea-change in my referrals recently.

    Twitter 6170 6038 4743

    QUARTER: 1418 (+19.6% annual rate) 1089 (-27.9% annual rate)
    Twitter 900 (-41.7% annual rate)

    30 DAYS: 616 (+55.9% annual rate) 370 (-26.5% annual rate)
    Twitter 317 (-38.3% annual rate)

    How much of the change is due to the approximately we think one month shadow search ban is hard to tell. [Added: not to mention why my referrals are down from]

  7. Capitalism has a simple and direct definition.

    Capitalism is the economic system where the primary concern of capital-holders is the accumulation of more capital via the market.

    That’s it.

    Capitalism and ‘free market’ are not synonymous, though capitalism relies on a market. (Nobody said here that it was, but that’s a common delusion.)

    Adam Smith, for example, advocates capitalism, viz. a system designed around the production of more capital.

    Compare with mercantilism, which is designed around the extraction of money, or socialism, which is designed around the central control of capital. Or communism, which is designed around the universal ownership of capital (though it devolves into socialism in practice, since ‘everyone’ means ‘the government’ through the Rousseauic mis-identification of ‘the people’ as an entity).

    Or distributism, which is designed around the spreading of capital as widely as possible (by structuring the system to encourage everyone to create capital, rather than taking it from those who already have it). I bring distributism out specifically because, let’s face it, Reaction should be economically distributist.

    Nota bene: ‘capital’ and ‘means of production’ are synonyms.

  8. Democracy is death by a thousand cuts, disguised as heaven by a thousand small cakes.

    Yours is not a shabby formulation either.

  9. Pseudo-chrysostom March 4, 2016 at 12:18 am

    >I got a link from him a while ago and my referrer stats got flooded with accesses from MIT addresses. Which is very impressive. Surely beats the bunch of nazis I’ve been getting lately.

    Pathetic. Lines like these never fail to evoke a visceral reaction of disgust.

    It was, after all, will cuckley’s cringing status consciousness and desperate need for validation and approval from ‘respectable high status’ establishment people (ie leftists) that animated him to personaly excise anyone who started to show signs of genuinely adaptive right-wing thought (eg the john birch society, ‘patriotic immigration reformers’ in later years) from places of influence. The commies couldent have asked for a better useful idiot!

    One need only observe, for example, the pontificating of his deflated disciples:

    > He [an: you know who] is an affront to anyone devoted to the project William F. Buckley began six decades ago with the founding in 1955 of National Review — making conservatism intellectually respectable and politically palatable.

    This is the expression of a character essentially predisposed to leftism.

    1. Nick B. Steves March 4, 2016 at 1:49 pm

      A) Birchers and patriotic immigration reformers are not Nazis.

      B) People with MIT IP domains will be running this country. The only question is whether they’ll be running it for patriotic Americans or… against them.

      C) Spandrell has practically written the book on moral status signaling. He’s earned the right to be wave an ironic pose once in a while.

  10. Pseudo-chrysostom March 31, 2016 at 12:58 pm

    A) Who said anything about whether they were registered members of the national socialist workers party of germany? I might hazard that would be rather difficult to ascertain, given that they were not citizens of deuschland to begin with (at least, as far as we can tell).

    In anycase, that is muddying the waters. The object level here is that they were more right than willy, and when push came to shove, willy punched right, not left.

    Iow, he cucked. And not for no reason do men cuck, are *drawn* to cuck.

    B) Again, not really relevant. Except insofar as it relates to the question of whether *they* will cuck, too, and how one might go about the prevention of cucking.

    As a subject matter expert in the field of memes and >implications, in which is united actual first hand experience in signals out in the wild, in the assholes of the intertubes, drifting, interacting, mutating, i can provide you a free trial consultation; desperately devalidating and distancing fashy folk in hopes of being cool does not ameliorate a stable and memetically robust demographic resistant to leftism. Crazy huh?

    You wana know who *else* devalidated annd distanced himself from fash-ists? Trotsky, thats who. You dont want to do something that trotsky also happened too do, do you? That would make you literally worse than trotsky.

    C) “He complains about the dish he ordered.”

    1. Au contraire, I find the opinions of many fascists on subjects other than nationality and race to be quite progressive. Quite pwned, that is, by the Narrative of Progress, just a couple of editions behind. I don’t really hold this against them, for it is in the nature of ordinary people to be pwned by whatever narrative happens to predominate. Whatever solution there may be to this state of affairs surely does not include letting ordinary people, Fashy or otherwise, have a say in their own government.

      Spandrell’s signaling triggers you. Fine. We get that. That’s what it’s for.

Comments are closed.