This Week In Reaction (2017/09/23)

VDH is a prophet to the normies: Beware of Narratives and Misinformation. Of course, he continues to believe that the media should not be carrying water for the DNC, aka. “The Regime”—in other words, a “free press”—which we all know cannot really exist. And so the best solution is not to pretend.

Let’s see… what else was going on?


Navigate…

This Week in Jim Donald

This Week in Social Matter

This Week in Kakistocracy

This Week in Evolutionist X

This Week in Thermidor

This Week around The Orthosphere

This Week in Arts & Letters

This Week in the Outer Left

This Week Elsewhere


Alfred Woenselaer kicks off the week with a humorous and insightful: Burn the Bureaucracy:

Truth is, language is an imitation of reality, not the other way around. Once reports take precedence over reality it is a sure sign of decay, for people are no longer incentivised to do what is right, instead they are incentivised to make sure the report makes them look right.

Fritz Pendleton has some concise and well-composed Sunday Thoughts.

Nick Land—whether approving, appalled… or both—has a quick Quote Note from Greg Johnson, which is probably misleading. I’m not sure any simple declarative statement about the influence of neoreaction upon the Alt-Right could fail to be misleading though.

Imperial Energy introduces a new “Theory of Everything” in his STEEL-cameralist Manifesto Part 5: the Minotaur of War: Power Selection Theory, which takes a purely Darwinian view of power. A very interesting read indeed, tho’ I am not convinced that it differs substantially from the paths which Moldbug explored. Some excellent vignettes along the way. Like:

Gladys Cooper c. 1910.

Gladys Cooper c. 1910.

In Moldbug’s system, we have the Cathedral, which is, in the strict sense, universities and the media – the “brains” of the Modern Structure; the Polygon, meanwhile, is the broader “apparat” which is the “extended” civil service such as the Fed, the big banks, the Military-Industrial-complex and, of course, the judiciary.

Nevertheless, virtually all of the personnel and operating ideas and values (Moldbug’s Kernel) can be traced to one, specific, institution (selector)—the university; one specific group of universities: the Ivy Leagues [sic.] and one university in particular: Harvard.

Harvard is the selector of selectors—the heart of a heartless world and the jewel in the crown of the kingless Modern Structure; it is the Minotaur’s masterpiece.

Certainly, one power will be selected, Darwinian-ly speaking. Left unanswered thus far, however, is what adaptive advantage does Harvard (etc., etc., etc.) confer? Why, for most of human history did one type of power (viz., personal fiat) confer certain adaptive advantages? Only to be punctuated rapidly by an entirely new type of power bearing little surface resemblance to the old?? Is GNON quite so fickle??? This one snagged an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

I.E. takes a brief interlude from The Manifesto to propose The King’s Game. (Towards the Development of Nrx “Strategic Culture”)—as in an actual game. Which seems really complicated.

Continuing on that them of High Political Theory, Adam takes a deep look at Incorporation, and the theory that those who framed, and propagandized for, the US Constitution were not starry-eyed devotees of the “Social Contract”, but hard-nosed realists who quite deliberately attempted to set-up Government as Corporation, just as Moldbug told them to.

But this is where the problem for the founders lay—if the government was a chartered corporation, who chartered it? Corporations are chartered by the sovereign—but the sovereign, the British Parliament, had just been overthrown. The “people” had to be sovereign, but what did that mean? A kind of social contract theory gets snuck in through the back door here, as some constitution of the people as a people must be retrojected back into the distant past. Developments within ancient and medieval theory helped here, as the Roman emperors legitimated themselves by claiming a one time (and of course irrevocable) donation of power to them by the “people”; this theory, mostly dormant in Roman history itself, was picked up and activated by those critical of the medieval European kings.

Sovereignty of “the people”… for only a nanosecond, and only to “sovereignly” select the system their “servants” had drawn up for them. That’s convenient, of course, but remains an achilles heel.

