Curtis Yarvin / Mencius Moldbug

After seeing you two reference him in the alt-right thread, I am curious to know your thoughts on this very interesting man.
Quote:Well, I open my eyes and I see things. I've seen spirits moving through the walls. I've seen a vortex coming through the wall. I've seen amorphous little balls of light bouncing all around in the front yard through the window. I've seen giant bugs on the floor. I was in a hotel room in Amarillo, Texas, and all I remember is standing on the bed and seeing the whole wall in front of me filled with lights that were [makes popping sound] popping like popcorn out of the wall. Then I'll wake up and I go "Wow, I was standing on my bed and staring at this wall."
Quote:Say the word democracy. Notice how good it sounds. Everything democratic is good. A democratic meeting, a democratic policy, a democratic giraffe... if the adjective fits the noun at all, anything you paint with it comes out shiny and bright.

Now say the word politics. Notice how bad it sounds. This person is a politician. She's being so political. These dangerous proposals would politicize US foreign policy. Every use of the word is negative. Everything you paint with it comes out sordid and mean.

But... what is democracy without politics? Is there any such thing? If there is, doesn't it sound like something North Korea would come up with? Our higher form of democracy has transcended mere politics. Uh huh. Sure. I know where you're going with that.

As objective realities — structures of governance — aren't democracy and politics in fact... synonyms? But if they're the same word, how can they have opposite connotations? How can it be that everyone knows, obviously, of course, democracy is a good thing, but politics is a bad thing?

wtf did i just read
Curtis Yarvin is the founder of the Neo-reactionary movement aka The Dark enlightenment:

Quote:The Dark Enlightenment, neoreactionary movement, or simply neoreaction (abbreviated NRx by proponents), is an anti-democratic and reactionary movement that broadly rejects egalitarianism and Whig historiography.[1][2] The movement favors a return to older societal constructs and forms of government, including support for monarchism and traditional gender roles, coupled with a libertarian or otherwise right-wing or conservative approach to economics.[2][3] Some critics have labeled the movement as "neo-fascist".

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)