Talk:Neoreactionary movement

Who linked to Evolution News?
The site is a creationist site disguised as a trustworthy scientific source.

I removed this: "For one example of the two camps going at it, see this article from the Discovery News website where they criticize the alt-right for drinking from the SoDa fountain."

They did not link to Discovery news, they linked to a different source which has a similar name. It is not said in the sentence that the linked site is creationist propaganda. This is Discovery News's twitter and their website.ClickerClock (talk) 07:25, 25 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I've made the link a bit clearer. (This is one of the things that would be hived off to an alt-right article.) - David Gerard (talk) 00:10, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Inherent contradiction
Surely you can be either 'neo' or 'reactionary' but not both? Anna Livia (talk) 21:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

thats the joke

Name Not Awesome Enough
Nobody looked at the term "Dark Enlightenment" and put together "Endarkenment"? Seriously? Fits their goals better, I think. 108.131.97.160 (talk) 05:32, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Far-rightists aren't exactly known for their cleverness. 05:34, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

"Their advantages over the Moldbuggian strain are shorter blog posts and an actual sense of humour (such as it is)."
Unqualified Reservations has a lot of humor. It probably accounts for a lot of its popularity. Pardon me sir (talk) 12:17, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

The possibility of realism and good faith?
Should this article include, along with the suggestions that neoreactionaries feel that either they will protect themselves from bullets with their massive manuscripts (a good joke, please keep it) or that they are sure that in their 'more just' system they'll be found worthy, that some of them actually believe that even if they should get killed by their desired new régime it would still on the whole be better—I don't believe that, but I can see some of them doing so…not everyone with whom I disagree is entirely selfish.