In Significant Triangles, I compared the Spandrellian trichotomy in neoreaction, the Estates of the Realm in Medieval society, and the political triangle in modern society. I made the case that these three divisions are emergent behavior, loose groupings that are the result of interactions of myriad genetic drives. This work is an attempt to analyze these general genetic drives, to determine the vectors, resulting in the triangle labeled Human Drives. These drives are the result of reproductive strategies and are particular to the genetic makeup of a specific population: Westerners.
It is possible to view the Significant Triangles as the results of these drives. This is an attempt to make the emergent behavior known as the Estates of the Realm more legible to Neoreaction. It is possible to view events in history and shifts in equilibrium within the Triangle. If equilibrium shifts too far in any one direction, then this can trigger intense selection events which will modify the gene pool to restore equilibrium.
Points of the triangle: Individualism (taken from the political triangle), Collective (modification of Three Estates ‘Commoners’), and Universal (my addition). I believe these points map to the Three Estates as, respectively: Nobility, Commoners, Clergy. These points map to Spandrell’s trichotomy as, respectively: Techno-Commercialist, Ethno-Nationalist, Theonomist. See the Table of Associations, below.
Sides of the triangle: Materialism (blue), Cooperation (red), and Abstraction (green).
Zones of organizational types: Capitalism, National Socialism, Communism.
The Human Drives, Opposites and Corollaries
The sides and points of the triangle are human drives, the circles contain examples of negotiated forms of interaction between the drives. The drives themselves are genetic, they are reproductive strategies. On each of the sides, the drive is strong, as you follow the line from the side to the opposite point, you reach the opposing survival strategy. Each of the drives on the side has corollaries, where the drive merges into the other two drives to create points.
Humans have developed the strategy of cooperating for survival. This cooperative strategy takes on two forms, genetically related collectivism, or genetically unrelated (universalized) cooperation (communism). In the Cooperation zone (red), cooperation is not a voluntary strategy, it is enforced. Outside of the Cooperation zone, we would have the notion of ‘liberty‘, as exception from enforced cooperation. As you move from the edge toward the Individual point, enforcement decreases in degree. The danger of equilibrium shifting too far into the cooperation zone is that the enforcement of cooperation results in totalitarianism or authoritarianism, depending on which side of the triangle the weight shifts. Shifts into the Abstract-Cooperation zone have resulted Totalitarian ideological enforcement, such as that under Stalin and Mao. Shifts into the Material-Cooperation zone, result in despotic rule or nationalist racial fervor.
Opposite Point: Competition
As we follow the line out of the Cooperation zone (red), the drives of materialism and abstraction narrow the vector into Individualism, which is a strategy opposed to cooperation — competition. At the opposing point (individual), we see pure competition. Individualism is a corollary of liberty, meaning freedom from enforced cooperative norms, which is the area outside of the Cooperation zone.
Corollary Point: Collective = Cooperation + Material
Keep in mind the reality that humans exist both as individuals and as members of a group, simultaneously. Concrete (real, material) group membership is based on genetic relatedness. The members of the collective are genetically related cooperators: clans, thedes, tribes, nations. The in-group is kinship, everyone else is out-group. Keep in mind, at the bottom edge cooperation is enforced: At the far right, nearest to Material (blue), think honor killing or stoning. As you move left and right along this edge, enforcement changes in kind. Near the material side, the enforcement is of physical violations of the drive to protect the in-group. The enforcement is not driven by a need for totalitarian ideological submission. When you have genetic relatedness, the need for mind-control (memeplex curation) decreases dramatically.
In this zone we see adaptive evolution characterized by eugenic breeding, or in-breeding. Eastern Europeans are drawn more strongly into this zone than Western European. The divider between the Individual and Collective Material points is the Hajnal line. Conversely, Western Europeans drift more easily into the Individual zone, due to being more out-bred.
Farthest points from genetic collective are genetically unrelated cooperators (communists) and genetically unrelated competitors (capitalists).
Cooperation is based on group membership. On the Abstract side of Cooperation, group membership is non-kinship based. Non-kinship group membership must then be based in something more abstract: an idea. These are synthetic in-groups built on some abstraction or set of ideas. The idea could be religion, or it could be a flag, or it could be ideological. Examples: Religion — progressivism, universal christian brotherhood. Flag — Africans born in Africa under French rule are French. Ideology— Universal Marxist brotherhood. Keep in mind, at the bottom edge cooperation is enforced: At the far left, nearest to Abstract (green), think excommunication, gossip, or shaming. As you move left and right along this edge, enforcement changes in kind. Near the Abstract the enforcement is primarily of the intellectual and ideological. As you approach the intersection of cooperation and Abstract, you find increasing totalitarianism, as the means of control is via the brain, so thoughts must be rigorously enforced: think struggle session and re-education., or SJW witch-hunting and diversity classes, political correctness. This is the region where moral intuition is active.
In this region is where ideas such as Hope and God exist. (Whether or not God exists is entirely beside the point, because God does not exist inside the mind of Man, only the idea of God exists inside the mind of Man). These ideas are very powerful. If not tempered by material reality, then the group can drift too far into the dream-world. Hope can change to irrational exuberance, where the touchstone of reality is discarded in order to reach Utopia. This irrationality and synthetic in-group membership can result in dysgenic breeding. If dysgenic breeding accumulates, then an intense selection event can occur, shifting weight back into the Material-Cooperation zone.
Mind control, propaganda, memetic curation: whatever you want to call it, it is an applied science, the science of cooperation through control of the human mind.
This drive is the need to deal with reality. Reality is synonymous with the material world, it’s opposite point is ‘unreality’ or ‘Utopianism’, the complete rejection of the material world. Keep in mind the reality that humans exist both as individuals and as members of a group, simultaneously. This means that the material reality of both humans as individuals and groups are valid. As you move left and right along the Material side, the weight of focus shifts between individual and group drives, between individual survival and group survival. In the Materialism zone, the focus is relentlessly on the physical, on what is real and measurable, weighted by individual or group. As you move out of the Material zone (blue), you move into what is abstract, rational or intuitive.
Shifts too far toward the material side can result in excessive practical kinship focus which reduce technological advancement, or in excessive material individualism which destroys kinship bonds and destabilizes a society.
Opposite Point: Universal
Anything that is universalized is an abstraction. Reality is always local. This is counter-intuitive for humans to grasp. For example, a kilometer is a distance that can be measured on Earth but is not terribly useful to measure distances at a galactic scale. This is because, in space, objects of great mass, such as black holes, actually warp space-time. Because the fabric of space-time is warped through gravitational lenses, the concept of distance itself becomes a problem. In our rational minds, we think that we can measure galactic distances just like we measure distances between cities here on Earth, but it simply isn’t so. So, a kilometer is a measure of distance here on Earth, which can be universalized in abstraction (rationally) only in our minds, because in reality it is non-functional.
Universalism is a rational construct, and is therefore abstract. Only in the abstract could the phrase “all men are created equal” be found to be true, but when subjected to measurement in the physical world, this notion is easily resolved to false. However, when attempting to arrange cooperation between unrelated individuals, these abstractions can be quite powerful, as we see now in the doomed Western experiment in multiculturalism.
Universal abstraction is more easily weighted as energy gets cheaper. As energy gets cheaper, then the population is separated further from the Darwinian struggle. The realities of the material world are easier to ignore when death is far away, and the Utopian mirage appears to solidify as the society marches away from Darwin and towards Utopia. In other words, as technology increases and material concerns are alleviated, then the equilibrium moves more to the Universal point of Abstract-Cooperation, drawn my Man’s innate desire to flee the Darwinian struggle. This is the current situation in the West.
Corollary Point: Collective = Material + Cooperation (see above)
Corollary Point: Individual = Material + Abstract (see below)
Abstraction is the realm of the human mind, of intellect and rationality. The memeplex lives here. The Abstraction zone is a world of thought, creativity and imagination. This is where dreams become possible and inspiration grows. This is where hope lives; hope that that the Darwinian struggle can be avoided, or hope of heavenly reward for Earthly deeds. Along this side of the triangle, at one end is the rational mind concerned with reality, at the other end is the intuitive mind, and moral intuition, and the concerns of the soul.
Corollary Point: Individual = Abstract + Material
This is where a single, rational, human mind roams. This point on the triangle is furthest from the enforcement of norms along the Cooperation edge. I this zone an individual may think the unthinkable: transhumanist singularity, or aborted fetuses for stem cell research, or auto-catalytic evolution and face tentacles. This region in general is where science and invention occur, with pure science (knowledge for knowledge’s sake) being nearer the Abstraction zone and invention (knowledge for practical human application, or applied science) being nearer the Cooperation zone. In this zone, associations with others are not genetic in nature, but rational, meaning where material benefit can be found regardless of genetic distance.
Note that this scientific zone can only be occupied by those with a certain level of intellectual capacity. This zone can be entered into through success in the Collective zone, as long as there is the collective cooperation contains a focus on eugenic breeding. Humans in the collective can then evolve adaptively and acquire the capacity to enter into the Abstract-Material zone of scientific discovery. Once a certain threshold is crossed then self-catalyzed (self-directed) evolution is possible, see John H. Campbell, generative evolution, and Homo autocatalyticus.
If too much weight shits into the Universal point and dysgenic breeding occurs at too high a rate, then it is possible to fall out of the Abstract-Material zone, after which weight will shift back into the Material-Cooperation zone where eugenic breeding is again possible.
Too much of a shift into Abstract-Materialism can also result in loss of human group bonding qualities such as kinship or empathy, resulting in Libertarian ‘brutalism’, Aspergers or fedora wearing.
Corollary Point: Universal = Abstraction + Cooperation (see above)
The three Estates of the Realm are part of our deep heritage, and are an expression of gene-culture co-evolution specific to the Western genome. The Spandrellian trichotomy is a natural echo of the Three Estate model. The Political Triangle is likewise an echo of the Three Estate model. The Three Estates are emergent phenomenon, expressions of complex genetic interactions, which can play a role in analyzing when and how social systems lose equilibrium and trigger intense selection events. Good government is a system of rules designed to maintain an equilibrium between the genetic demands expressed through the Three Estates.
The First Triangle: Spandrell’s
Let’s start with Spandrell’s Trichotomy, as visualized by Nick B. Steves. This identifies three groups: Theonomists, Techno-Commercialists, and Ethnicists/Nationalists. Apparently these three groups were identified from a poll, and it was determined that the voices in neoreaction could be roughly divided in this manner. This can be viewed as a snapshot of thought in NRx at the time.
We must remember that Spandrell did not seek to define neoreaction so much as simply point out who the current crop of reactionaries were… potential allies in overthrowing the progressive machine. (After which they would, of course, immediately turn on each other for dessert.) It has of course come to represent something far more fundamental to neoreaction and also remains a constant source of confusion. A source of confusion because people see it as representing branches of partisan pull. But such pull, while always a temptation, is always away from the core of neoreaction (which subsists in the embrace of all three) and into the respective old-school partisan reactionary wankery.
So, the Trike is no more than the current crop of reactionaries? Yet, it has come to represent something more fundamental? What then is that fundament? It remains a source of confusion?
I’ll bet it does. Yes, this triangle is fundamental. I believe that the confusion may arise in thinking that this triangle is not fundamental, in the notion that it somehow applies only to neoreaction. The rational thought has been the application of the triangle to neoreaction, but there is an intuition of a deeper meaning. Would the triangle be more fundamental if we could find it at the center of political discussion a millennium ago? I believe it would.
First, lets look at the three sections with quick word associations. Obviously, these are my associations, not any sort of reactionary consensus. I find these sets of words to be connected, though loosely and on an intuitive level.
The Soul (neither animal nor robotic): godly, heavenly, holy, moral, intuitive, divine.
The Church. Pope or Bishop. Representatives of the poor, the sick, the widowed and the orphaned. Champions of those who cannot compete, asking mercy and shelter from Darwin’s laws. Cultivar’s of memeplexes, masters of mind-control: evocative of moral intuition, embedded through repetition (song/cant). Short and long term planning. Judicial branch. Focused on the Abyss. Tendency to unlimited cooperation.
The Brain (not animal): intelligent, cunning, inventive, individualist, Machiavellian, robotic.
Competitors engaged in all-against-all competition, war, masters of war. Officers of War. The King or CEO. Absolute Darwinism. Masters of technology (War<=>Commerce<=>Computers). Organizers of production. Long term. Executive branch. Focused on the call beyond the Abyss – the sense of space. Tendency to unlimited competition.
Limited Darwinism. The General, Union Leader or Dictator. Medium term. Legislative branch. Focused on the path over the Abyss. Limited competition and cooperation through blood-ties.
Visualizing the Three Points
First we had the Venn diagram provided by NBS. Then Jim re-imagined it as a (beautifully rendered and shaded, 3-D) Celtic knot, the Trefoil. Then RiverC re-imagined it as the Trike.One thing that is important about NBS’s, Jim’s and RiverC’s renderings is that they can all be simplified into a single triangle. Keep that in mind, it will be helpful when we get to the Modern Politics section.
In neoreaction we talk about hierarchies because it appears that the most effective organization of humans is the hierarchy. The best visualization we have for the hierarchical human arrangement is the pyramid, remembering that a pyramid is a three dimensional object. I use three sided pyramids, with a three sided bottom — in order to keep with our theme of threes. My visualization is of three merged pyramids sitting flat on a plane. Each section will have its hierarchy and leaders: the Pope or Bishop (theonomists), The King or CEO (techno-commercialists), and the General, Union Leader or Dictator (ethno-nationalist). Here is my rather poor attempt at such a visualization.
The Second Triangle: The Three Estates
This is a part that is rather weird to me. I have searched and searched, but I can find no connection in writings of neoreactionaries between the Trichotomy and the Estates of the Realm, the Clergy, the Nobility, and the Commoners. The connection is so plain, so obvious, so direct. Is it possible that no-one in neoreaction has seen the simple parallel? What does that mean that no-one has, considering all the attention that it has received? I feel like it means something, but I cannot name it.
I now see clearly the genius of the Europeans of the Middle Ages. In 1909, Johan Huizinga wrote in The Waning of the Middle Ages that “Medieval political speculation is imbued to the marrow with the idea of a structure of society based upon distinct orders.” Well, that sounds reactionary as hell to me. Wiki writes, “[Huizinga] here reinterpreted the Late Middle Ages as a period of pessimism and decadence rather than rebirth.” So the dawning of the Enlightenment was the beginning of decadence, not rebirth. That sounds awfully reactionary to me, too.
As an aside, I think that we need to rename both ‘the Enlightenment’ and ‘the Renaissance’. Those terms do not serve us at all, as the ‘rebirth’ was the birth of decadence and the ‘light’ was merely ideological/metaphysical propaganda. Also, never suffer another man to refer to the Middle Ages as the Dark Ages. This is a shibboleth. If he says Dark Ages, he is either ignorant or an enemy.
Another quick side note on nobility and chivalry. In Chapter 3, The Hierarchic Conception of Society, Huizinga writes,
Nevertheless an assiduous reader of the chronicles and literature of the fifteenth century will hardly resist the impression that nobility and chivalry occupy a much more considerable place than our general conception of the epoch would imply. The reason of this disproportion lies in the fact, that long after nobility and feudalism had ceased to be really essential factors in the state and in society, they continued to impress the mind as dominant forms of life.
Do you notice a preoccupation with nobility and chivalry among the neoreactionaries? I do. I have noticed it especially when taking the side of the PUAs in discussions. I believe that neoreactionaries tend to disdain the PUAs for their lack of nobility and chivalry.
In retrospect this seems obvious. Here in the West, we have conceived of this division for at least a thousand years: the Three Estates of the Realm. Let us remember the reactionary consensus view of deep heritage. Let us also give special note to gene-culture co-evolution theory, which I assert is the engine of deep heritage. NBS quotes in Proposition Δ1—The Naturalness of Deep Heritage:
As a key component of all human cultures, Deep Heritage develops naturally as a way of collectively solving complex social problems in a roughly locally optimal way; it therefore a phenomenon unlikely to be explained primarily by imposed ideology, or as a cynical way of manipulating outcomes so that one party is unfairly favored at the expense of another.
I put forth the proposition that the Three Estates is part of our Western deep heritage, driven by the particular peculiarities of European gene-culture coevolution. This leads to the understanding that this is not a universal social organization, rather it is a roughly local (to Europe) means developed to collectively solve complex social problems. I further contend that the components of neoreaction as organized in Spandrell’s trichotomy align with the Three Estates, not because that particular crop of neoreactionaries was aligned in that way, but because all of Western society is aligned in that way, including neoreaction. If neoreaction is concerned with the social problems of Western society, then it should at a minimum be aware of the Three Estate model.
If the Three Estate model is part of our deep heritage, then that means it is still relevant today, unless we have somehow radically evolved in the past millennium. I personally find a genetic shift of that magnitude possible but unlikely. Some might want to make the case that I am somehow calling for a ‘restoration’ of the Three Estate model, essentially LARPing. I am asserting that Three Estate model is an essential model of Western civilization, one that our ancestors wrestled with in the Middle Ages, and that we still must wrestle with today.
This is why Spandrell’s trichotomy maps so easily onto the Three Estate model:
Clergy: Theonomists. Do I really have to explain this one? I think not.
Nobility: Techno-commercialists. The Nobles of the middle ages directed production and commerce, just like CEOs and Presidents direct production and commerce today. The Nobles had to keep up with the latest advances in the most important technology of the time: warfare. In the middle ages it was the stirrup, today it is bitcoin. You are aware of the Great Stirrup controversy aren’t you?
Commoners: Ethno-Nationlists. No offense, dear EthNats. The commoners of the Middle Ages were a population which included the middle class and upper middle class, which brimmed with many talented and intelligent individuals, just as they do today, the cream of which undoubtedly forms the neoreactionary Ethno-Nationalist camp.
I know some are going to claim that Ethnonationalism is not a class (or group of classes), which is correct. They will also claim that being involved in technology or commerce does not make you a noble, which is correct. This is exactly why I am using the concept of the Three Estates, because it is older and therefore should merit thoughtful consideration. I am making the argument that the Three Estate model is valid, the fact that Spandrell’s trichotomy maps to it at all is a point in the favor of that argument. This mapping should make better sense in the next section.
Side Note: In my piece, Is Neoreaction Right-Brahmin Signalling?, I make the argument that the difference between a reactionary and a neoreactionary is caste. The consensus is that this is correct. I now think it is a bit deeper than that. Neoreaction is comprised of the three groups (Spandrell’s), with members from each group, meaning that Neoreaction is comprised of members of the Three Estates. However, I believe that the target of influence by neoreaction is the First Estate, the Clergy (the Brahmin, the Cultivars of the Memeplex). So, the signalling is primarily to the First Estate, while Neoreaction itself is a cross-section of all three estates, and somewhat a cross-section of the ranks of the estates, going up and down the pyramidal hierarchies from higher to lower ranks of each estate (a little, heavily weighted at the top).
It is also important to note that each of the three estates should not be simplified in the mind to a caste or a class. This why my visualization is of three merged pyramids. Each estate is organized into a pyramidal hierarchical structure. For example, at the Apex of the first estate is the Pope, in the middle of that pyramid we could place the clergy, and at the base we could place the people, with a special place reserved for those that the Clergy protects from Darwinian competition: the poor, sick, weak, elderly, widowed, orphaned, etc.
The Three Estates, Time Preference and Reproductive Strategy
We can also look at the Three Estates through the lens of time preference. Time preference is a technical term used by economists, which I find to be named backward from the way in which I think. Low time preference means long term planning,and high time preference means short term planning (or no planning). If I rank the Estates by the time preference of their constituents, from short term planning to long term planning, then I produce the estates in this order: Clergy, Commoner, Nobility.
The reason for existence of the Three Estates in the West could be a simple as a difference in time preference, or it might be better to say that it is as simple as difference in reproductive strategy. I believe that reproductive strategy drives the expression of time preference. In the r/K selection theory dichotomy, a K-selection strategy is expressed as low time preference behavior, and an r-selection strategy is expressed as high time preference behavior.
Though the Clergy speaks quite often of forever in heaven, it wants changes in behavior today. It wants food for the needy now. It is true that the Roman Catholic Church is also the longest standing institution in the West, so no lack of planning there. However, those special groups that the Church seeks to protect from the Darwinian struggle: the poor, sick, weak, elderly, widowed, orphaned, etc., they are all focused on right now. Notice that the Church provides a contradiction, a paradox: it appears to hold the longest planning outlook and also the shortest. I think this is important. Perhaps it is that the Church must switch between the two reproductive strategies, at times encouraging more reproduction (r-selection strategy) and at other times encouraging better reproduction (K-selection strategy). Perhaps the Church functions as a regulator in this regard.
The Commoners exhibit a medium term outlook, with a range of short to long term constituents. If a commoner’s outlook is too short term, then he risks falling into one of the Church’s protected classes. If a commoner exhibits a very long term outlook, saving and investing, then he can rise in rank, possibly even marrying into a noble house. In our modern era, most of the commoners exhibit a medium outlook, capable of saving for a rainy day, or saving enough for an investment such as a house or farm or retirement. They range in rank from blue collar workers to highly technical professions such as rocket scientist or electrical engineer. Reproductive strategy will vary from r-type (low class) to K-type (high class), highly influenced by the memeplex cultivated by the Church.
The Nobility exhibit the longest term outlook. They seek to build multi-generational wealth and power. They seek to build estates, kingdoms and empires. In the modern era, they run financial empires, or entire countries, or are captains of industry. The modern nobility is comprised of talented commoners who rise to the equivalent of peerage like Elon Musk, of Tesla motors and SpaceX, or be born into multi-generational wealth and title like Evelyn de Rothschild, their common focus is relentlessly on the future. Reproductive strategy is K-type.
The Third Triangle: Modern Politics
We see the Three Estates model echoed in the modern American political system. The three branches of the Federal government: Judicial, Executive, and Legislative, which maps to Clergy, Nobility, and Commoners. The Judicial branch is the most overtly holy, parading in their black robes, consulting their ancient texts, intoning solemnly to convey the weight of their holy power as they decide what is moral and right for the Nobles and Commoners. The Executive branch is the most obviously entrenched with the true American nobility: the capitalists (techno-commercialists), who buy influence within the true bureaucratic power structure with sinecures and revolving doors to lucrative positions and board memberships. The Legislative branch is where the Commoners are allowed to pretend that they have influence on the system, though they are easily overruled by either the Executive or Judicial branches whenever necessary.
We also see an echo in the Legislative branch: President, Senate and House, mapping to Clergy, Nobility and Commoners. The President can suggest and uses the ‘bully pulpit’ to exert his moral authority over the legislative process. The Senate are most aligned with the interests of the Nobility and most long term in outlook. The House is definitely the House of Commons and most aligned with those of short term outlook, the Commoners. This alignment is not as neat as the branches, but there are parallels.
The point is that we see the echo of the Three Estates in our modern day political systems. Of course we see it in Spandrell’s trichotomy. What else would we find? I told you to keep in mind that the visualizations of the Spandrellian trichotomy created by Nick B. Steves, Jim and RiverC could all be viewed as a single triangle. Here is that single triangle.
Which brings me to coldness and this final triangle, the triangle of unknown origin, the Political Triangle that keeps popping up:
This triangle is supposed to represent modern Western society, defined by political view, divided into Left and Right. To the Left is the lie of Utopia, the leftist singularity, a black hole of navel gazing from which no logical thought can escape — here lies anti-materialism, nihilism, and destruction of ego (Eastern mysticism). No truth which contradicts the Utopia is allowed, no Darwinism can be said to exist, not science and not race. All systems which march left eventually converge into a single point — the leftist singularity. To the Right is reality, which must be grounded in materialism, which is measurable. Here lies science. The right opens wide, diverges into two main types of material reality: the reality of the individual and the reality of the group. If the driving force of materialism is the individual, if it is ‘I’, then the ‘We’ is forgotten, the drive expresses itself as ever increasing interest in material goods, material science. If the driving force of the materialism is the group, if it is ‘We’, then the ‘I’ is forgotten, the drive expresses itself as ever increasing interest in the well-being of the group. Natural selection seems to favor a mix of approaches between the individual and the group survival strategy, but punishes harshly those that travel too far to the Left.
To the Right is life, but the struggle is harsh and Man wishes to flee from it. To the Left is death disguised as Utopia, a beautiful siren song calling Man to crash upon the rocks of insanity.
I contend that there is a deep heritage of the Three Estates in Western social organization. If this map is a map of Western society, then would it not follow that it will map the the Three Estates? I believe it does.
The point labeled ‘communism‘ maps to the Clergy (controlled by the church of Progress), denoted by unlimited cooperation. This is why neoreaction labels those currently in power, pushing Utopian Progressive lies, the Cathedral. Neoreaction recognizes hyper-Calvinism as a driving force within the Cathedral, coupled with a rejection of Darwinism, for that is what Utopia is: the promise of freedom from the struggle for survival, freedom from competition, freedom from Darwin. This Cathedral circumvented the Church, out-competing them in their control of the memeplex, through accretion of media control.
The rejection of Darwinism is a dynamic gone haywire: the drive within the Church to protect certain groups from Darwinian competition. Previously, the Church limited the protected groups to the poor, sick, weak, elderly, widowed, orphaned, etc. Obviously, we are wired with empathy for such groups. With the advent of Cultural Marxism, the church of Progress sacralized (see Haidt) an additional set of groups: the female, the black, they gay, the transgendered, and now every brand of special snowflake known to man. Now the groups are not merely protected, they are promoted, creating dysgenic breeding patterns that threaten to swamp the society if continued. The Good News of the freedom from competition is being spread in progressively widening circles.
The farther a society moves into this corner, the more deceptions are needed to maintain power, because the system moves further and further away from the reality of competition and Darwinism. In order to explain why the Utopia never arrives, the leaders invent a Satan who is preventing it, usually through Black Magic. Conveniently, the Satan will be whoever has resources to be expropriated (to keep the scam going just a little longer). In this way, a game of musical chairs is played, with the number of chairs decreasing as resources decrease, until eventually the music stops.
This maps to the ‘Theonomists‘ of the Spandrellian trichotomy. And , No, I am not saying that Theonomists are commies. I am saying that the job that should be performed by the Theonomists has been usurped by commies. Somewhere along the line, something went very wrong. I have the feeling that it has something to do with calories getting cheaper, but that will be another post.
The point labeled ‘individualism‘ maps to the Nobility, denoted by unlimited competition or unlimited Darwinism. The Nobles have always been willing to stand out from others and to pursue their own self-interest. For Nobles to pursue their self-interest, they must guide the workers, the commoners, and organize production and organize defense of that production. This is the ‘commercialist‘ side of techno-commercialism. The Nobles have also had to control certain types of technology, lest another competitor wrest power from them. In the Middle Ages, this technology primarily centered around war, but progressively centered on control of agriculture and commerce. In the modern era, this technology to control has expanded to finance and computers, in addition to nukes and fighter jets. Corporations and governments now conduct warfare on the internet and in currency markets. Multinationals care very little for blood ties with those whose countries they inhabit, and it seems that Western governments are acquiring this same view.
In the past, under Monarchy, the Nobles were forced to organize production of the masses, requiring identification with the masses, so we see monarchy closer to the Absolutism point. Modern international corporations, with their ability to shift wealth between countries are much closer to the individualist node, as they are not as tied to any body politic. Modern international corporations can manage populations of any race. Tribal solidarity is non-existent, but the creative destruction of the market is strong.
I think in the diagram above that Kingdom and Tribe (in white) should be switched, and that Nationalism and Monarchism (in blue) should be switched.
Here individualist Darwinian competition is at its strongest, breaking even tribal bonds. The farther a society moves in this direction, the more science and decouple from humanity, from its bonds of kinship. In this direction lies the trans-humanist singularity.
This maps to the ‘Techno-Commercialists‘ in the Spandrellian trichotomy. This should be a straightforward mapping to comprehend.
The point labeled ‘absolutism’ maps to the Commoners, denoted by limited competition and limited Darwinism. Here all Darwinian competition must be limited to competition between the in-group (the collective) and the out-group, cannibalistic competition is barred. This is blood, kinship and loyalty above all. This is populism and group-think. What happens when you take the ethos of the commoner and have the people push a leader to power? You get Hitler of Mussolini. In this node we see the collectivist drive (“We own each other”). We see National Socialism, which is collectivism around race. The farther the group moves to this corner, the harder it is for their leaders to keep up with the shifting demands of technology, and the need to be on the cutting edge of technology. Tribal solidarity is strong, but the creative destruction of the market is weak.
This maps to the ‘Ethno-Nationalists‘ in the Spandrellian trichotomy.
Why the Estates Matter
The estates matter because they formed based on real human drives, vectors of competition between gene frequencies within a population: individualist vs collectivist, low time preference vs high time preference, loyal vs disloyal, Utopian vs Darwin, etc. When you take a number of two dimensional traits that humans display, and combine them into a population, we get emergent behavior which can be conceptualized as the Three Estates. When we look at governments, what we see is group negotiation. This means that governments are the framework within which these separate reproductive strategies (time preferences) and drives can be negotiated. In order for a Western society to function successfully, it must have a method for doing the math, for calculating the necessary policies to satisfy the drives of the three estates. This is why there are houses of government, to represent the divergent interests of divergent populations of gene frequencies.
We have examples of what the Three Estates look like within healthy Western societies. It is possible to view history through the prism of the Estates, watching the interplay between the Estates. It appears that there must be a center of gravity, an equilibrium, maintained between the Three Estates; if the center of gravity tilts too far to one corner or another, then the system falls out of balance and we see an ‘intense selection event‘. Let me quote Bryce Laliberte from Neoreaction is Always to Your Right:
Why right? Because society should be arranged so as to produce the best. Leftism, which allies the rulers with the least against the middle, leads to the endless reproduction of the least in society while penalizing the reproduction of the best and subsumes the middle into the least. If this occurs during a period of unparalleled cultural acceleration, then an intense selection event triggered by Gnon shall occur. Gene-culture co-evolution entails that genes cannot get too far past culture, and culture cannot get too far past genes, without being snapped back to equilibrium.
I think that the Three Estates are part of our deep heritage, and are an expression of our gene-culture co-evolution — and are an expression specific to the Westerner genome. I think that the Three Estates are emergent phenomenon, expressions of complex genetic interactions, which can play a role in analyzing when and how social systems lose equilibrium and trigger intense selection events. I think that government, and good government in particular, is a system of rules designed to maintain an equilibrium between the genetic demands expressed through the Three Estates.
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m not terribly concerned with ‘fixing‘ America.
A comment from a concern troll insinuates that neoreactionaries are really trying to ‘fix‘ America. Maybe some guys are, but I am not. You see, I’m a Southerner, and an Unreconstructed Southerner at that. I grew up with my father telling me about the atrocities of the North against my forefathers. The Southern states were fools to ever join the Union, just as the EU member states were fools to join the European Union. The member states of the EU were better off being independent, just as the member states of the American Union will be better off being independent. To be ruled under a single despot is intolerable to the Men of the West. No, I’m not terribly concerned with ‘fixing‘ America.
America and the EU are sick. They are diseased and their bodies are rotting, no longer able to fight off infection, unable to prevent colonization by foreign bodies. Their deaths are inevitable and will even be a relief. Perhaps this will occur in time for the constituent states to save themselves. If not, then the peoples of the West will re-organize into some other configuration and life will continue. The struggle will continue.
Did you know that Rome never ‘fell‘? Just like America will never ‘fall‘. When I imagine America ‘falling‘, I see the image of the Statue of Liberty bestriding the Atlantic, tall and proud and clear-eyed, holding aloft the torch of knowledge, gowns white and rippling, the hope of Europe. Then she trips and falls into the deep ocean, to be swallowed up like Atlantis, her torch held above the water until the last tragic moment when its light is extinguished forever. From greatness to extinction in an instant, that is ‘falling‘. No, that’s not what is happening or has happened. This once-proud daughter of Europe, once so full of hope and potential, is now an old porn star, tattooed, used up and diseased. She lies in her hospital bed, as the AIDS that infected her allows diseases to eat away at her flesh, colonies of bacteria that she once could have easily repelled, until common pneumonia overtakes her. She had so many opportunities to take the narrow path, but the party was fun, and the sex and the drugs and the rock’n’roll too enticing. A long, slow, painful, protracted fading is not a falling.
No, I’m not terribly concerned with ‘fixing‘ America. You think neoreaction is going to fix that? Good luck. Seems like a job for a Necromancer, not a Neoreactionary. You might as well be trying to ‘fix‘ the Roman Empire.
Rome never ‘fell‘, it sublimated. