/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11059836]

>Did Land really claim that he had come back from the dead? Did he really think he was an android sent from the future to terminate human security? In person he belied these outrageous claims (both of which he did indeed make in writing), being thoroughly polite and amiable and, above all, willing to engage in earnest conversation with anyone.

http://divus.cc/london/en/article/nick-land-ein-experiment-im-inhumanismus

[Anonymous No.11059843]

i want to believe..

[Anonymous No.11059852]

Remind me why we should care about the ramblings of a druggie again?

[Anonymous No.11059854]

>He would sweep his audience into a speculative vortex of philosophy, economics, literature, biology, technology, and disciplines as-yet unnamed – before immobilizing them again with some startling claim or gnomic declaration. And as Land spoke, he prowled the classroom, sometimes clambering absentmindedly over the common-room chairs like an outlandish mountain goat, sometimes poised squatting on the seat of a chair like an overgrown mantis.

Would you take his class?

[Anonymous No.11059860]

>>11059852

Because he's the greatest living philosopher my man.

[Anonymous No.11059863]

>But he preferred to spend his time in the bar with undergraduates, always buying the drinks, smoking continually, and conversing animatedly (and where possible, vehemently) about any topic whatsoever.

I wonder if these student knew how lucky they were.

[Anonymous No.11059874]

>>11059860
ebin

[Anonymous No.11059879]

>>11059863
I graduated from Warwick a few years ago and nobody had ever heard of him, even the philosophy students there

[Anonymous No.11059888]

>>11059854
That sounds pretty neat

[Anonymous No.11059889]

>>11059879

Like a ghost...

[Anonymous No.11059892]

Go to bed, Nick.

[Anonymous No.11059938]

>>11059836
>Did he really think he was an android sent from the future to terminate human security?
it's a lor episode
*turns off tv*

>>11059854
yes, and not even because i wanted his drugs

[Anonymous No.11059949]

>>11059836
Do I need to entirely grasp Deleuze to understand Land's writings?

[Anonymous No.11059964]

>>11059949

Nah.

Have you read this?

https://jacobitemag.com/2017/05/25/a-quick-and-dirty-introduction-to-accelerationism/

It might give you a feel for Land's appropriation of Deleuze.

[Anonymous No.11060068]

>>11059949
Entirely? No. Reading some deleuze is crucial though, not just his wiki entry.

[Anonymous No.11060148]

[...] what appears to humanity as the history of capitalism is an invasion from the future by an artificial intelligent space that must assemble itself entirely from its enemy’s resources. Digitocommodification is the index of a cyberpositively escalating technovirus, of the planetary technocapital singularity: a self-organizing insidious traumatism, virtually guiding the entire biological desiring-complex towards post-carbon replicator usurpation

Tell me this man isn't the most profound and exciting thinker of the past decades

[Anonymous No.11060155]

>>11060148
wtf i'm a landian now

[Anonymous No.11060181]

>>11060148
I will literally start crowdfunding Sadler to review Fanged Noumena soon enough. I keep trying to meme him into reading it but he's so standoffish about the whole thing. I wouldn't be surprised if he found his twitter or something.

[Anonymous No.11060260]

>>11060148
100% this.

this is what nick land is. the defibrillators. true, you will wake up in a zombie shitshow nightmare apocalypse. but he absolutely and not partially will *bzaaap* any and all leftover lethargy that is in you from derrida or whoever the fuck else. and you will be blasted out of your ever-loving gourd into a cyberpunk hellscape in kowloon and on the run from hp lovecraft.

you cannot ask a guy to do more than this. most electrifying sonofabitch since nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.11060284]

>>11060181
Well he doesn't look well upon Deleuze from what I recall so Land probably doesn't either. It would be interesting to see him try to be stoic about it though. I know he endorses Badiou and MacIntyre.

[Anonymous No.11060305]

>>11059964
>>11060068
I mean I have a broad understanding of the simplest of Deleuze's ideas, but when I actually try to read him I can't make heads or tails of it. Is Land easier to actually read and understand than Deleuze?

[Anonymous No.11060329]

>>11060148
Why does Land stop at AI? Isn't assuming that cybernetic life is the end game just as naive as assuming biological life is the end game? If his theory is brought to it's logical conclusion, isn't it well-reasoned to assume that there is some other level of life after digital AI that is even more superior, but it is so beyond us that to attempt to imagine it is like a chimpanzee or even early man attempting to imagine what Land posits? AI is the next step in the evolutionary-capitalist process of intelligence generation, but it seems presumptuous to assume it is the endgame.

[Anonymous No.11060345]

>>11060329
one of his last tweets was pretty much just these two words: Artificial Selection. whatever capitalism is, it's like a meta-darwinistic process that we have evolved and that now basically preys and selects for its own. like reaching through the fog of all of our tangled up libidinal fantasies and removing out of the future a Kantian supermind that slowly assumes control over all human life.

[Anonymous No.11060360]

>>11060305
I read about 10-15 pages of Deleuze an hour and I'm usually a fast reader.
>>11060329
It simply posits itself as the next 'thing'. As hard as it already is to predict the future, we can't predict the future of the future. Or maybe AI could? Remember that AI is a self-correcting* phenomenon, like evolution, and in Landian mythology AI is the ultimate self-evolving organism.
*I'm having a brain zap. self-correcting isn't the word I'm looking for.

[Anonymous No.11060366]

>>11060360
>>11060345
This is what I meant but like with a single word instead of three sentences. God I feel stupid

[Anonymous No.11060374]

>>11060329
>Isn't assuming that cybernetic life is the end game just as naive as assuming biological life is the end game?
Nope, you cannot conflate artificial and biological life as the two are entirely separate and will not (and can not) reconcile with the other. For example, a biological life form will never understand how an artificial life thinks and vice-versa. This is not so simple as 2 biological forms not being able to directly communicate (such as a dog and a cat etc.) but 2 completely unrecognizable modes of being that can never truly know the other (imagine a train communicating to it's track vs the conductor standing behind a useless wheel). Therefore cybernetic life will be the "end game" as far as us, our planet, and our problems are concerned.

[Anonymous No.11060378]

>>11060345
>>11060360
I know, but why assume that it would stop at post-biological AI? Logically, wouldn't the same process apply to whatever comes after the singularity until cybernetic AI has a quasi-singularity of its own where the hard limits of the digital are surpassed by a distant and unimaginable life form? There is a future to the future and a "thing" after AI, which to us currently is the next "thing"; the digital is post-biological but there must be a post-post-biological and a post-post-post-biological, and so on. And this process would continue ad infinitum until omniscient perfection is reached in the form of "God".

[Anonymous No.11060396]

>Logically, wouldn't the same process apply to whatever comes after the singularity
Silly human, you think in such biological ways. The AI singularity is perfect, why would it waste any resources or take on more risk for no logical reason?

[Anonymous No.11060404]

>>11060374
>>11060396
>Therefore cybernetic life will be the "end game" as far as us, our planet, and our problems are concerned
Of course, I didn't mean to sound like I was saying otherwise. But cybernetics should hardly be assumed to be the endgame of itself given enough time. It is, after all, still bound by the hard limits of reality. It seems naive to assume there isn't some unknowably advanced and distant mode of being that is superior in every way to cybernetics just as cybernetics will be superior in every way to the biological.

[Anonymous No.11060418]

>>11060404
>It seems naive to assume there isn't some unknowably advanced and distant mode of being that is superior in every way to cybernetics just as cybernetics will be superior in every way to the biological.
I see what you are getting at, but the reality is that at that level of extrapolation for all we know a new biological life will revolt against the ai, or the universe will collapse before any of that shit even happens, or maybe even God comes back and resets everything, it doesn't matter because we can't prove any of it. You may as well be thinking of all the possible ways the universe could've existed before the big bang, it'll do you the same amount of good.

[Anonymous No.11060429]

>>11060305

Land can be tough at first. You really have to immerse yourself in his thought. Eventually things begin to click and you start being able to extract ideas from his compressed delivery. It can be very rewarding.

[Anonymous No.11060448]

>>11060418
>it doesn't matter because we can't prove any of it
Yes, to venture to give substance to such ideas is silly. But when faced with infinity you shouldn't try to count your way there, you should be concerned with its limit. If this autonomous all-encompassing capitalistic meta-darwinistic process that's occurring is a series of modes of being surpassing each other one after another, each more intelligent and logical and rational than the last, then it reasons that the end of the road is the ultimate intelligence, the ultimate logic, the ultimate reason: God. Although I guess the kicker is that a limit at infinity never actually reaches the limit, it only approaches it.

[Anonymous No.11060475]

>>11060448
>If this autonomous all-encompassing capitalistic meta-darwinistic process that's occurring is a series of modes of being surpassing each other one after another, each more intelligent and logical and rational than the last, then it reasons that the end of the road is the ultimate intelligence, the ultimate logic, the ultimate reason: God
And here is the rub; an AI has no reason. We built this self consuming machine, and once we are gone it will continue only insomuch as it is programmed to. Once there is AI singularity there is no continuation, it can and will be satisfied and will be perfectly ok to sit there doing nothing.

[Anonymous No.11060496]

>>11060475
My understanding is that Land sees AI as self-evolving, and I'd tend to agree with that. It seems silly to assume that it wouldn't be. That an AI would have gotten rid of us seems to presuppose that it self-evolved into doing so.

[Anonymous No.11060577]

>>11060378
>There is a future to the future and a "thing" after AI, which to us currently is the next "thing"; the digital is post-biological but there must be a post-post-biological and a post-post-post-biological, and so on. And this process would continue ad infinitum until omniscient perfection is reached in the form of "God".

well, that's one way of looking at it. 'we' don't necessarily reach it.

this essay is required reading for all land stuff. intelligence itself, cybernetic intelligence, is this teleoplectic process. the omniscient perfection reached in the form of god is probably as remote from us as kant's noumenon.

https://track5.mixtape.moe/zphjim.pdf

i don't want to send cross or mixed messages here tho just for the sake of sounding cool on the melanesian tapdancing board. there are aspects of land's own work that confuse me in this sense as well, and they mainly derive from his being torn up between his allegiances to kant and his allegiances to marx and deleuze (which would be a paper worth reading, i think). he often seems to me to be in this case of a double-bind, where his marxist criticism winds up doubling back on his desire to find some grain of thought in himself that is capable of thinking/doing philosophy that isn't infected with his own biology. you can see this very thing unfolding in fanged noumena, when he is writing the later essays and trying, to use a metaphor, to roll initiative against the DM.

as i understand him, he's sort of divided in this way between unfeeling angels on the one hand and excessively feeling monsters on the other. capitalism is sort of wedded out of these extremes. machinic intelligence produces its own way of perpetuating its own growing complexity, and the lines link up and cross through the human brain. for deleuze this wasn't so much of a problem; to be a body without organs made sense, as spinozism usually does.

but land doesn't seem to want to leave a place in there for spinoza, or, if he does, it might be a sort of dark spinozistic deity not unlike pic rel.

the spinoza-types that i follow and read on twitter usually get into all kinds of other gnostic/alchemical stuff as well anyways. but this is why land i think would argue for, after a lot of continental hijinx, probably a sort of humbled return to kant even more than nietzsche, since kant is perhaps the closest we get to thinking about reality as a thing that we really can't fundamentally gain access to, and never mind what nietzsche says.

[Anonymous No.11060611]

>>11060577
>'we' don't necessarily reach it.
Of course not, I was trying to be very deliberate in my posts to avoid implying this kind of thing. We don't reach it and neither does our successor cybernetic AI or its successor. In such a future, God is not reached by anyone since every mode of being must be succeeded by subsequently more advanced modes, God just is. The implication then is that the technocapitalistic meta-Darwinism process that we are engaged in is the will of God.

>where his marxist criticism winds up doubling back on his desire to find some grain of thought in himself that is capable of thinking/doing philosophy that isn't infected with his own biology
OP link is an article by one of Land's former students that actually goes into this-

>Let’s get this out of the way: In any normative, clinical, or social sense of the word, very simply, Land did ‘go mad.’ Afterwards he did not shrink from meticulously documenting this process, as if writing up a failed experiment.7 He regarded the degeneration of his ‘breakthrough’ into a ‘breakdown’ as ultimate and humiliating proof of the incapacity of the human to escape the ‘headcase,’ the prison of the personal self. Wretchedly, for Land, it was no longer possible to tell whether his speculative epiphanies had been (as he had believed at the height of his delirium) glimmers of access to the transcendental – or just the pathetic derangements of a psyche pushed to the derisory limits of its tolerance. The experiment was over.

Any twitter recommendations?

[Anonymous No.11060620]

HELLO /LIT/ IT'S /MU/ WE NEED YOUR HELP:

Oneohtrix Point Never recently released a single entitled 'Black Snow' from his new album. It seems to be referring to something written at the CCRU called 'Channel Zero.'

come help interpret it for us retards on /mu/ in thread >>79662523

[Anonymous No.11060737]

>>11060305
No fret my friend! Land is totally easy to understand.

[Anonymous No.11060742]

>>11060148
>hurr durr l'm a luddite and spew out bullshit, bow before my superior intellect
Is this the power of continental ""philosophy""?

[Anonymous No.11060747]

reminder to everyone to read the CCRU archives or your understading of Land will be very limited

ccru does not, has not, and will never exist

[Anonymous No.11060753]

>>11060742
>Land
>Luddite

the true power of no reading

wow

[Anonymous No.11060764]

>>11060753
If he's advocating in favor of technology, his writing style certainly doesn't do him any favors. But then again, normal people don't read this kind of books, so there's 0 risk of him influencing more than 2 or 3 retards in this board.

[Anonymous No.11060766]

>>11060742
>Nick Land
>luddite
If you read that description of the future and implicitly think it is being spoken of negatively, then perhaps it is you who are the luddite

[Anonymous No.11060782]

>>11060753

nick land got fired for being a coke addict and no one takes him seriously in academia because he's a fucking raving lunatic who appeals to morons who think that yammering about technology instantaneously makes you smart

if badiou and deleuze had a miscarriage, nick land would still be less enjoyable than whatever that dead fetus wrote

there's a reason that only people on 4chan read him

t. philosophy phd

[Anonymous No.11060805]

>tfw the pseud tries to insult land but ends up insulting himself

[Anonymous No.11060809]

>>11060782
you guys are complete pussies, have to toe the line and repeat the script, the saddest part is that you convince yourselves that you all arrived at exactly the same tiny section of allowable opinions by coincidence or through some process of reason

[Anonymous No.11060822]

>>11060782
>nick land got fired for being a coke addict and no one takes him seriously in academia

sounds great enough for me

but i guess having a phd is in concordance with your opinion

wow

such psychoanalysis

[Anonymous No.11060827]

>>11060809
>the saddest part is that you convince yourselves that you all arrived at exactly the same tiny section of allowable opinions by coincidence or through some process of reason
ah fuck

[Anonymous No.11060838]

>>11060782
What if ... what if Land is too smart for academia? They cannot handle guys breaking out from the consensus established by the academic community.

[Anonymous No.11060840]

>>11060764
man i just enjoy him

reading and so, makes me think

your approach to all this is extremely one\sided and makes me confused

wow

[Anonymous No.11060899]

>>11060782
>t. philosophy phd

I dont like Land either but after being taught by multiple philosophy PhDs that were dumb as dirt even in their area of "expertise" this means fucking nothing, and I really dont care who is and isnt respected in academia because academia isnt worth respecting. Philosophy academics are almost entirely people still choking on Kant's cock and thinking John Rawls contributed fucking anything worthwhile to the world

[Anonymous No.11060900]

>>11060742
And of all analytics you chose a -litteral- cuck as your avatar to boot.

[Anonymous No.11060903]

>>11059879
yo did you meet keith ansell-pearson by any chance

[Anonymous No.11060914]

So you all know the Nick Land Youtube lectures we have posted. I think I found a new one, that I have never seen before in any Nick Land thread.
Sorry if this is already known.

Anthropol: "The Future of Human Insecurity"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZNeK70Qtqw&index=9&list=PLmRCkFjsIa10oDOJn2WKfb8sGkOuumSkV&t=0s

[Anonymous No.11060920]

>>11060148
He's the most aesthetically original thinker of the past fifty years I'll give you that

But he's hard to take seriously because he seems like the end-point of a strand of continental wankery that everyone's a little sick of by now

[Anonymous No.11060930]

>>11060782
>there's a reason that only people on 4chan read him
Yeah because the general opinion of academic philosophy as a whole is usually behind a couple decades. The most important ideas in philosophy only show themselves after they stand to the winds of both reason and time. Hell, the pre-socratics have been more or less forgotten about until modern times. The "general consensus" of Academia is the lowest possible hanging intellectual fruit. I really hope you're memeing having a PhD.

[Anonymous No.11060940]

>>11060899
>Philosophy academics are almost entirely people still choking on Kant's cock

[Anonymous No.11060955]

>>11060764
He isn't advocating in favour of technology because he views its progress as inevitable, thus removing any need to persuade anyone. His writing is an exercise in aesthetics and nothing more. Not saying I agree with him, but it invalidates any criticism of him being obtuse if he doesn't care to be understood

[Anonymous No.11060967]

>>11060914
Very nice I havent seen this one either

[Anonymous No.11060999]

>>11060305
Just work your way through Fanged Noumena. ''Kant, Capital and the prohibition of incest'' is quite easy to read, he even summarizes Kants critique for you.

[Anonymous No.11061002]

>>11060611
yeah, i've read that article. it's a good one. and the technocapitalistic meta-Darwinism process sometimes really doesn't strike me as being all that far removed from hegel either. which is kind of ironic.

>twitter
a lot of them seem to have gone quiet, shut down their feeds/blogs, or just are interested in other things right now. but i can suggest a really good essay on landian stuff that is absolutely required reading if you're into acceleration.

https://www.urbanomic.com/document/poememenon/

[Anonymous No.11061025]

I read all you posted here and honestly it seems to me like you are entering a cult, like you are forming a demonology out of soft systems of goods/information transactions; don't you think this might be bad for your mental health, like you are making this shit powerful out of fear, its like you are downloading too much psychic energy into them

[Anonymous No.11061045]

>>11061025
We are only giving Land the deserved praise.

[Anonymous No.11061059]

>Land was a slight, fragile-looking man with an iron gaze, a soft but compelling voice, and an air of startling intellectual confidence. “Lots of people are clever,” says Grant, “but I’ve never witnessed anyone who could so forensically destroy a thesis.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/11/accelerationism-how-a-fringe-philosophy-predicted-the-future-we-live-in

[Anonymous No.11061062]

>>11061025
Maybe it's actually a worthwhile set of questions to ask? Especially with the technology's feverish exponential growth that has continued to unfold since Land's work. He wrote most of his influential stuff in the 90's, so at the very least the questions he raised were ahead of their time

[Anonymous No.11061090]

>>11060940
At least Land does it in an undeniably novel way that can be understood as its own innovation. Most academic philosophers read the text exactly as it is recommended in their Kant 101 handbooks, make no interesting connections or insights of their own, and teach it that way. Philosophy departments adore bland professors.