MadisonHamiltonThe corporate form has obviously lasted so long, through so many social transformations, because it is an extremely reasonable mode of organization. It is especially remarkable that the corporation has persisted in spite of its being in absolute contradiction to liberal principles—the Enlightenment liberals, and liberals since then, have wanted to get rid of or at least reduce to liberal imperatives the corporation, that remnant of feudal governance, with its fixed hierarchies, it being a quasi-law unto itself, its governance through “status” rather than “contract.” The Left has always been well aware of and suitably outraged by these features of the corporation—they’ve never quite been able to give the abolition of the atrocity of limited liability the high profile they had hoped to, but it’s still there, lurking in the shadows, although perhaps now more for purposes of blackmail than any real transformation, as the Left has learned to work its will very well through corporations.

Anyway, you get the picture I hope. And there is, of course, much more over there. RTWT! It’s short by Generative Anthropology standards. Adam takes home the ☀☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Award☀☀ for his superb work here.

Spandrell wonders What’s the deal with the Rohingyas. Which is one better than I wondered: What is the Rohingyas? Also there: Musings on the attractions and disattractions of Primitivism.

Speaking of Poltheory, Social Pathologist has been doing some reading from Havers and Gottfried on Strauss.

A rare sighting of HBD Chick is prompted by an Isegoria quotation. More of Jerry Pournelle’s insight from this DragonCon interview, and a classic from the archives, with Tom Snyder in 1979 including some time-capsule memories and prophetic (and not so much) observations from the earliest days of the retail computer. The second instalment also of his late interview with Leo Laporte. On the question of why students don’t like school, Peter Gray suggests the answer is simply school is prison. The fallibility of Air to Air Missiles. The little-known influence of Lesley Blanch’s Sabres of Paradise on Frank Herbert’s Dune. An interesting video on how American animation has turned from crafting conservative fairy tales to liberal allegories. And some selected extracts of Jordan Peterson, with the Canadian psychologist’s observations on the Will to Power as predicting the tyranny of the meanest and most brainless and also in conversation with Joe Rogan and Bret Weinstein

At Jacobite, Hong Kong native Laika offers a response to the brouhaha surrounding an article praising colonialism in Third World Quarterly with Colonialism Was Hong Kong’s Exit. For her part, Laika is rather appreciative of Britain’s colonial efforts at least in this case.

While there is no doubt that colonialism has destroyed many lives, there is also no doubt that “British colonialism” has its successes, above all in Hong Kong. British colonialism is, plainly put, an essential part of Hong Kong culture. Without the British, Hong Kong would never have flourished economically; it would have been subsumed into the PRC from the start.

N. T. Carlsbad takes a deep dive into The Comte de Montlosier’s swansong for the debased nobleman.

Malcolm Pollack sends a somewhat encouraging Note from Vienna.

Finally this week in Cambria Will Not YieldThe Liberals’ Holy Ghost—which he takes to be science, or rather that which falsely goes by that name.

 



This Week in Jim Donald

Let’s see… first in rotation from Jim this week was an update on the Trump situation, the swerve left. The title ought to tell you that it is not exactly good news here. The coup by the Permanent Government against the Merely Elected Government continues apace.

And this swerve left has swerved the Trump white house left. Trump is the only Trumpist left in the Whitehouse. Trump is tired and weak, and is acting like a lame duck. He has allowed himself to be surrounded with people who are fundamentally hostile to him. He has been put inside a bubble of unreality where mass low IQ replacement immigration is popular, the dreamers are popular, the wall is unpopular, rebuilding infrastructure is unpopular, Obamacare is popular and virtuous, never ending wars to make conservative Mohammedans into progs are popular and virtuous, and so on and so forth, a bubble where he is a bad person, a low status person, and his natural inclinations are gross, wicked, and depraved. They are gaslighting him. Alinsky 101: socially isolate the target.

This is a sobering dose of reality for anyone still stubbornly clinging to the idea that Trump will save us. Instead, if history is any guide, we can expect the Permanent Government to become ever more left-wing and the penalties for failing to toe the rapidly-moving line will become ever more severe.

Lovely Gladys Cooper.

Lovely Gladys Cooper.

What happens is that movement left is made in the name of the people, but inevitably the permanent government moves left faster than the people do, so its democratic credentials become less and less credible, and the government increasingly lies about representing the will of the people, and crushes anyone who calls out the lie.

And right now the policies that are in fact being implemented have no plausible democratic credentials, despite ever louder proclamations to the contrary.

