/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15006945]

What's the deal with NRx? Someone explain it succintly

[Anonymous No.15006953]

government is modern day clergy

[Anonymous No.15007059]

>>15006945
Sovereignty is conserved. Some one is always in power, exercises absolute power. Under liberalism we lie to ourselves that we have solved this by, say, 'checks and balances' and the 'private sector' but really all that's been done is power has become hidden, deformalized, and thus unaccountable.

[Anonymous No.15007100]

>>15006945
Formalism aims to reduce violence by reducing uncertainty. Uncertainly is reduced by eliminating informality in government. Spontaneous gleichschaltung has given the extended civil service - the university-media-civil service complex - the power to manipulate public opinion and manufacture consent for their preferred progressive policies. Eliminating informality requires the liquidation of the civil service, which acquires power when democratic government reaches its inflection point of divvying up sovereignty and parceling it out amongst the demos - increasing governmental complexity. A small but strong state will run its affairs in the best interests of its people, because it has no incentive to do it poorly under the model of a joint-stock corporation. You can even preserve rights like free speech, because in such a state free speech has no power to harm the state.

[Anonymous No.15007130]

>>15007100
>in such a state free speech has no power to harm the state.
How does it insulate against mass politics, aka zealous or self-interested dissidents riling up the masses with rhetoric?

[Anonymous No.15007217]

>>15007130
A state in which the sovereign has complete and total power and an army with crypto-locked weaponry at his command (this is what he really believes) is a state that doesn't have to worry about the odd dissident. Under neo-cameralism and an international order governed under a patchwork model, anybody who is not happy with the services provided by the state is free to vote with their feet. Anyone staying to make trouble is dealt with in the same way Singapore deals with their dissidents

[Anonymous No.15007320]

>>15007217
so it's basically "you can have free speech if we take away all of your other rights"? Who is this supposed to appeal to? Right wing authoritarians don't actually care about free speech and libertarians care about way more than free speech,

[Anonymous No.15007341]

>>15007217
To add to this >>15007320 it doesn't seem very well insulated against coups and putsches

[Anonymous No.15007357]

>>15006945
Whys this guy hanging out with teenagers now

[Anonymous No.15007379]

>>15006945
edgy kids being edgy

[Anonymous No.15007395]

>>15007357

[Anonymous No.15007865]

>>15006945
Just read Unqualified Reservations

[Anonymous No.15007875]

>>15007865
Why would Curtis need to read that?

[Anonymous No.15008276]

Just a bunch of weak basedboys larping

[Anonymous No.15008324]

>>15008276
how can they be weak if they're based

[Anonymous No.15008345]

NRx was a loosely nit network of people engaging in discussion and theorising about non-democratic governance in the wake of Moldbug's blog. It wasn't a unified doctrine or ideology, the only unifying feature was a strong dislike of democracy and some of Moldbug's jargon, but beyond that people were discussing the viability of a variety of different directions a non-democratic government could go. It could broadly, at the time, be separated in to three trends (Landian, Ethnat, and Trad) but very quickly the latter two were submerged in to the burgeoning Alt-Right and when that wave broke on the shore the Landian party was really the only one left standing but to complicate things further Land had doubled down on r/acc branding after being challanged by u/acc and making NRx and r/acc almost interchangeable, with the exception of some irrelevant hold-outs, at least as far as their terminology was concerned.

I think this is partly why Moldbug, who was a silent observer to all this (unless you know his secret twitter identity) has reemerged a decade later to recapitulate his ideas in the clear pill essay in the hope that they will stand on their own this time.

[Anonymous No.15008355]

>>15007395
I'm thinking based.

[Anonymous No.15008372]

>>15007320
>>15007341
It rejects the ethical ideal of liberty in favor of security and efficiency. Remember, the goal is to reduce violence and in his formulation the only way to do that is to reduce uncertainty. So nobody in the neocameralist state has formalized "rights". It's just that exercising those rights we would typically ascribe to a free society are incapable of harming the regime, so it would appeal to those supposed libertarians still unsure of embracing a heresy like this and to those authoritarians who didn't care in the first place. There is no mass politics because there is no opportunity to engage in political action. Disruptors are treated as terrorists.

[Anonymous No.15008373]

>>15008345
>unless you know his secret twitter identity
does he actually?

[Anonymous No.15008394]

>dude what if we turned real world into Psycho Pass lmao

[Anonymous No.15008426]

>>15007059
that's literally just Carl Schmitt

[Anonymous No.15008432]

>>15007865
OP spelled the word wrongly, but he did say
>succinctly
I really despise CY's prose.

>>15006945
>Premise: natural selection of rulers leads to the greatest prosperity
>Split the world into 10k city states
>Each is controlled by a PLC with 12 directors
>Call this neo-monarchism
>(PLCs tend to have 12 directors because natural social selection killed off PLCs with other board structures)
>Also,
>Christianity is against natural selection of the fittest rulers, basically a tool used by incompetent rulers to trick the masses into not 'firing' them.
>Modern liberalism is just a form of Christianity (The ultracalvinist hypothesis).

[Anonymous No.15008558]

>>15008426
Who is highly based.

[Anonymous No.15008598]

>>15008432
>>Christianity is against natural selection of the fittest rulers, basically a tool used by incompetent rulers to trick the masses into not 'firing' them.
>>Modern liberalism is just a form of Christianity (The ultracalvinist hypothesis).

Ironically, if NRx has a lineal successor, it's the hardcore Catholics that have cropped up to critique Liberalism, like Deneen and Vermeule and Ahmari and the guys at The Josias. That's a big part of where the 'reactionary' action is these days, intellectually.

[Anonymous No.15008603]

>>15008426
More or less, yes. Yarvin's pitch with his old blag was basically to get progressives to embrace the truth of the matter and their own elitism, cut the bullshit and realize that's how it really be. Then we can have a functioning society and real statecraft rather than all the smoke and mirrors, pandering, pretending every one is equal and every one's voice is important or relevant.

[Anonymous No.15008609]

Are there some good, short-ish reads to get a feel for this stuff?

[Anonymous No.15008631]

>>15008609
Unqualified Reservations
https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/
Read How Richard Dawkins got Pwned, the Open Letter and the Sam Altman one.

[Anonymous No.15008653]

>>15008372
But what's the appeal of this? It's the political equivalent of "if we chain everyone to the radiator in their bathroom they'll be safe". The only upside he tries to sell is voting with your feet, but that's not even a truthful selling point because ultimately everything still has to be subsumed to his Leviathan so there's a hard limit on what systems can actually function as part of the patchwork.

[Anonymous No.15008658]

>>15008345
>in the hope that they will stand on their own this time.
He takes way too long to say way too little, he needs to learn how to write more succinctly if he wants to be anything more than a jumping off point.

[Anonymous No.15008722]

>>15008598
I agree, and I think it is less ironic the more one considers it (if there is one space NRx struggles it is spiritual/metaphysical comprehension).
IMO these are all simply movements towards neo-aristocratic ideals as a bulwark against the lowest common denominator, broad based liberalism, that discards the fundaments that civilisation rests on.

[Anonymous No.15008784]

>>15008426
Not really, Schmitt says a lot more than that.
>>15008603
Moldbug is an idiot, and just continues the struggle of life against death. If you think you can influence your political opposition with infotainment takes you're literally worse than them.

[Anonymous No.15009307]

>Mrs. Moldbug and I got on the R1100R and took a motorcycle pilgrimage to Chris McCandless’s bus, where we stayed up three nights in a row, just thinking, then did a bunch of acid and emptied our pistols maniacally into the woods. “Smoke dat moose!”, we were chanting. “Git dem maggots! Smoke dat moose!”

[Anonymous No.15010059]

>>15006945
Just discovered his first mind blowing RED PILL was the discredited John Kerry smearing Swift boaters weren't taken seriously enough for his liking JFC lost respect for this faggot who should kill himself ...Swift Boats

[Anonymous No.15010170]

>>15008653
>But what's the appeal of this?
Erm, it triggers the libs?

[Anonymous No.15010218]

>>15006945
1. Everything is caused by sociological constructs.

2. Conspiracies don't real.

3. The English Civil War caused everything.

[Anonymous No.15010251]

>>15008345
I lost faith in Moldbug when he said the solution for America is to hire a communist CEO and a christian CEO

[Anonymous No.15010260]

>>15010251
He lives in Silicon Valley so for him everything is solved by charismatic technocrats.

[Anonymous No.15010275]

>>15008653
Imagine this, unilever begins buying up masses of land maybe the American government reaches a state of decline where it has to start selling off national parks, maybe they buy up land in Africa, who knows. Unilever now owns an area the size of a small European country and begins dividing that land up in to chunks and builds housing and amenities on them. Think of it like a theme park, you know how you go to Disney Land and the place is divide up in to different themed kingdoms and such? Well Unilever does the same thing and themes its micronations along various different lines. Maybe some are multicultural, maybe some are ethnic specific, maybe some are religiously themed, maybe others are reddit-atheism themed. People buy a pass or a subscription to stay there (taxes) as long as they like, can afford to, or until they violate their terms of service agreement (law).

[Anonymous No.15010546]

It’s pretty nuanced and would arguably be preferable to what we have now, but it completely loses me when you cut to the chase and discover it’s basically just corporate feudalism.

[Anonymous No.15010562]

>>15010546
>it's pretty nuanced but it loses me when I deliberately make it less nuanced

[Anonymous No.15011457]

NRx? more liek woj/acc

[Anonymous No.15011530]

>>15010546
Feudalism isn't real

[Anonymous No.15011766]

>>15006945
edgy losers play too much System Shock and think the intro to logic class they took in college made them the greatest thinkers to grace the western world

[Anonymous No.15011860]

>>15006945
>What's the deal with NRx? Someone explain it succintly
A bunch of retarded nerd libertarian larpers who realised that most normal people don't actually like the policy of an ultra libertarian society; according to Yarvin people want government services so they will keep voting for a 'bigger government'. Accordin to Yarvin and Land the only way to stop the inevitable rise of social democracy (oh the horror!) is to get rid of democracy and larp as medieval monarchists/neo-cameralists where the king is the 'national CEO' or some dumb shit.

tl:dr a bunch of boring nerds

[Anonymous No.15012078]

>>15011860
>social democracy (oh the horror!)
It is objectively the worst system.

[Anonymous No.15012192]

>>15011860
>let me describe this alternative to social democracy without actually stating what would be bad about it while making empty condescensions and tutting noises like a basic-bitch liberal
First against the wall.

[Anonymous No.15012232]

>>15011457
based, where do I sign up?

[Anonymous No.15012262]

>>15012192
Now about no weekends and holidays for a start?

[Anonymous No.15012263]

>>15006945
he said he's pro-fag marriage, so don't listen to him

[Anonymous No.15012272]

>>15012262
Don't like it? Move to a state that has more flexible/lenient working hours. Sovcorps have an incentive not to treat you like shit because you can always go somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.15012276]

>>15012263
Homophobia is very unbiased my friend

[Anonymous No.15012289]

>>15007395
what does he mean? Like, buying and selling of children? Or adults will be childlike? Or people will have more children?

[Anonymous No.15012293]

>>15012276
The Church says fag marriage isn't a thing and I don't question that. Simple as. Another thing I don't like about Moldbug is his pretend amoral machiavellianism.

[Anonymous No.15012305]

>>15012272
Well if the free market was completely unregulated weekends and holidays could be cut anywhere and we couldn't do anything about it. It would certainly be more profitable. Besides, just move to another state bro isn't really an argument when I point out a negative consequence of your system.

[Anonymous No.15012316]

>>15008372
Isn't that basically what we have right now? Everyone reeeeees on twitter and 4chan/reddit, but it doesn't really change anything.

[Anonymous No.15012318]

>>15012293
Yeah but who careswhat the church says

[Anonymous No.15012338]

>>15012305
Like I said, states need to be competitive to ensure they have willing subjects, otherwise they will just go somewhere else. This is not a negative consequence of the system, because wherever you end up will also be the same system, just a different syndicate. Why bother even posting a description when you literally don't understand anything about it?

[Anonymous No.15012343]

>>15012263
seriously? if that's true, what is his reasoning?

[Anonymous No.15012366]

>>15012276
>unbiased
A faggot and a retard

[Anonymous No.15012412]

Any buy fags

[Anonymous No.15012422]

>>15010275
How is that functionally any different from what the Founding Fathers originally envisioned with the Articles of Confederation? What stops the Roundheads and Cavaliers from going at it again and the winner seizing control of the federal level?

[Anonymous No.15012451]

>>15012338
What happens when states consolidate through mergers into oligopoly and the labor market becomes loose enough that there's no longer upward pressure on citizen benefits?

[Anonymous No.15012527]

The real summary of NRx is that order is a monotonic desideratum

[Anonymous No.15012587]

>>15006945
He's great. Gained a little bit of attention and /lit/ turned on him. Pseuds gonna pseud. Ignore them.