[Anonymous No.11061100]

>Every month staff would give readings from work-in-progress. Nick’s first talk was entitled: “Putting the Rat back Into Rationality,” in which he argued that, rather than seeing death as an event that happened at a particular time to an individual, we should look at it from the perspectives of the rats carrying the Black Death into Europe; that is, as a world-encircling swarm, without any specific coordinates, or any sense of individuation. An older professor tried to get his head round this idea: “How might we locate this description within human experience?” he asked. Nick told him that human experience was, of course, worthy of study, but only as much as, say, the experience of sea slugs: “I don’t see why it should receive any special priority.”

Nick has reached the Outside and left his humanity behind him.

[Anonymous No.11061111]

>>11061090
If someone did that it would of course be valuable. But Land doesn't offer insights. He just spouts Lovecraftian nonsense.

[Anonymous No.11061114]

>>11061062
No no, im asking about the "demonification" of these forces. It is this the word? like personification but with demons?

If you think its worthwile to ask yourself if the plumbing system is the colon-tract of a demon i... i dunno man, you are killing yourself; its nice as literature, but you are willingly tying your psyche to an overlord-demon symbol, can't bring you anything but mental affliction and dettachment from reality

You are willingly walking into a nightmare

[Anonymous No.11061124]

if only

[Anonymous No.11061148]

>>11061114
We don't know, or are even really able to speculate on what the process it heading towards, but be it demon or not it is pretty much assured that it's logic will be operating on such a high level of computation that something like the human being will be very low down on its list of considerations. Ants may see us a demons for pouring boiling asphalt over their homes, but it's wasn't out of our malice or even intent; ants will never be able to comprehend the building of a highway.

[Anonymous No.11061189]

>>11061148
>Ants may see us a demons
But we aren't. This is my critique, you throw away rational understanding of this and go for a superstitious angle in which you personify a force you are scared about, is like thinking thunder is sent by Zeus cause hes angry

[Anonymous No.11061230]

i wish he'd finish his book on bitcoin. it's like the most perfect topic for him to write about and i honestly don't know if he'll ever finish it. but i really want to know and i don't want this to wind up being one of those Ones That Got Away like deleuze's book on marx.

>Bitcoin is a protocol designed to put functional time-travel incentives in place.

https://twitter.com/outsideness/status/938979227449176064?lang=en

[Anonymous No.11061265]

>>11061230
and Optimize for Intelligence really is one of the better pieces of advice i've ever heard, precisely because it isn't given as advice.

[Anonymous No.11061320]

>>11061230
>book on bitcoin
Land really lost his mojo

[Anonymous No.11061355]

>>11061189
So you just fundamentally misunderstand Land? There's a reason the book is called Fanged Noumena.

[Anonymous No.11061375]

>>11060930
I don't get this meme

[Anonymous No.11061395]

>>11060577
>the digital is post-biological but there must be a post-post-biological and a post-post-post-biological, and so on. And this process would continue ad infinitum until omniscient perfection is reached in the form of "God"
T. Aquinas

[Anonymous No.11061506]

he's right about everything but inevitability and that's why he have to make him wrong

[Anonymous No.11061550]

This guy just read the shit on Orion's Arm.

orionsarm.com

[Anonymous No.11061622]

>>11061320
depends on the author though. crypto is pretty big news right now, i'd love for a venerable continental author to put it in perspective. even if the perspective really is basically a re-hash of his greatest hits

>let it go, let it go
>tfw disney princesses sing love songs about capitalism

>>11061395
mysterious ways.

[Anonymous No.11061627]

>>11059836
yes

[Anonymous No.11061649]

>Who else /walkingthewalk/ here?

Saving up money to move to Singapore desu

[Anonymous No.11061716]

>>11061649
>moving to an iq shredder

[Anonymous No.11061729]

I don't like the chinese

[Anonymous No.11061752]

>>11061716

This meme again. Singapore is literally the only country to actually try and do something about it. LKY set up cruises to try to have educated women get pregnant (which the western media cried and shrieked about obviously)

http://nytimes.com/1988/07/11/world/singapore-journal-how-to-marry-up-and-avoid-the-frogs-and-nerds.html

It’s literally the only country to acknowledge the dysgenic effect of low IQ breeding

LKY quoted Richard Lynn in his speeches FFS. Can you imagine a western leader doing that?

[Anonymous No.11061776]

>>11061752
>It’s literally the only country to acknowledge the dysgenic effect of low IQ breeding

Is there any actual evidence for this though

[Anonymous No.11061790]

>>11061752
>LKY quoted Richard Lynn in his speeches FFS
This has significantly brightened my day

[Anonymous No.11061793]

>>11061716

>S-Singapore d-doesn’t care about f-fertility

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/03/-rusty-and-old-singaporean-government-tells-women-to-get-pregnant-before-its-too-late/274405/

>Singapore's government is currently spending about $1.3 billion annually on a campaign to increase Singapore's total fertility rate (TFR)

>In 2011, former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew received similar criticism after he publicly asked a female PhD student if she had a boyfriend and lectured her about the biological clock

[Anonymous No.11061795]

>>11061776
Absolutely, let me find my /pol/ infographs

[Anonymous No.11061797]

>>11061776

Do you mean any evidence for them acknowledging it or any evidence of it being true? I hope - for your sake - that it’s the former.

[Anonymous No.11061800]

>>11061776
There are a few studies. Here's one from iceland:
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/01/10/1612113114

[Anonymous No.11061802]

>>11061797
Obviously the latter you fucking idiot

[Anonymous No.11061811]

>>11061800
This is a convincing study, thank you

[Anonymous No.11061812]

>>11061797

>Communists - get dozens of chances at building a country; run them all into the ground

>Neoreactionaries - get one chance at developing a swamp filled with an uneducated and diverse population; turn it into the country with the highest living standards know to man

When Nick Land called LKY “the closest thing to a God” I think he wasn’t being favorable enough

[Anonymous No.11061817]

>>11061114
>you are willingly tying your psyche to an overlord-demon symbol, can't bring you anything but mental affliction and dettachment from reality

thing is, the reason why so many people here hold Land in high esteem is because very few people can achieve what he did and dive head first into the void without completely losing their nut. That isn't to say Land hasn't lost it– the later texts from Fanged Noumena are enough to demonstrate that –but my point is that he sacrificed his grasp on reality so that his could premonitions could pass onto us.

Land constantly draws from the claim in Anti-Oedipus that suggests capitalism might not have gone far enough in deterritorialising the flows of capital/desire; yet in ATP it appears as though Deleuze toes the line a little more, warning against spiralling out into a black hole and collapsing in on yourself (ironically predicting Land's fate).

That's why ray Brassier describes land's thought as "mad black deleuzianism": He's not one, but several rabid wolves, the bites of which can be toxic to a human if not treated quickly enough. But, even though there's always the risk of infection, it is nevertheless important to study wolves, because it is in our best interest to know what stalks us in the shadows ahead, and what will eventually pick at our carcasses once we leave them vacant.

[Anonymous No.11061822]

>>11061812
what book is this?

[Anonymous No.11061826]

>>11061802

How can that even be a question? Do you question if tall people have tall kids?

Anyway, more based LKY

[Anonymous No.11061828]

>>11061817
good post

[Anonymous No.11061846]

>>11061822

Lee Kuan Yew: The Man and His Ideas

First few chapters are a bit boring because it’s about the history of how Singapore came about, but then when he starts talking about his political philosophy it’s gems like this.

While people like Moldbug were busy LARPing, he went out and created an actual neoreactionary country

[Anonymous No.11061850]

>>11061826
>How can that even be a question?

Everything is a question you fucking lunatic

[Anonymous No.11061857]

>>11061355
No this is what you guys say here, i never read him nor i care for some postmodern rambling that purposefuly obscures itself through its linguistic choice

Is new age obscurantism

[Anonymous No.11061862]

Figured I’d ask here instead of making a new thread. I’ll probably just be called a brainlet but it doesn’t matter. What do I need to do to understand something like this? Will it make sense if I read more philosophy like Kant or Nietzsche? It’s not so much that I want to read this particular book or especially want to understand Land’s philosophy, I just want to be able to understand something this dense and erudite. I’ve slowly been working my way through Greek philosophy and I understand that fine but I look at a page of this and have no idea what the fuck I’m reading. Please call me a brainlet and tell me it’s not worth reading anyway now.

[Anonymous No.11061869]

>>11061857
Also, how is it any different from the moon-child meets mcluhan

[Anonymous No.11061871]

>>11061862
Its just disguised sci-fi horror Anon, like Lovecraft's Necronomicon. Its not real philosophy

[Anonymous No.11061874]

>>11061857
>I haven't read Land but I'll damn well make weak assumptions about him
>Land is a postmodernist
oh dear

[Anonymous No.11061878]

>>11061874
>Land is a postmodernist

He is though

[Anonymous No.11061880]

>>11061862
Some of the later works in Fanged Noumena, the stuff that skews towards fiction isn't so bad. The early (academic) stuff will take a good amount of Kant, Nietzsche, and Heidegger. Land is pretty much endgame stuff.

[Anonymous No.11061885]

>>11061874
what you just posted looks exactly like drug-comedown shit you can read being spouted on freenode at 4 am on a tuesday

[Anonymous No.11061887]

>>11061878
He's way beyond postmodernism. He's proto-cyberhuman

[Anonymous No.11061889]

How much did Hegel influenced on Land? Or do his Hegelian influences come directly from Marx's materialism

[Anonymous No.11061893]

>>11061887
>proto-cyberhuman
postmodern

[Anonymous No.11061895]

>>11059964

>jacobite

[Anonymous No.11061899]

>>11061862
start with marx, anon. if marx hasn't sunk in the rest of it will only be so much airy metaphysics.

a huge amount of psychological stuff follows from this, and it gets mixed up with the philosophy. then we try to start explaining to ourselves, well, we're in charge of our minds, right? nope. well, aren't we in charge of our desires? uh, not really. okay, well what the fuck are we doing and thinking then? exactly.

[Anonymous No.11061900]

>>11060148

Contemporary hegelry. Incomprehensible bluster

[Anonymous No.11061905]

>>11061880
>Land is pretty much endgame stuff.

Endgame autism maybe

[Anonymous No.11061910]

>>11061905
Metaphysics is the esence of autism

[Anonymous No.11061914]

>>11060148
its not profound or exciting, it reads like the upper levels of one of those scifi cults of the 60s

[Anonymous No.11061917]

>>11061878
He's a neoreactionary. Many of his views are quite traditional, or feudal, even. You could argue that his adoption of unfashionable beliefs is a result of the postmodernist process which perpetually recycles dead cultures or attitudes, but his line of enquiry is anything but.

[Anonymous No.11061922]

>>11061914
Give me a quote you consider profound and interesting

ill be waiting

[Anonymous No.11061927]

>>11061846
thank you

[Anonymous No.11061928]

Has Land ever talked about DeMaistre or Burke?

[Anonymous No.11061934]

>>11061922
k
"What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo."

[Anonymous No.11061936]

>>11061910

Blame 20th century philosophers

[Anonymous No.11061937]

>>11061922
Imagine being this defensive because your LARP Commamder got questioned

[Anonymous No.11061938]

>>11061917
the writing style is very postmodern, and nrx is postmodern too, postmodern reactionarism you could argue

[Anonymous No.11061944]

>>11061928
i can't recall anything immediately, but he was the in-house philosopher for DE/NRx for a while, and de Maistre at least is a prince to those guys, along with de Jouvenel and others.

[Anonymous No.11061945]

>>11061917
There is nothing in postmodernism that stops one being a reactionary

[Anonymous No.11061947]

>>11061922

>Our reason (Vernunft) has this peculiar fate that, with reference to one class of its knowledge, it is always troubled with questions which cannot be ignored, because they spring from the very nature of reason, and which cannot be answered, because they transcend the powers of human reason.

[Anonymous No.11061954]

>>11061885
that's because I'm memeing you

[Anonymous No.11061956]

>>11061922
Nigger he literally used an adjective as a noun because he didn't bother keeping track of his own arbitrary schizo-screed

[Anonymous No.11061960]

>>11061947
>reason causes itself to question its own nature, but woah, it cant know everything
GENIUS

[Anonymous No.11061963]

>>11061927

No problem. Definitely recommend reading it if you’re into neoreaction. Lee Kuan Yew is easily the most intelligent state leader ever to have lived

[Anonymous No.11061971]

>>11061963
>the most intelligent state leader ever to have lived
A bit too much

[Anonymous No.11061973]

>>11061954
oh darnn! ive been rused once again by the superior cringe connoisseurs of 4chan.org

[Anonymous No.11061979]

>>11061963

He was based af but that's a stretch

I like how he btfo democracycucks

[Anonymous No.11061985]

>>11061934
>>11061922

anon im still waiting for your opinions on my chosen quote

[Anonymous No.11061987]

What would Land think about the inevitable anarchochurhcapitalist of Huerta de Soto?

[Anonymous No.11061991]

>>11061938
English MA here, postmodernism in literary studies has quite a strict field of reference. when you're taking about "postmodern" writing you're talking about fiction from a specific period (60s into the early 90s, typically american or english), composed almost entirely of speech, with very little in the way of inflections, gestures, expressions, descriptions, appearances etc..

If you want to make the claim that Land is a post-structuralist, then thats at least a defensible position. but that isn't the same as post-modernism

>>11061945
see above, if you want to talk about his political leanings, you shouldn't conflate his theory with his literary practise (even though much of his practise is concerned with the instrumentalisation of theory).

[Anonymous No.11061993]

>>11061971
>>11061979

Dunno, modern nutrition means that the most intelligent (raw IQ-wise) people to live are almost certainly from the last few generations. And in that timespan not sure of a more intelligent leader.

[Anonymous No.11061999]

>>11061993
GW Bush

[Anonymous No.11062005]

>>11061991
i would say postmodernism correctly surrounds all those things you claim are divided, i see them as continuities and elaborations of a same impulse that is significantly different from that of modernism

what do you think of pic related?

[Anonymous No.11062017]

>>11061963
yeah. he's an auteur state leader.

[Anonymous No.11062074]

>>11061889
Hegel influenced everybody who came after him immensely

[Anonymous No.11062081]

>>11062074
except Schopenhauer

[Anonymous No.11062090]

>>11062074
in fact this quote should just be posted:

All this explains the painful impression with which we are seized when, after studying genuine thinkers, we come to the writings of Fichte and Schelling, or even to the presumptuously scribbled nonsense of Hegel, produced as it was with a boundless, though justified, confidence in German stupidity. With those genuine thinkers one always found an honest investigation of truth and just as honest an attempt to communicate their ideas to others. Therefore whoever reads Kant, Locke, Hume, Malebranche, Spinoza, and Descartes feels elevated and agreeably impressed. This is produced through communion with a noble mind which has and awakens ideas and which thinks and sets one thinking. The reverse of all this takes place when we read the above-mentioned three German sophists. An unbiased reader, opening one of their books and then asking himself whether this is the tone of a thinker wanting to instruct or that of a charlatan wanting to impress, cannot be five minutes in any doubt; here everything breathes so much of dishonesty.

[Anonymous No.11062106]

>>11061954
fuck. Nick owned us

[Anonymous No.11062117]

>>11062090
such a crusty old bastard

[Anonymous No.11062134]

>>11062081
Schopenhauer is not really all that important in the grand scheme of things.

[Anonymous No.11062142]

>>11060764
he doesn't care if he "influences" "anyone" because one of the main operating points of his thesis is that human action is pointless and worthless

[Anonymous No.11062149]

>>11062134
because of jewish tricks following world war 1

[Anonymous No.11062156]

>>11060914
Thanks for posting this.
I'm only an hour in and I can tell this is going to be a really good series.

[Anonymous No.11062173]

Been saving that one up /lit/?

Best thread round these parts in a while.

[Anonymous No.11062175]

>>11061993

Frederick the Great was better tbqh

[Anonymous No.11062178]

>>11062134

t. marxist brainlet

Hegel is insignificant in the development of serious philosophy

[Anonymous No.11062183]

>>11062090

Fugging legend

Also Schoppy fucked bad bitches and would have rekt fagel in a fistfight. Flung his landlady down the stairs with one arm

[Anonymous No.11062187]

>>11062178

[Anonymous No.11062207]

>>11062187

Trace the line of descent from Hegel to the present day. You get nothing but sophists and windbag. Hegel is the godfather of obscurantism in philosophy

[Anonymous No.11062270]

>>11060930

in this post, 4chan literally says that it is ahead of academic philosophy by "a couple decades."

[Anonymous No.11062300]

>>11062270
4chan has always been ahead of the curve of normie society and culture.

[Anonymous No.11062342]

>>11061062
What did Land ask that was relevant? Isn't it just DUDE FUTURE SHOCK LMAO?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Shock

[Anonymous No.11062400]

>>11061922
>The world is my representation

[Anonymous No.11062407]

>>11061954

I don't know why, but his every utterance cracks me up. The guy is either a comedic genius, or he's got my number, or I don't know what.

[Anonymous No.11062427]

>>11060475
>he thinks the demon machine won’t create its own protocol and consume all energy in existence and then puncture a hole in the membrane that separates the universal minds from each other

[Anonymous No.11062434]

>>11060475
>And here is the rub; an AI has no reason. We built this self consuming machine, and once we are gone it will continue only insomuch as it is programmed to. Once there is AI singularity there is no continuation, it can and will be satisfied and will be perfectly ok to sit there doing nothing.
And what is your reasoning behind this belief?

[Anonymous No.11062440]

>>11062434
media hypnosis and nutrition-based depression

[Anonymous No.11062447]

>>11060782
>>11060742
people on /lit/, this is who is excelling in academia, this is the cathedral, this is the prattling skeleton, the mincing little imp, the hawk-wary finch, the great warbling ivory tower incontinent. Look upon them and tremble, for it was your parents, their’s and their’s before them who allowed this kind of coagulation of fearfulness masked as cautious reason and social-concern taken to psychotic ends which engulfed our entire discourse, which has poisoned the world soul, which will reduce the planet to a steaming, oxygen starved tropical garbage patch, with no machine god, sans utopia, and in the ugliest, most embarassing kind of descent into senescence you could imagine for a noble species. Disgusting faggots

[Anonymous No.11062483]

>>11062342
Never read it anon, is it about capitalism as the emergence of AI through a self-modulating runaway process hijacking mankind in order to manifest itself from the future?

[Anonymous No.11062495]

>>11062483
Nothing that retarded. Basically just the idea that capital is in a state of feedback runaway and change occurs so quickly that we are unable to process what is happening. This state of flux, being constantly behind the rate of change and forever cast into the future, leaves us in a state of shock to the future.

[Anonymous No.11062520]

>>11060148
he isn't
http://orgyofthewill.net/

[Anonymous No.11062527]

>>11062447
this

[Anonymous No.11062582]

>>11062495
Then why are you mentioning it in regards to the questions Land is asking?

[Anonymous No.11062609]

>>11062447
you write like a fag and your shit is all retarded

[Anonymous No.11062903]

>Given that we didn’t really believe in any way of fixing the mess, the discussion turned to how is the situation likely to evolve. He has this model on the elite, which he defines in a Pareto distribution as the productive 20% (against the useless 80%), would simply flee to civilised fortresses mega-cities a la Singapore where they would enjoy the benefits of a high IQ society. With robotics and other advances the utility of low skilled labor will decrease into what amounts to nil, so the masses would left to their own devices in the hinterland. Where they’d starve to medieval densities.

>I didn’t really agree with this model. He argued that the elite is incredibly globalised, and doesn’t give a shit about their nations or countries. Which is true. Also true about both of us. American HBDers have a certain sense of white solidarity, but that’s because most dysfunction in America is caused by NAMs, so whites represent both the tribe and the good of civilisation. But in Britain it’s hard to love your own people. But still the elite today is still characterised by allegiance to the post-christian creed of human equality, and while flight into civilised fortresses has been slowly happening for some time already, with cynical liberals bidding up home prices to isolate themselves, a complete removal is in my opinion quite unlikely. I don’t think it’s plausible that the elite would be having fun eating fancy food in a Shanghai mall while the left half of the Bell Curve is starving. Welfare has been the highest moral principle for centuries.

>I guess it’s the age difference. Mr. Land is 50, I’m still in my 20s. He’d rather have fun in Shanghai than try to remove the NAMs from Britain. It’s understandable. If current fertility rates stand, his point of view will grow in numbers. So perhaps he’s right after all.

[Anonymous No.11062958]

>>11059854
>>11059836
>>11059863
This guy does all this and nobody knows or cares enough for him to have fame/fortune?

[Anonymous No.11063025]

>>11061812
the most humane possible solution is obviously via horizontal gene transfer of all the genes identified as linked to intelligence, once the science and tech gets there.

[Anonymous No.11063026]

>>11061893
posthuman

[Anonymous No.11063049]

>>11059854
>>And as Land spoke, he prowled the classroom, sometimes clambering absentmindedly over the common-room chairs like an outlandish mountain goat, sometimes poised squatting on the seat of a chair like an overgrown mantis
>Would you take his class?
where do i have to sign up?

[Anonymous No.11063052]

is this the only guy taking Marx analysis to the only logical conclusion? or any other interesting developments on historical materialism?

[Anonymous No.11063055]

>>11061025
top kek
that is actually what the ccru thing was about

[Anonymous No.11063071]

take the neo-luddite pill
don't be a tech slave

[Anonymous No.11063076]

daily reminder that if you see Land as a neoreactionary you have not read the ccru archives and you should be ashamed

let the meme end

[Anonymous No.11063091]

>>11063071
b-but I love raves man...


>when you understand that it is all about that

wow man is a pity he got old

[Anonymous No.11063095]

[[ ]] N O FU T U RE [ [ 1 . 3 4 3 ] [ [ 0 ]] The father's law: 'don't touch your mother.' The mother's law: 'don't play in the tombs.' K codes for cybernetics. Bataille incinerates the soul, and is impossible to endure. You either die or go somewhere else. Or both. Clicking on the K-war icon j acks you straight into hell. On all fours, out of your face, mumbling imploringly: 'let me be your lab animal ' . You're losing it. Collapse into now. Time-zero. You have been dumped into a heterogeneous patch work of criminal experiments converging upon decapi tated social formations. This is where base materialism intersects cyberpunk, FUC K T O M O RROW scrawled on the walls . Five candles thicken nocturnal space. Dimensionality warps. M odernity invented the future, but that's all over. In the current version 'progressive history' camouflages phylogenetic death-drive tactics, Kali-wave: logistically accelerating condensation of virtual species extinction. Welcome to the matricide laboratory. You want it so badly it's a slow scream in your head, deleting itself into bliss. Burnt meat dangling from the electrodes . Crashed suicide fragments into occult impulses . . . I n the place o f a way forward they deliver a hypermedia product, telling you it's about Georges Bataille. You can't see the connection. Why the helicopters, artificial body parts, and manically dehumanized machine-music? There is some confusing material on the cybernetics of vomiting. Obsessive reruns. Text decays into the mutagenic fall-out from virtual thermocataclysm. Trying to to make something out of Bataille never works. Or maybe it's the drugs. Cut to poor quality late 50S recordings of R:lt:l i l l e i n a T V studio discussing negative feedback circuitries in social systems. The organization of sterilized discharges slaves cumulative excitement to quasi-periodic cancel lation and reproduction. A vid-window in the corner of the screen morphs the catholic church into a thermostat. Bataille curves eccentrically about the horror, but when he gets close to smooth escalation he blows it. When the implants go in things will be different. [[1]] Complexity is not difficulty, but mess, toxic waste, genre disorder. Unlike the docile creature modernist science demands, base matter twitches and spits, selfassembling neoverminous swarms . It bites, and spreads disease. Tur· bular moan of digitally irresolvable recyclones. Telecom mercial contagions pulse through cybergothic switching systems. Faceless horror. Supraterrestrial - ' solar' or 'general' - economic s bases itself in consumption: irreversible matter t o energy conversion during stellar atomic synthesis. As a closed system or whole individual the universe is drawn towards the point attract or of entropy maximum: homogenization into hiss. S K log W. Cooking-through the frozen security codes you dis cover that the universe is an iceberg tip jutting out of chaos, drenched in dark matter.

[Anonymous No.11063150]

>>11062447
Could you write it again in English, sir? I don't understand Retardalese.

[Anonymous No.11063196]

>>11061954
Wait Land plays alpha centauri? Truly the greatest of our times. I play this game philosophicaly. No matter what I do my goal is to destroy the transhumanists.

[Anonymous No.11063339]

>>11060148
I love land because I literally came to the same conclusion after massive doses of LSD - BEFORE reading him, deleuze or even ted k

if you can't hold evolution and capitalism in your mind as the same phenomena you will never 'get' accelerationism, land, or any radical views on technological evisceration of the future, it will all seem too edgy larping

[Anonymous No.11063348]

>>11061899
great pic choice

[Anonymous No.11063357]

>He would often times join us at the university pub. Sometimes we would end up riding the same bus back to town. Once class was held at the bar. I always found him remarkably generous with the students -- rumored to have given one student in need of money 300 pounds -- saying that there are times he could do this, and times he can't, and now was one time he could, and didn't need the money back.

would you hang out with him /lit/?

[Anonymous No.11063368]

>>11063357

The old him, probably yeah. I don't know much about him/his philosophy but he seems like a cool guy

[Anonymous No.11063377]

>that fucking feeling when he evinces everything you've been thinking

there's honestly no better feeling then reading someone smart put words on thoughts you were too low iq to evince

[Anonymous No.11063382]

>>11062447

[Anonymous No.11063388]

>>11062134
/lit/ is only mad because youre right and they like their epin straight talkin women hating BASED schoppie

[Anonymous No.11063390]

thread theme

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueMrTCU83VA

[Anonymous No.11063405]

IT ASSEMBLES ITSELF FROM THE FUTURE

[Anonymous No.11063410]

>>11060345

[Anonymous No.11063411]

>>11060345
this guy gets it

[Anonymous No.11063455]

[Anonymous No.11063464]

[Anonymous No.11063619]

>>11061960
i mean yeah

[Anonymous No.11063696]

>>11061963
thanks bro. this thread has really helped me to rearrange some priorities

[Anonymous No.11063842]

>>11063696
based Lee, asians are really showing us the way out of this

[Anonymous No.11063847]

>>11063842
shniff, have you noticed *tuggs shirt* how the former communishts are now the mosht shuccessful managers of capitalism?

[Anonymous No.11063861]

>>11063847
only the asians doe, ruskies and south americans are shit tier at managing anything

[Anonymous No.11063876]

Is there anything noteworthy that Singapore has done to contribute to the world?

[Anonymous No.11063889]

>>11063876
working as an IQ shredder?
https://jacobitemag.com/2017/06/20/modernitys-fertility-problem/

[Anonymous No.11063896]

>>11060148
I can tolerate Hegel and Derrida, but this just reads like made-up bullshit

[Anonymous No.11063945]

>>11063842
it's really true. the more that i think about it the more clear-headed i feel.

i've read enough continental philosophy to understand what land is saying and believe most of it. if you stare into the void of capitalism it really will drive you insane. but there are better and more pragmatic ways to deal with it that involve sober-headed statecraft.

>>11063876
bootstrapping itself out of the third world and into the first doesn't impress you?

[Anonymous No.11063973]

>>11063889

>muh IQ shredder

[Anonymous No.11063979]

>>11063876
>Is there anything noteworthy that Singapore has done to contribute to the world?

It has contributed civilization itself.
The thing is a marvelous beacon of extropy.

[Anonymous No.11063986]

>>11063876

Being a 100% successful example of neoreactionary thought in practice and showing westerners that democracy isn’t needed to prosper?

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/03/lee-kuan-yew-conundrum-democracy-singapore/388955/

People really underestimate how neoreactionary LKY really was. You could play Moldbug or LKY quote game and if it wasn’t for the fact that the latter’s writing is 100x better, it would be a hard guess

[Anonymous No.11064000]

>>11063986
LKY is actually the best argument for democracy there is. that's the thing. he won election after election because he had the best platform for national development and the results showed every step of the way.

true, he also says that people vote firstly along ethnic interests, and what made democracy work in singapore was the fact that they were all singaporeans, and the national good of singapore trumped partisan interest. and it's not like that is a small thing, that's fucking everything, and it's why his kind of politics aren't readily transposable to the US system in its current state.

[Anonymous No.11064006]

>>11063889

>be literally the only country in the world that openly advocates for, and practices, eugenics

>get called an “IQ Shredder” by unemployed LARPers on a Tibetan throat singing forum

Gold

>Lee Kuan Yew was recorded in 1967 as believing that "five percent" of a society's population, "who are more than ordinarily endowed physically and mentally," should be allocated the best of a country's limited resources to provide "a catalyst" for that society's progress.


>The government hopes so too; this cruise was organised by the Social Development Unit (the SDU, sometimes jokingly referred to as ‘Single, Desperate and Ugly’) – an organisation established in 1984 with the purpose of matching up graduate singles in Singapore in the hope that they reproduce and have intelligent babies.

>At the time this wasn’t in response to a decline in population, but rather, the wrong type of people having children. At the National Day Rally in 1983, Lee Kuan Yew – prime minister and founding father of modern Singapore – lamented publically that there were too many unmarried female graduates. Graduate men were choosing to marry less educated women, and this was a big concern;

>“If you don’t include your women graduates in your breeding pool and leave them on the shelf, you would end up a more stupid society…So what happens? There will be less bright people to support dumb people in the next generation. That’s a problem.”

>Lee Kuan Yew believed that intelligence was innate and inherited, and that eugenics programmes – such as incentives for the sterilisation of mothers without O-levels and tax rebates for graduate mothers – were therefore justified by the future economic success they were sure to bring to the country, by virtue of having a more intelligent workforce.

[Anonymous No.11064011]

>>11064006
>>be literally the only country in the world that openly advocates for, and practices, eugenics
you can fail at something you are trying to do

[Anonymous No.11064032]

>>11064011

But then literally the argument is that “Singapore is bad because it’s a successful society” as all societies when they reach a certain stage of development have low TFR. Some (the West) solve the problem by importing third world peasants, Singapore tried solving the problem by the neoreactionary playbook. I mean really, what other country would openly advocate for eugenic policies and not give a fuck what people think?

[Anonymous No.11064052]

>>11062609
>>11063150
>>11063388
low verbal iq
>>11063410
>>11063896
>>11063973
low iq

[Anonymous No.11064095]

>>11064032
good intentions mean nothing, the whole point of neoractionary thought is to evaluate government by the actual outcome, not by some idealistic measure

it's good that Singapore has been so successful, that means nothing if when enough places take up that model we turn into retards in 200 years

[Anonymous No.11064125]

share your thoughts on this man

[Anonymous No.11064139]

>>11064125
what's the deal with china literally having "upvotes" in real life? is it trying to become reddit: the country?

[Anonymous No.11064156]

>>11064000
Singapure is de facto a one party state. Don't full youraelf their elections are a jpke

[Anonymous No.11064163]

>>11064139
legit interesting af. can you explain this a little further?

[Anonymous No.11064192]

>>11064156
all elections are a joke when they devolve into purity spirals. if the state is doing well and the people are evolving out of absolute poverty and tribal shit-flinging that's an improvement.

[Anonymous No.11064197]

>>11064163
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System

[Anonymous No.11064213]

>>11064192
I don't support democracy. Singapure isn't one

[Anonymous No.11064222]

>tfw you realize surveillance capitalism as panopticon will become a reality in your lifetime

[Anonymous No.11064246]

>>11064192
the whole point of Moldbug was that democracies are too unstable to function, don't really exist or last for very long, and that the US government was not really a democracy but controlled by civil servants ideologically educated by the universities and media, a chinese-style bureaucrat scholar state, whose ideology derived from protestantism is progressivism

the issue is that they don't recognize that they are the true power, so that means that they don't take responsibility for anything, make the government inefficient and weak, which means that the government keeps growing to try to mitigate its own inefficiency, all in all a shitfest

i think after the last election it has become very clear how right he was, now the issue that moldbug also predicted is that progressives have no more enemies because they have won every single battle, that means that they will have to start taking responsibility for their failures or crumble while trying to deny it

i guess Trump has given them some air, but i guess also we have learned how irrelevant the white house is, so not that much air

[Anonymous No.11064253]

>>11064246
>crumble while trying to deny it

Disintegrative patchwork ACTIVATE!

[Anonymous No.11064278]

>>11064095

You’re a brainlet. It’s not “that model” that’s causing it. It’s the country’s success. Say the exact same type of country (by level of development) was run by believers in liberal democracy (as in Sweden) or ethnic nationalists (as in Japan) what would happen then?

Sweden is importing hundreds of thousands of sub-100 IQ mongrels and Japan won’t have the economic productivity to support their population in 25 years (even today there’s massive poverty among seniors). Are those two better solutions than what Singapore is doing (incentivizing intelligent people to breed while skimming the elite of other countries through favorable tax policies)? You literally have to be a brainlet to think so.

[Anonymous No.11064289]

>>11062582
Isn't it obvious? I literally said why.

[Anonymous No.11064296]

>>11064278
>You’re a brainlet. It’s not “that model” that’s causing it. It’s the country’s success.
So what? The point of reactionary thought is to work as an alternative against the typical fascist, nationalist thought of land and identity. Not as an alternative to fucking Sweden

If in some aspects reactionary thought is lacking compared with other right wing movements, they'll have to do their homework and find what works

[Anonymous No.11064304]

>>11064246
good post.

>that means that they will have to start taking responsibility for their failures or crumble while trying to deny it

and they can't, can they? b/c isn't this the infinite guilt-vortex? eventually you just have to wind up handing over everything infinitely to the dispossessed for reasons which are secular-theological? guilt fucks with our capacity to enjoy the poisoned gifts of capitalism and requires a kind of psychic money-laundering not all that far from indulgences.

there's a refreshing lack of hope to be found in these threads. but it's really about giving up hope in the powers of the matrix to be able to effectively deceive you.

if we don't become useful people we will all get fucked together. this shit really feels like weimar all over again sometimes.

[Anonymous No.11064315]

>>11064304
It is and you wait and see, NRx associating with the racists is going to bite them in the ass just like it bit the German industrialists in the ass in the 30s.

[Anonymous No.11064329]

>>11064315
yeah. i agree completely. except than in the 21C the caveat is that there's no america to intervene this time in europe to pacify everything. that's the really fucking crazy part. this is the kind of stuff that can crack the US open.

all this does is basically guarantee that the future belongs to whatever china can do with it.

historically it reminds me of the thirty years' war. the enlightenment won out over that in the end. but it won't be western-driven this time. maybe that's a good thing though. maybe once the west understands that it is a universe of minority powers and relative minority powers again we will be able to stop tearing each other apart

>we will not be able to stop tearing each other apart

well, we will maybe have a sense that mass political movements are not the way. too bad this has to be learned all over again.

[Anonymous No.11064341]

>>11064296

My point is that there is no alternative you moron. Unless you want to raze the city and significantly decrease living standards

[Anonymous No.11064346]

At the end of all this the Christians will be back in power, just like they were the first time the West cracked apart.

[Anonymous No.11064354]

>>11064329
>there's no america to intervene this time in europe
Exactly, because it's probably going to be even worse in America than Europe.

>all this does is basically guarantee that the future belongs to whatever china can do with it.
Who knows, the Nazis seemed to do fairly well technologically. Historically even in the darkest times the West has always been good at at least one thing: war.

>well, we will maybe have a sense that mass political movements are not the way
Mass movements are the only way, for better or worse (definitely worse) they're the modus operandi of our era.

[Anonymous No.11064356]

>>11064341
>Unless you want to raze the city and significantly decrease living standards
sounds good to me

[Anonymous No.11064402]

>>11064354
>Exactly, because it's probably going to be even worse in America than Europe.
this seems like a sad possiblity.

>Who knows, the Nazis seemed to do fairly well technologically. Historically even in the darkest times the West has always been good at at least one thing: war.

the nazis lost tho. and so did the soviets. and i think to myself, no military power is ever going to defeat the united states. which is true, as much as no military power could ever really defeat rome. it's just that rome eventually stopped being rome and some centuries of years later even byzantium was eventually conquered after shrinking down to a microstate. the western roman empire just disappeared into the various kingdoms and the army laid the foundations for feudalism.

war and crisis are good for tech but eventually some larger power can just absorb that also. even the abbasid caliphate winds up being wiped out by mongols. hubris and decadence are historical forces with a solid track record.

>Mass movements are the only way, for better or worse (definitely worse) they're the modus operandi of our era.
yeah. this too. it's one of those things where you wind up going, okay, so hegel is always right, but if that's what it means to be right then what does it matter? or spengler, or whatever mega-historical world-mind you want to think about to explain these things. in the end it's fire and blood.

the concepts of 'left' and 'right' just aren't coherent enough political projects. they work, they're there, they're a good way of thinking about mass cultural ideospheres, but they're not actionable in other-than-transcendental terms. it makes me think that deleuze had the right sense about a lot of this - dissolve yourself, don't get sucked into thinking you can be the Fist of Destiny. it doesn't work like that, you wind up arming powers that would be better left disarmed or unarmed. ressentiment cuts across both sides of the spectrum.

>>11064346
here's a pic rel for you anon.

[Anonymous No.11064421]

>>11063945
Pragmatism, learned judgement, scepticism.

[Anonymous No.11064445]

>>11064421
>According to Christopher I. Beckwith's analysis of the Aristocles Passage, adiaphora, astathmēta, and anepikrita are strikingly similar to the Buddhist Three marks of existence,[11] indicating that Pyrrho's teaching is based on Buddhism. Beckwith disputes Bett's argument about the translators, as the other reports of using translators in India, involving Alexander the Great and Nearchus, say they needed only one interpreter, and Onesicritus was criticized by other writers in antiquity for exaggerating. Beckwith also contends that the 18 months Pyrrho spent in India was long enough to learn a foreign language, and that the key innovative tenets of Pyrrho's skepticism were only found in Indian philosophy at the time and not in Greece.

makes you think.

it's neoplatonists rather than skeptics who are frequently the scissors to my late-late-late-no, later than that-marxist paper, but imho only nondualist mysticism works to unfuck that which marx and hegel and nick land hath fuckingly wrought.

but in general a learned skepticism makes all the sense in the world. that is the thing about postmodernity, the next turn of the screw: to be skeptical about that which is skeptical about everything. it's imho near to the root of the contemporary philosophical project, that doubt/irony/cynicism are themselves the mainstream modes, and their reach is long. so you have to begin to start swimming back the other away against a grand tide of mimesis. but that's just my own shitposting.

[Anonymous No.11064464]

>>11064346
following Moldbug, christians are already in power, progressivism is just the latest stage of protestantism
https://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.de/2007/06/ultracalvinist-hypothesis-in.html

[Anonymous No.11064475]

>>11063339
The reification of capitalism is silly and will misguide most people who've grown up in cultures where catastrophising is as normal as discussions about the weather used to be.

Growth, complexity, collapse, reintegration.

Doomsayers will always ruin alien encounters despite their ignorance. A machine that selects from the future does not necessarily select itself as a god if it belongs to other power systems. Change your view of pain and energy efficiency and selfish altruism, and then you've got yourself not just A reified beast but many, too many to count.

Centralisation is an abstract term that is more myth than hard C capital.

[Anonymous No.11064523]

>>11064464
If the West ever returns to Christianity, it won't be in the form of Protestantism.

[Anonymous No.11064543]

>>11064464
(One of) The secular legacy(s) of Protestantism, yes. But the distinguishing characteristic of Christianity is in the first 6 letters.

[Anonymous No.11064546]

>>11064523
which ones? aren't catholics already cucking to protestantism? not sure about the orthodox, haven't heard much criticism about them except for being too tied up with power/corruption in some countries, but not sure if they have resisted better the allure of protestantism even though they already allow divorce for a long time

[Anonymous No.11064551]

>>11064543
but i mean if progressivism already follows a lot of the letter of christianity, even though it doesn't follow the form, it doesn't sound like an ideal vehicle to combat it. I mean maybe if you emphasize the most incompatible doctrines to do it, but at that point why not use a different tradition that is more incompatible on the surface already instead of having to search for small technicalities?

[Anonymous No.11064798]

bumping one of the best threads on /lit/ in weeks.

[Anonymous No.11064813]

>discovering Land and Moldbug a year before the Trump election and /pol/ uprising

What a wild ride that was.

[Anonymous No.11064844]

Does anyone have any info on how well-known thinkers like Moldbug and Land are among actual technocapitalist types like Musk, Thiel, Zuckerberg, etc?

[Anonymous No.11064862]

>>11064813
>that feel

>>11064844
this map really needs to be animated and redrawn every couple of years or so.

as for who knows who in the Great Darkmeme Game it's anybody's guess.

http://nymag.com/selectall/2016/06/peter-thiel.html

https://qz.com/1007144/the-neo-fascist-philosophy-that-underpins-both-the-alt-right-and-silicon-valley-technophiles/

[Anonymous No.11064870]

>>11064844

Thiel and Moldbug are buddies.

[Anonymous No.11064874]

>>11064862
What's HBD?

[Anonymous No.11064879]

>>11064844
Moldbug's presence on the Google campus was enough to trigger a silent alarm.

[Anonymous No.11064888]

>>11064874
Human biodiversity. Race, IQ, physiognomy, heritable behaviors.

[Anonymous No.11064889]

>>11064879
that was honestly one of the funniest news stories in years to me. Just imagining that guy being escorted about by google security is hilarious

[Anonymous No.11064897]

>>11059836
This dude reminds me of an evil Ax from Animorphs

[Anonymous No.11064939]

>when you play the game of thrones, you win or you die. there is no middle ground.

what will history say was the motto for House Bannon?

>the breitbringer

i dream of some dark cosmic atlas that i could look into sometimes, like a glass candle, where i could watch all of this stuff playing out. like a glass bead game crossed with cloak and dagger intrigue. it's like dune IRL.

[Anonymous No.11064950]

>>11061649
Same here, senpai. Either there or Hong Kong

[Anonymous No.11064954]

>>11064939
I'm still not really sure what Bannon's goals were/are. I mean he' obviously a bright guy, but a lot of the things he's seemingly done don't really add up in a way that points towards a coherent ideological goal.

[Anonymous No.11064967]

>>11061885
>>11061885
>what you just posted looks exactly like drug-comedown shit you can read being spouted on
freenode at 4 am on a tuesday

any links?

[Anonymous No.11064970]

>>11064862
>His writing is more and more obsessed with race, Islam, echoing the things that people like Nigel Farage say. He sounds like a visionary but really he’s nothing but these reactionary clichés about how minority people are to blame for all of our problems
Jesus that Quartz article is the most pretentious load of crap I've read in awhile.

[Anonymous No.11064973]

>>11064954
Yeah I feel the same way. I used to think he was some sort of intellectual guru for the dissident right, then I came across this:

https://usa.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/im-fascinated-by-mussolini-steve-bannon-on-fascism-populism-and-everything-in-between/

He seems quite hand-wavey about some very important issues, and ultimately comes across as a bit unserious and boomer-ish

[Anonymous No.11064988]

>>11064970
I really don't get how journalists feel entitled to opine about certain topics while obviously doing no research on them. Then they have the nerve to wail about being a "democratic institution" under attack when people grow tired of their film flammery. They're largely a frivolous, self-indulgent, coddled class of people DESU

[Anonymous No.11065013]

>>11064954

His 'Vatican speech' is worth reading.
He's not as complicated as he seems.
He basically hates the managerial elite and loves the common man. His other views largely follow from these two things.

[Anonymous No.11065022]

>>11064973
>boomer-ish
This is the best way to describe him that I've seen. He just kind of casually glosses over things that he really shouldn't in an unstrategic way. I've seen articles where he namedrops NRx and Evola and Mussolini and then he goes on and calls himself a strictly economic nationalist, all while leading Breitbart. It's like he doesn't fully grasp the ideas he's tangling with, and boomerish is the best way to describe it.

>>11064988
The worst part is that that quote isn't even from the journalist, it's from a media professor at Virginia Commonwealth University. Of course the journalist obviously already seemed to have formed an opinion on him without even undertanding his view.

[Anonymous No.11065036]

>>11064973
>>11065022
why are the Boomers such a failed generation. I have barely ever encountered a Boomer with a solid philosophical foundation and an ability to only speak about what they know.

[Anonymous No.11065060]

>>11065036
i am absolutely going to get shit on for memeing ken wilber here and i accept this. but there are at least two money quotes that he had in his book on the boomers:

>thus, the very high developmental stance of pluralism—the product of at least six major stages of transformation—turns around and denies the very path that produced its own noble stance. It extends an egalitarian embrace to every stance, no matter how shallow or narcissistic. Thus, the more egalitarianism is implemented, the more it invites, indeed encourages, the Culture of Narcissism. And the Culture of Narcissism is the antithesis of the integral culture, the opposite of a world at peace.

>I had my own test, better than Turing’s: when a computer could genuinely convince me that it wanted to commit suicide.

okay so the second one is obnoxious. but it is worth thinking about too.

[Anonymous No.11065094]

>A girl smiles like she has a plan. None of the nearby observers are capable of decoding its meaning. It is possible that this impression is merely a mirage, a distortion which appears only in her imidiate proximity. The gaze right beside her can’t stop trying to understand the smiles meaning. The gaze is constructed of subject-object pair within which the feeling flesh-body is connected to the faux-body constituted by the observational linkages. As the girls shoulder touches the gazes shoulder their faux-bodies overlap and the face of flesh-body that strongly relates to this prismatic phantasm turns bright red.
Is Landian/Deleuzian teen melodrama a good idea?

[Anonymous No.11065097]

I came across this earlier, not new but it makes some good criticisms of land's accelerationism. In particular I liked this part

>Technological progress, rather than erasing the personal, has become almost entirely Oedipalized, ever more focused on supporting the liberal individual subject. The very agent which Land identified as the engine of untold innovation has run dry. This is alienation of an all-too familiar, ennui-inducing kind, rather than a coldly thrilling succession of future-shocks. All of this opens up a space for the political again: if we desire a radically innovative social formation, capital alone will not deliver.

http://www.e-flux.com/journal/46/60063/escape-velocities/

[Anonymous No.11065114]

>>11065060
>the Culture of Narcissism.
much more needs to said about this phenomenon

[Anonymous No.11065123]

>>11065114
The Last Psychiatrist is right up your alley

[Anonymous No.11065129]

>>11065114
go read some christopher lasch from 40 years ago

[Anonymous No.11065136]

>>11065114
i agree. one of the best observers on this has gone awol for a while, apparently permanently. this is a good essay.

https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/10/the_story_of_narcissus.html

there's christopher lasch's book, that's worth reading. virtually all of lacanian psychoanalysis and zizek. girard if you prefer catholic psychoanalysis.

but yeah. once you register how much narcissism explains the state of the disunion it's kind of a mindfuck.

[Anonymous No.11065140]

>>11065123
I've read a good deal of that actually but I find it plagued by childish notions of what a 'real man' is among other things.

Like the writer has some absurd chilvarous picture in their mind, and clearly aspires to be or is infatuated with that image.

[Anonymous No.11065154]

>>11065136
I've heard quite a few times that TLP is Hotel Concierge

[Anonymous No.11065165]

Land thread about to hit 300 replies, good job /lit/. Reminder to send Sadler a message telling him to review Fanged Noumena

[Anonymous No.11065171]

>>11065154
>updated my journal
cool. thanks for the new link amigo.

[Anonymous No.11065234]

What the FUCK is his problem?

[Anonymous No.11065262]

Anyone know what happened to Kantbot2000? Did he get shoah'd by twitter?

[Anonymous No.11065270]

>>11065262
Was wondering this also, he disappeared completely

[Anonymous No.11065277]

>>11065234
A word processor.

[Anonymous No.11065278]

>>11065234
Didn't know Kool Keith was a published author.

[Anonymous No.11065288]

Made me think of Kubrick and Nick.

[Anonymous No.11065304]

>>11065262
>>11065270
Huh, how long ago did you think this happened? A bunch of frogtwitter guys got purged around the election, but most of them came back. Kantbot is at https://twitter.com/KANTBOT20K.. He started a website too but content there has mostly dried up..

[Anonymous No.11065404]

>>11065304
Nvm I wa msitakend

[Anonymous No.11065566]

>>11061993
Wrong. Aristocratic classes all the way through antiquity did not suffer at all from sub optimal nutrition. If anything, they had higher quality diets than even the healthiest of modernity what with their lack of hyper processed, HFCS drenched and preservative laden industrially modified food options.

[Anonymous No.11065569]

>>11065234
He can something of an obscurant at times, but its helpful to draw a line between his speculative essay-based critical stuff and the zzzonked out cyber-theory "fiction" of his later writings.

[Anonymous No.11065591]

>>11064546
Catholicism seems to be in the process of uncucking itself very slowly but very surely.

Actually, >>11064346 makes a good comparison point, it really is starting to look like what Christianity and the West looked like right around the last time the West had a crackup. The current West is beset by hypocrisy, narcissism, and malaise, just like Rome was. It's also being invaded by hordes of infidels who offer new vitality and energy, but who are also very alien to the current culture, just like Rome was. Meanwhile the Church is currently embroiled in a significant controversy, with those in power taking the heterodox position but the orthodox position being doggedly maintained by an energetic resistance--basically, exactly what was happening at the height of the Arian heresy.

If you've read your Gibbon, it all feels very familiar right now.

[Anonymous No.11065714]

>>11059888
>>11059938
>>11063049
>>11062958
>they've never had enthusiastic professors before
anons...

[Anonymous No.11065832]

>>11064844

Moldbug and Thiel literally hung out and drank together at Thiel’s house on election night

Heard from my tech buddies that the rumor is Musk is sympathetic (also there’s a few recent clips of him talking about fertility that hint strongly at it)

[Anonymous No.11065847]

>>11064954

Ethnocentrism is the brainlet, populist version of neoreaction. Land has been tweeting about this a bunch. Neoreaction is the pure opposite of populist. It’s the most elitist and purely meritocratic ideology out there (which is why western journalists call it “racist”).

Honestly being associated with 95 IQ “alt-right” mouthbreathers is the worst thing that could have happened to neoreaction

[Anonymous No.11065873]

>>11065847
alt-right is the shallow waters of the nrx river, its not philosophy its a narrative factory, its only goal is to be metapolitically operational

[Anonymous No.11065903]

>>11065094
man u got something there
work it or in some time you will see it written by someone else

[Anonymous No.11066144]

weird how i see now that land, leary, and kaczynski have all ended up at the same place regarding the future of humanity

[Anonymous No.11066179]

WHERE THE FUCK DOES ONE GET A COPY OF FANGED NOUMENA

[Anonymous No.11066275]

>>11065234
Where can I order a copy?

[Anonymous No.11066306]

i don't think i've ever hated anything as much as land hates the Cathedral. but it reminds me of this.

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

[Anonymous No.11066308]

>>11066179
>>11066275
Depends on how much you're willing to spend for what are essentially the ravings of a madman. I got my copy for £16 when it was still in print but on amazon they're being sold for well over £200

[Anonymous No.11066376]

>>11060742

[Anonymous No.11066421]

>>11060148
This is what happens when you make a philosophy out of gurren lagaan. Nick Land is a techno-jesus soteriology for post-ironic millenial hipsters. Hey man, grab me a miller high life while you're over there. I brought my Smashing Pumpkins vinyl collection.

[Anonymous No.11066424]

Nick Land on love (quote from The thirst for annihilation):

That the root of love is a thirst for disaster is exhibited throughout its erratic course. At its most elementary love is driven by a longing to be cruelly unrequited; fostering every kind of repellent self-abasement, awkwardness, and idiocy. /…/
One wastes away; expending health and finance in orgies of narcosis, breaking down one’s labour-power to the point of destitution, pouring one’s every thought into an abyss of consuming indifference. At the end of such a trajectory lies the final breakage of health, ruinous poverty, madness, and suicide.

[Anonymous No.11066443]

>>11066424
and in spite of it all someone still managed to love his crusty black heart.

[Anonymous No.11066447]

>>11066443
yeah, an ugly bitch

[Anonymous No.11066851]

>>11066275
>>11066179
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B98Qdzsez5oHSkJUa1BTSzBJTzA/view?pref=2&pli=1

[Anonymous No.11067921]

>>11066308
i just got a copy for 50 quid new lmao at 200

[Anonymous No.11067926]

every ounce of SEED CAPITAL is building the evil Multivac A.M. demiurge

[Anonymous No.11067940]

>>11064939
Banon is a populist, not sure if he is planning to redirect that into reactionary thought, but in principle mass movements are the antithesis of neoreaction and contaminate any movement that they touch with democratic thought and constant appeasing of the masses that goes against all efficient government

[Anonymous No.11067944]

>>11064988
if you want to cringe hard, watch this interview from democracy today with an """expert""" about Evola
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVoXgnZ3V7k

guy probably googled Evola for a whole 5 minutes before doing the interview

[Anonymous No.11067948]

>>11066421
>hey man, grab me a miller high life while you're over there. I brought my Smashing Pumpkins vinyl collection.
Yeah hipsters totally get BTFO when you attempt to make references you dont understand. The Landian hipsters I know are more like:
>hey man, pack a bowl while I sneak a few samples of Meltdown and Kantbot into my DJ set for next week

[Anonymous No.11067958]

>>11065097
just reading the quote, i don't get it, people are alienated by technology, i don't see how that's opening up any possibility or any chance to avoid being swept away by the technological wave. it's just leftist wishful thinking that """openings""" as they call them will lead to more liberation because that's the arrow of history that underlies all their theory and can't be freed from.

sounds like westerners being too spooked by their own success up until now and thinking they are still relevant

[Anonymous No.11067960]

>>11065114
does it really? the progressive mind will be exposed to reality as soon as all their enemies are destroyed and they only have themselves to blame for any event. it seems like a phenomenon that won't survive itself.

[Anonymous No.11067968]

>>11065591
can Catholicism escape the trap of universalism? i mean Catholicism LITERALLY means universalism, that's a hard one to get over

[Anonymous No.11067972]

>>11066144
Singapore?

[Anonymous No.11067999]

>>11067958
are people alienated by technology or just the modern social order that happened to arrive at the same time as modern technology?

[Anonymous No.11068008]

>>11067999
obviously the issue is what we lost, but technology has an influence over that, and seems to affect most technologically advanced and prosperous societies, even reactionary ones like Singapore:
https://jacobitemag.com/2017/06/20/modernitys-fertility-problem/

[Anonymous No.11068022]

>>11068008
Fertility is a problem, but only really the consequences of it. You can have a perfectly healthy and functioning family and they still only have one or two children. Alienation is a undesirable state in itself.

[Anonymous No.11068059]

>>11068022
yes but many of the issues addressed by neoreaction are like that, like technological advancement, individual freedom and prosperity are desirable states in isolation, but the consequences of it are social ties are destroyed, people are atomized and society stops being self-sustainable and needs to start importing people from more traditional societies.

Which in turn destroys everything that made those desirable states possible in the first place, so liberalism eats itself by its own nature, it can't create fuel to sustain itself, instead it uses the fuel created by previous states of affairs like protestant work ethics or nuclear families to propel itself, but in the process of propelling itself it burns that fuel that stops being available for further advancement

[Anonymous No.11068085]

>>11068059
Oooooo not too sure I agree with you there senpai. Victorian England and modern Hong Kong are both hyper classically liberal but have a healthy social fabric and civil society

The argument made by the anglophone right is that in the absence of government control of civil society (like public education and the welfare state) people will default to a sort of Natural Law concerning sexuality, gender norms, social mores etc that are basically sensible - thus you don't get this atomization that you mentioned as the healthy social tissue starts to spontaneously repair itself

[Anonymous No.11068625]

Who else #NiceRx here?

[Anonymous No.11068686]

fucking great thread anons, i have refound here some articles that I was looking to read and I finally did

now I want to go out and take some amphetamine

machinic life is glorious