We are not in the run up to open left wing dictatorship, because left wing dictatorship is never open. Mao and the rest claimed to be the will of the people, and I am sure the vast majority of Chinese, North Koreans, and so forth believe that leftism was the will of the people. But we are in the situation where the lie becomes more obvious, and is therefore enforced more coercively.

If you do not want to be surprised by what happens in the next decade, read the whole of this ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

Jim also hits one of his usual topics this week, and gets right to the damn point: chicks dig jerks. He protests that his blog is not a game blog, but I disagree. Purging the feminist monster from your brain is the very heart of game, and Jim’s blog is second to none as anti-feminism shock therapy. This particular piece is a concentrated dose of that very course of shock therapy. A mere ten paragraphs guaranteed to purge ten years of feminist indoctrination from your brain, or double your money back, but only if you RTWT. If space, and my editor permitted, I would just quote the whole thing, but I must bow to authority the same as anyone, so just have a taste.

If you want a nice girl, be the bad man. The only society where nice guys get the girl is the society where the patriarch does not allow any non related males near his daughter except the man he has already decided will marry her. (And in such a society she will agree to marry him, because she wants to climb aboard the first plausibly high status cock that she meets, and her Dad treats him as high status and forces her to treat him as high status.) Ballroom dancing is pretty much a ritual to make the males look high status to the girls, so back in the day the system was a girl had a dance card filled out by her father, and was compelled to dance with everyone on the dance card, and be polite and respectful to him, and forbidden to dance with anyone not on the dance card.

But in a society where you can meet chicks without asking their dad to put you on their ballroom dance card, you need to treat chicks like dirt. And you especially need to treat them like trash if you want chicks from intact families who don’t have a number larger than your own.

Chick dig jerks. Society shouldn’t be this way—indeed everyone suffers for it. But for now, it’s the way it is.

 



This Week in Social Matter

The Social Matter week kicks off late this week with the Myth of the 20th Century podcast: Episode 36: Henry Ford, His Life, Work, And Legacy. With not a small detour by Thomas Edison. That whole era of invention and industrialization was a veritable golden age of civilizational confidence—one might be tempted to call it white supremacist, if the minds of such men had been so small. Truly we stand on the shoulders of giants, to the extent we manage to stand at all.

Saturday Poetry & Prose was on vacation. And Hadley Bishop is making some tweaks to the Myth Series that we think you’ll greatly enjoy. So, apart from self-referencing our own TWiR report from last week (which we almost never do), that rounds out a remarkably slow week in Social Matter. Much good stuff to come, however.

 



This Week in Kakistocracy

First off, Porter has a little fun with Money Magazine’s ranking of the Best Places to Live for Those Who Like to Live Best. And comes up with his own list, using decidedly Cathedral-unapproved methods:

Finally, in perhaps the most critical filter of all for a sane man’s psyche, I dismissed every town that votes majority democrat. This may or may not be of importance to many readers, but I have traveled long enough to assure myself that safety and prosperity do not entirely compensate for feeling like the only human on The Island of Doctor Moreau.

Then, Porter addresses the fertility crisis, and the question of what to do when The Best Never Have a Solution.

You need to start asking the worst.

Next, Porter has a laugh at the Zuckerbot’s transparent setup for a presidential run in The Gibs Singularity:

Many observers have remarked upon Zuckerberg’s recent ungainly efforts to ingratiate itself with consumer units in the North American market segment. The presumed, but ultimately alien and unknowable, motives being to seed their primitive psyches with positive associations required to trigger involuntary motor actions in a voting booth. Below are photographs of Zuckerberg evaluating human sensitivity to this modeled stimuli.

Said singularity being the supposed UBI platform that Zuckerberg will run on. I seem to recall Moldbug warning against an AI programmed with only Pig-Philosophy, but now we might get to see our robot overlords in person. Porter also does a little math on the topic—no surprise, it’s expensive.

And finally, Porter pulls out the shiv to take a few jabs at the whole NFL business going on this week in Protests at the Fryer. On a related note, it still hasn’t stopped being amusing how our President can drop an offhand comment and send the enemies of civilization into a week of gibbering rage. This, certainly, we find in his favor.

 



This Week in Evolutionist X

Evolutionist X kicks off the week with what is obvious to any of us around the Sphere, that is that Politics are getting dumber.

