The real analysis, the data driven analysis, is link and reference tracing. Before it shows up on VoxDay, it shows up in on a particular set of online sources (“blogs”) – VoxDay is not driving an agenda, he is selecting a narrative among options constructed by others – narratives that entertain his audience.
So here is how the “alt right” people see it. Right-wing is “organic” and left-wing is “artificial.” The religious people will talk of the “family” as an “organic” human development. Ethnically aware types will say that the “tribe” or the ethny is itself an organic developement, “diversity” is the exemplar of artificiality. Conservative types stress how gender roles evolve organically from the biological differences between the sexes.
The Right will also see “monarchy” or “hierarchy” as organic. The most obvious example is the hierarchy of male violence. At some point it makes sense to just accept one guy is bigger and can beat everyone else, so he is now the warlord. There is also a natural hierarchy that develops via work (work is mankind’s war against not each other, but of nature) – men form into ranks and specialties based on a meritocracy.
Organic humanity is a jungle, a complex jumble of life evolved under infintely complex constraints and pressures. The Right wants to tend this as a garden. The leftist, an ignorant fanatic, shows up one day and demands all the plants be trimmed to the same height, no two plants of the same types allowed to be next to each other, and each plant given the exact same dose of chemical fertilizer.
At least that is how right-wing cranks typically explain their love of “hierarchy” and disdain for “egalitarianism.”
There is a lot to be said for this conception. A good example is the more or less organic development of right-wing crank blogs in the Internet era.
If Big Man-ism, Warlordism, Bossism – Monarchy – is the most basic, least complex, first hierarchy to develop organically, the online version of that, in the sense of socio-political-economic writing, would be the Cult. A Cult is the intellectual “priestly” [sic] version of Monarhy, Bossism, Warlordism.
Indeed, right-wing crank blogs are based around the online version of charismatic cult leaders. It is pretty directly equivalent to “real life” counterparts.
An example of this is Vox Day. The jargon of his comments refer to him as the “Dark Lord.” He’s “Dark” – not “Light” – for the same reason that teenage boys wear flames and dragons and guns on their t-shirts, not like girls who wear rainbows and princesses and flowers. The men of the generation prior to the Boomers had “personal cards” that would list their occupation as “Professional Drinker and Pirate.” Think a tongue-in-cheek homage to a James Bond type character. In the Clint Eastwood film he teaches the Asian kids how to use ethnic slurs property, the way “men talk to each other.”
All his fans tell Vox Day how brilliant he is, and he tells everyone he is smarter than everyone else. No one “really” believes it all that much. Vox Day is the “captain” and by flattering him they are flattering themselves, “their team.” VoxDay is as much a mascot as anything.
Jim Donald is a less fun version. While Vox Day’s crowd has to be openly Christian without becoming a Ned Flanders ninny, Donald’s “NRx” crowd is openly cynical about Christianity. “Faith” means “loyalty” and you have to say the Creed before being allowed to post, if you can’t say the creed you are a “demon”. Their particular version of “Religion” only contains “things that are unfalsifiable by definition” so demanding you assert these beliefs carries one piece of important information: you are not weirdly and religiously devoted to an alternative creed, like “Marxism.”
Curtis Yarvin is the professional Jewish version. While VoxDay has to work for it – he has a real business selling subscriptions to online infotainment for the right-wing autist market – Yarvin was introduced by Andrew Sullivan at The Atlantic and became a client of Peter Thiel, the gay Silicon Valley oligarch mentored by arch Neo-Conservative Zionist Jew Irvin Kristol. Yarvin has had a professional political campaign and marketing team pushing him since four days after he registered his free Google account.
Now his commenters call him the “Marx of the 21st Century” and say in the future the generic phrase “read theory” will mean him: like Kleenex is to tissue, Curtis Yarvin is the political theory. Curtis Yarvin is surrounded by a core team of sycophants proclaiming him literally the greatest political intellectual of the century so far.
They couldn’t pull it off if Yarvin wasn’t good at writing and constructing propaganda. Yarvin is what lesser bloggers like VoxDay and Jim Donald aspire to be: Yarvin doesn’t have to brag of his supposed IQ, like VoxDay, nor does he have to magnanimously answer questions from his cult followers like Jim Donald.
The joke for years about Yarvin was that he wanted to restore the Monarchy so he could fulfill his life long ambition to become a Court Jew, but Yarvin doesn’t need an actual monarch, in fact, it is best if the monarch is left as a charater off-screen, “one day to return” or even a “spiritual king.” That way Yarvin doesn’t have to take royal responsiblities while still being the one in charge.
Yarvin’s patrons pay money to add addendums to his posts, Hadith to his Quaran, “commentary” that gets to be the first to “interpret” the Holy Writ of the Prophet.
I find Steve Sailer about as informative on power relations as Yarvin. Yarvin is more analytical and it always feels like Yarvin is patiently trying to explain to his fellow Northern California “liberals” that their tyrannical streak is showing and scaring the horses. Sailer doesn’t really need an abstract analysis as his specialty is simply pointing out – “noticing” – when that streak presents itself.
Which may explain while Sailer has a pretty rabid fan base but seemingly few sycophants.
I had a blog sycophant once, it was a pretty weird experience – I’m fairly certain he was an autistic teenager. I have long assumed most of my readers and commenters are Jews, because none of what I would write would make sense to anyone else.
In any case, you can see the limitations of the Organic Right. You cannot evolve past the level of King Grug’s Band Of Merry Mugs until there is selection pressure on leadership and you can’t grow intellectually past a cult leader and his followers until you have a more complex selection pressure. Sometimes that liberal fanatics do have a point about plant placement in the greenhouse.
This is also why, in America, the Right is so business oriented, because market pressure selects for organizations with a high degree of ability to cooperate. The Left has conquered every other human institution – including the Western Church, from top to bottom.
First you ruin my sympathies with Trump. Now Vox. Brutal.
LikeLike
@Lyon
I have a weird and begrudging respect for VoxDay. First, he puts his money where his mouth is. Don’t like SJW comics? He made his own. Don’t like Youtube censorship? He has his own youtube. Don’t like Wikipedia? He has InfoGalactic.
Say what you will, VoxDay is a DOER – he gets shit done. You have to give him that respect.
But as far as analysis, commentary, etc. – he’s an entertainer, a storyteller, a preacher and a poet. So he can entertain “fun” conspiracy theories, he can take Trump at face value, because he’s more in the business of Fiction as opposed to Non-Fiction.
VoxDay is Art, not Science.
LikeLike
Yeah, I agree with all of that. I do respect his drive. And the posts are often entertaining.
LikeLike
VD is usually worth reading if only to try and figure out how much of the stuff he puts out is rhetoric and how much he actually means; he is very big on rhetoric. Also a few of VD’s posse put up intelligent comments that somehow get by his monitors. Like gold nuggets in a compost heap, they are worth finding. Jim Donald I never heard of….and Moldbug/Yarvin – this was years ago – I liked at first then found his sheer cleverness offputting…it set off an early model of my Jewdar, which eventually proved correct. Banned Hipster also occasionally seems too clever – maybe a better word is virtuosic – at times, but mostly I find his posts instructive. Haxo, by contrast, favors sledge hammers, sharp swords, and the Law of Large numbers.
LikeLike
It took me a long time to realize this, but Moldbug was ultimately a bait.
I started reading him because he made very good points in his formalist manifesto in regards to how to determine informal ownership, and as a result I took interest in his blog.
And then he fed me, and all of his readers, the absolutely bonkers Puritan Hypothesis for the origin of Leftism, and we all fell for it, hook, line and sinker. “It’s the Protestants’ fault, dude! Not my co-ethnics, who maintain a chokehold over all cultural and financial institutions in America! And Catholics are ultra-based bros! Don’t look at the theological basis for Social Justice, or the history of the Jesuit Order!”
Curtis is great at rhetoric, I’ll give him that. In his first post about the PH, he actually recognizes that it’s hard to believe that Calvinists who believed in Total Depravity and Predestination would be at fault for creating Leftism, which assumes the Perfectability and the Ontological Equality of Man. And yet, when you finish his article, you want to believe him. Madness.
Even with that in mind, I don’t think the “Reaction” label should be discarded in its entirety. Jim, Spandrell, Aidan, even Vox, they all do more good than bad. So do you, exposing the psyops and honeypots in the Dissident Right.
LikeLike
@Ousia
I dislike the term “reaction.” First, it’s commie slang. It’s Trotskist. Communists act, then reactionaries react. That’s half the problem right there.
As for the “Puritan Hypothesis” – yes, this is such an obvious way to draw attention away from Zionist Jews it makes for a great example of “chutzpuh.”
I’m a Calvinist. I find it hilarious to find out that Calvinism is responsible for both the far-left – and the far-right – and the center. Calvinism is both uber-capitalist and quasi-communist. Calvinism is both anti-semitic and philo-semitic.
Of course, Yarvin is correct when he talks about “Universalism” – but, I guess he won’t tell you – Universalism is precisely the opposite of Calvinism, which is infamous for “limited atonement” – the opposite of universalism.
So what gives? It’s actually pretty simple. In the 1960’s, Jews took over the culture from the “WASPs.”
But Yarvin desperately doesn’t want people to notice that, so he goes into bizarre twists to explain how, while Harvard is full of Jews, they aren’t “really Jews” – they are really just “Universalist Calvinists” – in fact, they are so Calvinists they are “anti-semitic” and force poor Israel to not murder all the Palestinians, which the Jews should be doing under Formalism!
Really, once you see it, it is quite obvious what Yarvin is – we used to call them “neo-cons.”
Now – just go through my articles on him, his sponsorship, the astroturfing campaign for him against the Ron Paul anti-war crowd in 2007, and it becomes even more obvious what he is.
LikeLike
>I dislike the term “Reaction” […]
Good point. What would be a good alternative label?
>I’m a Calvinist […]
So am I, for the reasons you describe below, and for its incredible predictive power in regards to human nature.
>In the 1960s, Jews took over the culture from the “WASPs”
And here’s the million dollar question: How?
Isn’t it mind-boggling that a civilization at its supposed peak would allow foreigners access to the levers of power? Foreigners of an opposite religion, no less!
Where did something as absurd as Universalism come from, philosophically speaking? My answer: the Doctrine of the Soul.
[BTW, for some reason my previous comment appears three times. Feel free to delete the copies.]
LikeLike
While VoxDay has to work for it – he has a real business selling subscriptions to online infotainment for the right-wing autist market
Vox sells superhero comics, pure homoerotic poz.
LikeLike