Bronze-level articleNeoreactionary movement

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
A king? You want a king? Boy, nobody wants a king! Ignatius, are you sure you're OK?
—John Kennedy Toole, A Confederacy of Dunces.

Someone is wrong on

The Internet

Icon internet.svg
Log in:

The neoreactionary movement (a.k.a. neoreaction, NRx, the Dark Enlightenment, the alt-right movement) is a loosely-defined cluster of Internet-based political thinkers who wish to return human society to forms of government older than liberal democracy.[1] They generally present their views as a revival of the traditions of Western civilization, or a return to a natural order of things.

Neoreactionaries are the latest in a long line of intellectuals who somehow think that their chosen authoritarian thugs wouldn't put them up against the wall. Possibly using sheer volume of words as a bulletproof shield.[2] Or that they are somehow too competent, virtuous and useful to end up one of the serfs.

The movement is largely insignificant and mostly an object of curiosity (one must hope it remains this way), though it has attracted some racists of the pseudo-intellectual variety.


[edit] Forerunners

The completed puzzle would show literate men the disaster course that history had been taking for the past four centuries.

Many neoreactionaries were former libertarians who had come to the conclusion that freedom and the free market are fundamentally incompatible with liberal democracy. Mencius Moldbug, one of the founders of the movement, describes his own journey as "from Mises to Carlyle" via Hans-Hermann Hoppe, a "libertarian" who pushed feudalism as his desired end state.[3] It's ideal for soi-disant libertarians who realise they don't actually like freedom for others all that much. In some ways, neoreaction flows out of the "Californian ideology"[wp], a blend of countercultural ideas from the 1960s with libertarianism and techno-utopianism[wp][4].

In the Francophone world, the thought of Guillaume Faye[wp] also anticipates neoreaction in several particulars. Faye calls his ideas archeofuturism; this "calls for 'the re-emergence of archaic configurations' – 'pre-modern, inegalitarian, and non-humanist'" and advocates traditional spirituality and concepts of sovereignty while hoping for a technological utopia. This, by Faye's reckoning, is the only way to defeat "the American party", which he continues to identify with egalitarianism and democracy.[5] (Faye wrote in 1999, so he had the opportunity to acquaint himself well enough with recent U.S. history to know better.) Faye has also spoken at a conference hosted by the white supremacist magazine American Renaissance[wp].

Peter Theil[wp], one of the founders of PayPal, has made statements that suggest he is another libertarian critic of democracy. In 2009 he wrote an essay for the Cato Institute, in which he announced that he "no longer believe(s) that freedom and democracy are compatible." He went on to suggest that votes for women or welfare recipients are incompatible with the sort of capitalism he desires: "Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron." [6] However, Thiel is not an advocate of "neoreaction" under that label.[7]

Similarly, libertarian activist and professional poker player Patri Friedman[wp] despaired of persuading anyone to actually vote for libertarianism, observing that "(m)ost people are not by nature libertarians", "(d)emocracy is rigged against libertarians", and that therefore "Libertarians are a minority, and we underperform in elections, so winning electoral victories is a hopeless endeavor."[8] Friedman therefore advocates seasteading, a movement to create libertarian enclaves on artificial land masses on the high seas. Like other libertarians despairing of actually persuading semi-democratic governments to enact libertarianism, Friedman counsels withdrawal from those societies and their governments. Friedman takes a somewhat more nuanced relationship with neoreaction, citing Moldbug and "taking notes on 'a more politically correct dark enlighenment.'"[9]

[edit] History

An elaborate 2013 map of the wider Dark Enlightenment categorized by theme, made by Scharlach of Habitable Worlds. It is unlikely that more than half the people on this diagram would think they belong there, but the diagram has been propagated with approval in the neoreactionary blogosphere.

Mencius Moldbug (who by day is software engineer Curtis Yarvin) of the prolix Unqualified Reservations[10] is generally considered the founder of neoreaction as we know it. Other significant participants include Michael Anissimov of More Right;[11] and Nick Land[wp], a British philosopher who blogs at Outside In.[12] Vox Day was happy to be considered part of this movement in 2013,[13] though he ridiculed the term "dark enlightenment" as media hype in 2014.[14]

The subculture started amongst the Bay Area technolibertarian subculture, particularly including the transhumanists — Moldbug commented extensively on Overcoming Bias, the predecessor of LessWrong; Michael Anissimov worked at the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence (now MIRI), which runs LessWrong; and for a long time, LessWrong was the only place you'd see these ideas unless you tripped over a neoreactionary blog. (Eliezer Yudkowsky has since explicitly disclaimed their ideas,[15] citing Scott Alexander's takedown. The neoreactionaries took umbrage at this and left, many to the comments on Scott's blog, but have been returning.[16])

Nick Land, who coined the term "Dark Enlightenment", is British, but has similar interests: he was the co-founder of the "Cybernetic Culture Research Unit"[17] and currently is on the faculty of The New Centre for Research and Practice[18]. He is also an apostle of something called Accelerationism[wp], a movement that in his view seeks the "indefinite acceleration of capitalism"[19]

The term "neo-reactionary" (with a hyphen) was used in passing by Moldbug in 2008,[20] but was first used as a name for the movement as a whole by libertarian blogger Arnold Kling in July 2010.[21] Moldbug had originally called his ideology "formalism," but Kling's usage was quickly adopted by the subculture.

The movement came to the attention of the world (outside the Bay Area and LessWrong) courtesy a November 2013 TechCrunch article, "Geeks for Monarchy: The Rise of the Neoreactionaries".[22] Corey Pein suggests in The Baffler that neoreaction is an outgrowth of Silicon Valley technolibertarianism, citing statements by Peter Thiel, Patri Friedman, and Balaji Srinivasan that reflect neoreactionary ideas without using neoreactionary terminology;[23] he concludes that neoreactionaries, and Silicon Valley libertarians in general, are overgrown manchildren with a crippling lack of self-awareness. Matthew Walther, at The American Spectator, finds them "silly but not scary", a "harmless product of the Age of Twitter", and prescribes alcohol, football, and P. G. Wodehouse.[24]

(The term "neo-reactionary" was also used by George Orwell in 1943,[25] to refer to conservatives who felt human nature was not perfectible therefore changes to society were not worth pursuing.)

[edit] Writing style

I am at the moment writing a lengthy indictment against our century. When my brain begins to reel from my literary labors, I make an occasional cheese dip.

The main thing neoreactionaries do is blog.[26] One common feature of the movement is a long-winded — ridiculously long-winded — and oblique prose style, eager to show off its mastery of historical trivia; it seems more poetry[wp] than politics at times. This is right-wing politics in its dotage: radical, deliberately "transgressive" posturing in obscurantist prose, a worthy bookend to the Frankfurt School,[27] and perhaps evidence of the horseshoe theory of politics. Like its doppelganger, you wonder how they imagine anybody is going to be persuaded to vote for it. (Which is why neither is all that fond of voting.)

For an example, Moldbug responded to Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion by writing a seven-part sequence of posts in September 2007, totalling 37,941 words, in which he conclusively proved, step by step, thread by thread, detail by detail, that Dawkins was, for all his protestations of atheism, in fact ... a cultural Christian![28] Dawkins, of course, stated the same thing in December 2007 in four and a half words: "I'm a cultural Christian".[29] (No doubt provoked by Moldbug's stirring rhetoric.)

[edit] Positions

This city is famous for its gamblers, prostitutes, exhibitionists, anti-Christs, alcoholics, sodomites, drug addicts, fetishists, onanists, pornographers, frauds, jades, litterbugs, and lesbians, all of whom are only too well protected by graft.
A diagram posted to 4chan /pol/ outlining the origins and effects of Cultural Marxism, i.e. the Jews did it. This was reposted with approval on neoreactionary blog More Right as "Infographic of the Cathedral", though with the bit about Jews trimmed. Curiously absent: the Beatles.

While the various figures in the neoreactionary scene may partake of its tropes to varying degrees, their not-entirely-consistent broad themes include:

Hostility to modernity and democracy seems the main point of agreement among neoreactionaries. Moldbug writes that "a reactionary is a believer in order, stability, and security. All of which he treats as synonyms ... Thus, the order that the rational reactionary seeks to preserve and/or restore is arbitrary. Perhaps it can be justified on some moral basis. But probably not. It is good simply because it is order, and the alternative to order is violence at worst and politics at best. If the Bourbons do not rule France, someone will – Robespierre, or Napoleon, or Corner Man."[32] Echoing traditional libertarian concerns, they assert that democracies are necessarily financially less stable than autocracies generally, and monarchies in particular: that a king will be fiscally responsible because the king has a property interest in the kingdom. The actual history[wp] of kings[wp] would seem[wp] to be rich[wp] in counterexamples[wp], but so it goes.

Michael Anissimov proposes the following six tenets as the core beliefs of neoreaction:

  1. People are not equal. They never will be. We reject equality in all its forms.
  2. Right is right and left is wrong.
  3. Hierarchy is basically a good idea.
  4. Traditional sex roles are basically a good idea.
  5. Libertarianism is retarded.
  6. Democracy is irredeemably flawed and we need to do away with it.[33]

[edit] The Cathedral?

Moldbug's idea of "the Cathedral" is a recurring theme; it is a "distributed conspiracy", one that treats feminism, democracy, and other "progressive" causes, and the general world view of educated Westerners, as the current world's version of an established church:[34]

And the left is the party of the educational organs, at whose head is the press and universities. This is our 20th-century version of the established church. Here at UR, we sometimes call it the Cathedral - although it is essential to note that, unlike an ordinary organization, it has no central administrator. No, this will not make it easier to deal with.

Even if there's something like this that you could be persuaded to see, it's hard to imagine a proper conspiracy without conspirators. What Moldbug describes looks more like a culture: a broadly shared set of associated social values embodied in shared institutions, symbols, and practices. If you are reading this, you probably live there. This is what he's against.

[edit] Transhumanism?!

One of these ideas is not like the others. This one comes from neoreaction's links to the Bay Area transhumanist subculture. This is why neoreactionaries showed up on LessWrong.

There are neoreactionaries who will attempt to reconcile transhumanism and singularitarianism with taking the rest of society back several hundred years, particularly Michael Anissimov;[35] the attempts are certainly creative, at least.[36]

Despite Yudkowsky rejecting neoreaction, MIRI's goal closely resembles the neoreactionary goal: a single sovereign Friendly artificial intelligence, ruling human space for all time for the good of all.[37]

In Moldbug's proposal — a world divided up into libertarian anarcho-monarchies, informed by pickup-artist patter (the world made Gor![wp]), among many little autonomous princedoms governed by kings, aristocrats, or dictators — you may have trouble placing bets about how long the Internet would hold up. If 300 baud was good enough for Jesus Christ ...

[edit] Anissimov versus Tunney

My stringent attitude toward sex intrigued her; in a sense, I became another project of sorts. I did, however, succeed in thwarting her every attempt to assail the castle of my body and mind.

In 2014, a mini-conflagration erupted within the internet neoreactionary movement when notorious political troll and former Occupy leader Justine Tunney[wp] started praising and interacting with neoreactionaries on Twitter. Michael Anissimov then demanded that all other neoreactionaries should not even talk to Justine or any other transgendered people.[38] Some other neoreactionaries didn't buy it,[39] though others were divided over whether transgendered people were beyond the pale and to be shunned, or were merely deluded.[40] Anissimov stresses that he does not consider transsexuals a threat (though their behaviour is "destructive, a form of self-indulgence and escape which contributes to the breakdown of societal fabric"[41]), he just considers Tunney insane.[42] In any case, gender dysphoria apparently strongly correlates to Tumblr.[43]

[edit] In popular culture

Ignatius J. Reilly, an important forerunner of the movement.
What I want is a good, strong monarchy with a tasteful and decent king who has some knowledge of theology and geometry and to cultivate a Rich Inner Life.

Ignatius J. Reilly, from A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole, fully anticipated the modern neoreactionary blogger by fifty years. Down to the fondness for Boethius.[wp] Sometimes, history starts as farce. It's a fantastic novel that fully lives up to the hype. Neoreactionaries don't find it funny at all. You'll enjoy it.

[edit] In real life

When Fortuna spins you downward, go out to a movie and get more out of life.

Stung by accusations that they are spending their lives doing for words what Bitcoin does for electricity,[26] Nyan Sandwich of MoreRight is organising an in-person meetup group called Phalanx, a "reactionary fraternity for the cultivation of masculine virtue and the development of social and moral capital."[44] (A previous version of the announcement apparently[45] also proposed to "practice game", but this was deleted.) The plan is "not to directly engage, but to become strong and worthy", so we're sure this will be just fine and accept Nyan's assurance[46] that any unfortunate naming coincidences[wp] are nothing to worry about.

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

Scott Alexander (Yvain from LessWrong) has written extensive examinations of neoreaction, as he knows a lot of the players personally. These include:

Other discussions:

[edit] Footnotes

  1. You know, the forms of government that couldn't create the Internet.
  2. "the words are a bulletproof shield against insincere dabblers"
  4. Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron, The Californian Ideology, The HRC Archive (1995).
  5. Michael O'Mara, Foreword to Guillaume Faye’s Archeofuturism, Countercurrents, 2010.
  6. Peter Thiel (13 April 2009). "The Education of a Libertarian". Cato Institute.
  8. Patri Friedman Beyond Folk Activism, Cato Unbound, April 6, 2009.
  9. Patri Friedman, Facebook post, Jan. 26, 2014
  10. Unqualified Reservations
  11. More Right
  12. Outside In
  17. Cybernetic Culture Research Unit, Internet Archive, 2003.
  18. The New Centre for Research and Practice
  19. S. C. Hickman, Nick Land: On Williams and Srnicek #ACCELERATE MANIFESTO for an Accelerationist Politics, Dark Ecologies, Feb. 15, 2014.
  20. [1][2]
  23. Mouthbreathing Machiavellis Dream Of A Silicon Reich (Corey Pein, The Baffler, 19 May 2014)
  24. The Dark Enlightenment is Silly, Not Scary, (Matthew Walther, The American Spectator, Jan. 21, 2014). Presumably he means real, American, gridiron football; soccer would only make them worse.
  26. 26.0 26.1 Michael Anissimov has an ongoing series on Neoreactionary Accomplishments. Parts one to six list blogging, parts seven to ten list blogging about hypothetical governance structures. "intellectual accomplishments are real even though stupid people don’t understand them."
  27. Indeed, Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer's Dialectic of Enlightenment appears to anticipate some of the themes of neoreaction, holding that the elevation of reason over other human values tends to treat people as means to an end, and elevates Progress to an unquestioned good.
  30. "Paleo isn't a fad diet, it's an ideology that selectively denies the modern world". 
  31. E.g. Davis Aurini.
  32. Mencius Moldbug, An Open Letter to Progressives, pt. 3:the Jacobite history of the world, Unqualified Reservations, May 1, 2008.
  33. Michael Anissimov, Principles of Reactionary Thought, More Right, Dec. 13, 2013.
  34. Mencius Moldbug, A gentle introduction to Unqualified Reservations
  35. Who also takes Roko's basilisk seriously.
  36. Reconciling Transhumanism and Neoreaction (Michael Anissimov, MoreRight, 23 May 2013)
  37. Coherent Extrapolated Volition (LessWrong wiki)
  38. Anissimov pontificates without saying who he's talking about; now he says who he's talking about.
  39. [3][4][5]
  40. Fucking awful comments here.
Personal tools