Next up, Mrs. X provides another reason why you should have multiple children, using the Bush and Clinton dynasties to illustrate her point.

article-2535107-1A7762F500000578-319_634x772As the only heir of the immensely wealthy and powerful Clinton family, Chelsea has been thrust into the public spotlight following her mother’s electoral defeat.

Unfortunately for the Blue Tribe she is supposed to lead, Mrs. Chelsea isn’t too bright. […] Chelsea’s writing career shows few signs of brilliance: she’s written two books for kids (one of those a picture book) and co-authored one for adults, which has—wow—absolutely rock-bottom reviews. Considering her kids’ books got good reviews, I don’t think this is a troll campaign—it looks like her book is actually terrible.

[…]

Unfortunately for the increasingly old and decrepit senior Clintons, lack-luster Chelsea is the only egg in their basket: they have no other kids to prop her up or take the limelight for her.

On the other hand…

President and first lady George H. W. and Barbara Bush had 6 children—George Walker Bush, Pauline Robinson “Robin” Bush (1949-1953, died of leukemia), John Ellis “Jeb” Bush, Neil Mallon Pierce Bush, Marvin Pierce Bush, and Dorothy Bush Koch.[…] George “W” Bush, although not noted for intellectual excellence, managed to follow in his father’s footsteps and also become President; his brother Jeb was governor of Florida; and Neil and Marvin are doing well for themselves in business.

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

Finally, for Anthropology Friday, she turns her attention towards the American Outlaws, Bandits, and Stand Watie.

 



This Week at Thermidor Mag

Over at Thermidor, editor P. T. Carlo starts off the week along with Myth of the 20th Century regulars Hans Lander and Alex Nicholson to discuss The Great Trumplosion.

Next Stephen Paul Foster offers up another meditation on the events in Charlottesville.

Nathan Duffy gives us California’s Changing Face: On The Effects Of Mass Immigration. Duffy calls upon a variety of sources to paint a vivid portrait of modern California and show just how mass immigration has changed the state.

Some might be inclined to point out that between Native Americans, Spaniards, Mexicans, and European settlers, California has often undergone transformation in the recent past, for better or worse. What proponents of immigration tend to gloss over here is the fact that such changes can be resisted; that it is not simply a matter of fate. The mere fact of a history of demographic change is not evidence that natives were wrong to see in large influxes of outsiders a danger to their way of life. Native Americans did often intuit that just such a danger was afoot, and were ultimately proven correct. Those who are native now are just as justified in perceiving the shifting dynamics of people groups entailing a disruption, if not a threat, of their settled modes of life. The contemptuous dismissal of their concerns and grievances as “reactionary” or “xenophobic” by elites can only be due to the elite’s own grim worship of the gods of Capital and Progress.

This week Thermidor serves up two separate articles on the all-important topic of justice. Walter Devereux starts off with Justice And Judgment Among The Eloi. Devereux draws on etymology and history to describe two competing notions of justice.

Gladys Cooper had amazing hair.

Gladys Cooper had amazing hair.

We can contrast social justice with communal justice, since they represent different termini for a similar train of thought. Both of them are alike in that they are conditional forms of justice as a type. Both involve a degree of casuistry. Both, to an extent, can concern themselves with vengeance, as any notion of justice might, and can be turned against themselves if corrupted. The primary concern of social justice, though, is the establishment of equality—not just equality of outcomes, although this is increasingly what “social justice” has come to mean, but a general equality of discrete individuals in legal and social matters. Communal justice, on the other hand, is far more concerned with stability and unity of the tribe than it is with equality of the individual: communal justice is clan-law, wherein the sovereign (employing Schmitt’s definition) is the male leadership of the community—not the elected or even princely leadership, but the tribal leadership, the heads of families.

The Committee were pleased to bestow an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Silver Circle Award☀ for Devereaux for his fine work here.

The second article comes from Leonid Savin, On Law and Justice.
Savin likewise wades through linguistics and history, and also takes a stab at that great modern liberal philosopher John Rawls:

[Rawls] saw a serious problem in the main institutions of constitutional democracy which prompted him to develop his own model.

It is important to note that Rawls was essentially daring to revise the ideas of the ‘founding fathers’ of Western rights and freedoms, i.e., the social contract theories of John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Immanuel Kant. Rawls’ construct of society, however, was too ephemeral, as he proceeded from the premise that people have no intrinsic status and do not know their place in society. Thus, he rejected the thesis that man is directly shaped by society.

This too was an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ for it’s historical importance.

 



This Week Around The Orthosphere

Lovely Melanie Oesch is a superb yodeler and apparently properly married, which may be disappointing to some.

Lovely Melanie Oesch is a superb yodeler and apparently properly married, which may be disappointing to some.

Rorate Caeli has the full text of the Correctio Filialis: And So it Begins! Surely the Vatican cannot have all the signatories assassinated!! More at One Peter Five.

Kristor briefly demonstrates how Profane Hierarchies are Bound to Work Evil. Follows up with The Glamour of Evil.

“I Get a Kick out of Fugue”, Part 1 and Part 2, says Thomas F. Bertonneau. And if you don’t, you really should after reading this fabulous musicological essay. Then, just for fun, Jodeln ist Cool (I Get a Kick out of Yodeling). Yodeling is an under-explored aspect of the White Supremacy and Minority Oppression Industrial Complex.

Matt Briggs is writing about artificial intelligence again. What Neural Nets Really Are: Or, Artificial Intelligence Pioneer Says Start Over.

There is no hope of creating intelligence from artificial neural networks, or anything that works in a similar fashion to them.

Then, child drag queens, flunking gender essentialists, a witchcraft revival, and POC hysteria over a banana peel, all in the latest installment of the Insanity & Doom Update IV.

Also, guest-posting at Briggs’, the irredential Ianto Watt writes this critique of two empires which are probably more similar than different. A Clash Of Empires, Russia & USA Part I.

Nations are built upon citizens. Empires are built upon slaves. Furthermore, nations must grow internally to survive, whereas Empires must grow externally, else they die.

Bonald asks, Who owns the dead white men? Hopefully, it’s the deplorables.

James Kalb scribbles down some Notes on white nationalism at Crisis Magazine.

White nationalism is also identified with tendencies that have no clear principles at all, like the “alt right” that Mrs. Clinton pushed into prominence during her presidential campaign. So far as I can tell, the label has mostly been applied recently to an assortment of online trolls angered by the effort to unify a disparate leftist coalition by demonizing ordinary white men as the source of everyone else’s problems.

Aussie Mark Richardson asserts Trump is right on refugee reforms. Then he praises Angela Merkel’s recent fall in vote share as
A step forward in Germany.

In looking into the darkness of man, it is easy to ignore that female counterpart. Dalrock writes Why the blind spot matters..

 



This Week in Arts & Letters

At City Journal, Dalrymple recalls an anecdote of a visit to Pyongyang that sheds light on the eloquence of the Dear Leader’s recent Trump-troll, Of dotards and dithyrambs. Steven Malanga reviews a new book that flips the coin on that mainstay of contemporary self-help, the digital nomad’s ‘laptop lifestyle’; plot twist, you’re homeless! and, in many such cases, have been Undone, by Choice. Clark Whelton appreciates a densely written municipal history of Law and Disorder in the Birth of the NYPD. Throwback to 2006 and an article from Heather Mac Donald that now looks horridly prescient: Amnesty Lessons […not yet learned]. Finally, Stephen Eide and Carolyn Gorman cast an unhappy eye over the just-adequate, too-late approach of Crisis Intervention Training [CIT] and Its Limits.

woweyes1

Fencing Bear discerns an augury foretold in Revelation (11:19-12:2) of Marian Return in the alignment of celestial bodies during the Virgin in Sun. She then cleanly excises some mewling voices of feminist theology who routinely put theory first, and mutilate the corpora to fit their evil design. This stands in for garden variety scholarship nowadays, some would do well to refer back to their Richards, or their good Southern Agrarians from time to time.

Richard Carroll meanwhile looks back upon the Rankin/Bass adaptation of The Last Unicorn (1982) and finds its many charms enhanced by age.

Chris Gale this week has a valproate warning viz. DYOR and read all the labels of your Pharma; ascends the chain of being with a metaphysical warning of Pride in the vogue for Rebellion; celebrates Eliot in absentia with the Sydney Trads and is inspired by his wisdom on the redeeming of Time; enjoys some elementary lessons in Herbert and Donne; finds and applauds the ACP are Contra Euthanasia; and offers the ususal Sunday Sonnet.

Southern Nationalism comes under the spotlight over at The Logos Club, in Blake Lucca’s Wolfman podcast with Silas Reynolds of Identity Dixie.

At Albion Awakening, Bruce Charlton writes a splendid essay on the vitality of Primary Thinking as a vehicle for redemption from our current state of error.

Do one thing—and that thing is Primary Thinking; or by another name, Final Participation (Owen Barfield); or by another name Pure Thinking, or the Imaginative Soul (Rudolf Steiner).

Impressive as much for its imperative vigor as its crystalline structure, I highly recommend you RTWT.

Meanwhile, John Fitzgerald remembers The Battle of Stamford Bridge, fought by King Harold against the vikings. He wonders where we might have been by now, had Harold been able to turn back William too.

Much glory and goodness has emanated from this country since 1066. My intuition tells me, however, in a way I can’t quantitatively account for, that if Harold had won at Hastings, England would have been more like the Albion we hope to awaken and less like the hard-nosed powerhouse she so often became—materialistic, mercantile, rapacious and exploitative.

Also there, William Wildblood laments the fact of Albion Asleep, with a hopeful message of awakening.

And so to the Imaginative Conservative where Madison Michieli uncovers The Presocratic Origins of GM Hopkins’s Pied Beauty. Annie Holmquist has an answer for Why Our Civil Discourse is Broken. Tina McCormick enjoys life in "Scrutopia". Frederick Wilhelmsen ponders whether The Great Books are Enemies of Reason. A Note on Play from Chesterton. A rare soujourn into the cinematic arts with Elizabeth Baruzzini’s Existentialist retrospective on Wes Anderson’s filmography. Joseph Pearce with some authentic Reflections of a White Supremacist still jarred by events at Charlottesville. Stephen M. Klugewicz enjoys a trip down some recent American folkways in Bruce Springsteen’s Autobiography. Dwight Longenecker is inspired by his Grand Tour to resume writing poetry, A Renewal in the Spirit of Language. Jerrod Laber reviews The Life and Career of Arturo Toscanini as told in Harvey Sachs’s new book. Glenn Arbery examines the Power of Names in the transformative funcion of Language as the Word of Christ. Finally Pat Buchanan soars with a trenchant essay against Transnationalism, President Trump vs. the Globalist Crusaders.

 



This Week in the Outer Left

Another sub-par week from our leftist… friends? acquaintances? associates this week, but we can expect there to be plentiful salt for the mining next week, after the AfD’s strong finish in German elections. There were a couple pieces of interest though, so let’s get into it.

As per usual, Craig Hickman of Social Ecologies is making an appearance. His big entry this week was an extended meditation on that ol’ favorite topic, accelerationism, entitled Time, Technicity, and Superintelligence. There is an awful lot going on here, and references to Nick Land abound, so definitely RTWT if accelerationism is your thing.

Why are essays on accelerationism like wandering through an Egyptian museum pondering the dead artifacts of a half-buried Mummy King? Isn’t accelerationism about the future, but one finds only genealogies and buried fragments of a tormented world of dead concepts. Why? Accelerationism, whatever it was is dead, it died of its own vanishing speed. All that’s left of accelerationism is a zombie crew of misfit thinkers seeking a lost mythos from the future of absolute time.

The other piece worth mentioning this week comes courtesy of The Baffler. Mattilda Bernstein Sycamore (no, really) penned an intriguing missive on the trans in the military kerfuffle. It is a fascinating look into how a leftist must always be Lefter Than Thou, just take a look at this opening.

maxresdefaultOn July 26, 2017, President Trump announced (on Twitter, of course) that he would ban trans people from serving in the U.S. military, one year after Obama had repealed the ban. Immediately I imagined spectacular celebrations in cities across the country, where trans people—and anyone else with a conscience—would gather to welcome this news with extravagant opposition to militarism in all its forms. Maybe gender transgression could bring down the state, after all!

At last, here was step one in a three-point plan for dramatic structural change, handed right to us:

Step 1: Ban trans people from serving in the military.

Step 2: Ban everyone from serving in the military.

Step 3: Ban the military.

I do not think I am overstepping my bounds by saying that, as reactionaries, we wholeheartedly endorse step 1, but have reservations about steps 2 and 3.

 



This Week… Elsewhere

Unorthodoxy has been paying attention. His thesis here is somewhat controversial in The Filtering. It’s also 100% correct. And earned an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ this week.

dev2

This Quote of the Week at Heartiste’s was quite well put: Her Love Will Find A Home.

PA passes on some pretty solid advice on How to Get a Job at a Construction Site.

AMK is annoying—in which, I believe, he takes some pride. And often interesting. He’s rarely more interesting than when he’s talking about Scientology, in which he has substantial background. This week a tidbit on Scientology, training routines, and the post-rationalization of abuse. Sure, it sounds abusive. Much in Scientology sounds abusive… or completely insane… or both. Yet, we’re left with a very stubborn—and weirdly delicious—fact that this is Scientology we’re talking about here. It is many things, but unsuccessful is not one of ’em. Either way, AMK got a nod from The Committee with an ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀.

Over at Let a Thousand Nations Bloom, a hopeful note on decentralized green shoots: Good Earthlings Vote with Their $$.

Jason Bayz is Changing [his] Mind About Race and IQ. A lot of know-nothingism mixed in with some intriguing data. My view: Well, thinking that IQ was entirely genetic was a problem to begin with.

This bit from TUJ seems pretty important: Alexander Hamilton’s Arsenal of Capitalism – Regionalism as American Grande Strategy. But it’s very long.

Al Fin describes what he believes to be Trump’s Long Game: Behind a Smokescreen of Tweets. Well, let’s hope so. Also: More than you’ll likely need to know about whether 100% Intermittent Energy can work. Certainly until it is cost-effective. That’s for sure.

Filed under Well That Explains a Lot: Greg Cochran digs in the vicinity of some Ancient British Diversity.

I have no idea who Lorenzo is or when or why I followed his blog, but I’m glad I did as this week he discusses The persistence of (belief in) socialism. This zeroes in on a key weakness of conservative—i.e., anti-socialist—thought:

What other language of justice-inspired of major social change is there? There remain all sorts of reasons to be morally repelled by aspects of contemporary society: what is the alternative political vision for a post-capitalist society? If there isn’t any, then “socialism” wins by default, as it has no effective competitor in the moral marketplace.

The rational arguments against socialism are completely owned by the traditionalists. Unfortunately only a tiny fraction of any population will be convinced by rational arguments—even assuming they want to be. The battle traditionalists must win is in the affective domain. It is not enough to prove that socialism never brings about justice, but only death. Yes, it’s true. But we must show feel how traditionalism truly brings about the justice that they purport to seek.

Untitled

Zeroth Position continues to carve out seemingly ad hoc exceptions to Libertarian ideology in order to save it: The Ethical Notions Of Personhood And Savagery is valiant in that attempt. Which, over all is laudable; but once one recognizes the duty of libertarians to recognize one set of ethics for those who can live up to libertarian principles and another for those who cannot, one cannot be too far away from asking just Who decides for Whom?

Over at American Dad: You can take the boy out of the Working Class, but you can’t take the Working Class out of the boy. My situation was similar. Tho’ I never went to a private school.

Giovanni Dannato finds much to dislike about a California Secession. Can’t say I really disagree. Even at it’s most amicable, it doesn’t really solve America’s problem.

 


Welp, that’s all we had time for. Many thanks again to the Based TWiR Staff: Alex Von Neumann, David Grant, Egon Maistre, Hans def Fiedler, Aidan McLear, and newcomer Eric Mayflower all provided invaluable content for this edition. (They have, in fact, now surpassed me in words/week written.) Keep on reactin! Til next week: NBS… Over and out!!

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

15 Comments

  1. “A very interesting read indeed, tho’ I am not convinced that it differs substantially from the paths which Moldbug explored.”

    The key difference is that it does not depend on anyone being a Protestant, a Puritan, or a Unitarian, so it can explain power and leftist drift in countries like France, Russia, Italy, Mexico, Japan, China, etc.

    Reply

    1. My entire point was, perhaps obtusely put, is that it’s hard to explain a phenomenon apart from ideology, when it has such obvious ideological effects. I don’t doubt it’s POSSIBLE–convergent evolution–but it seems an enormous row to hoe. Maybe ideas are NOT THE ONLY THING that have consequences, but that’s very far from believing they have NONE.

      Reply

      1. Thanks for reading and the honor, but the best is still yet to come.

        To begin with, we can divide interpretations of Moldbug into two different camps:

        1: Structuralists (materialist).
        2: Idealists (memes/ideas).

        Reactionary Future is a beautiful example of a “Structuralist”. His claim (see Patron Theory) is that culture, religion, law, economics and politics is driven by High-Middle-Low dynamics.

        Nearly everyone else seems to fall into the Idealist camp.

        Power Selection Theory is Structuralist and while it agrees with Future about the explanatory power and importance of Patron Theory, it posits a deeper, more fundamental cause of the growth of Power, the State and the many Fascist ideologies, including “Tranzism”.

        In short, the theory can be understood via the following formula:

        Man makes war; war makes the State and the state makes Fascism (democratic, totalitarianism).

        This week, following Power, there is a close reading of Bertrand de Jouvenel’s On Power; this is followed by a close reading of Charles Tilly’s Coercion, Capital and European States, AD 990-1992. (European Minotaur of War I and II respectively.)

        Vol I:

        https://imperialenergyblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/26/the-steel-cameralist-manifesto-part-5a-the-european-minotaur-of-war-i-the-origins-nature-and-development-of-the-minotaur/

        There is also a discussion about Power, war and Elites with Reactionary Future and Adam here:

        https://www.reddit.com/r/Absolutistneoreaction/comments/729erf/power/

        Then, the growth of the Military-Industrial Complex and the rise of the soldier in America is covered in American Minotaur of War.

        Our theory (really Jouvenel’s and Tilly’s) answers the question as to why the Elite (or central power) uses the Low against the Middle. It is done, ultimately, because of the need to prepare for and wage war and it is sustained by war and conquest.

        Reply

  2. “Why, for most of human history did one type of power (viz., personal fiat) confer certain adaptive advantages? Only to be punctuated rapidly by an entirely new type of power bearing little surface resemblance to the old?? Is GNON quite so fickle???”

    It likely has something to do with population size and technology, especially transportation and media. I realize this is bad news, because it probably means we are at the end of an entropic process and there will be no “return or kings.”

    Reply

    1. SecretForumLurker September 27, 2017 at 12:56 pm

      Tech at the disposal of the centralized bureaucracy is pretty totalitarian and all inclusive. Only counter to that would be that this tech continues to slink into the grasp of smaller and smaller groups therefore an organized ‘other’ could use it.

      Reply

    2. If no return of kings, have we seen the end of the CEO as well? Private Property?? Fatherhood??!!

      Reply

    3. Man makes war; war makes the State and the State makes Fascism.

      Reply

  3. Thank you for the award. Glad you enjoyed the post. Have a great week, everyone.

    Reply

  4. With regard to Insula Qui’s work this week, “Who decides for Whom?” has already been asked and answered in libertarian theory. Private property owners decide for other people who are in their territory, and the owners are the people who have the physical and mental ability and willingness to take and defend land.

    Reply

    1. OK. Sure, but any “private property owner” deciding that someone or entity is outside the protection of the “voluntary agreement entered into by all the morally capable persons or entities” is acting a WHOLE lot like an authoritarian government, whose power to do so is limited only by the laws of physics on not by any particular contract or custom.

      Reply

  5. “The key difference is that it does not depend on anyone being a Protestant, a Puritan, or a Unitarian, so it can explain power and leftist drift in countries like France, Russia, Italy, Mexico, Japan, China, etc.”

    Power Selection Theory is “exculpatory”. It is the political structure and the need to wage war that is to blame.

    All religions and all religious people are off the hook.

    Reply

    1. But that’s where we’ll surely disagree. There are more and less socially stable religious systems.

      Reply

      1. I don’t disagree with that, but it is Power which selects them. Power is what sends the bounds of the possible.

        Reply

  6. It is Alfred Woenselaer, but I guess that’s what you get for not choosing a sticky name like Moldbug.

    Reply

    1. Sorry Alf. Fixed.

      [Damn Dutch names…. <grumble grumble>]

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *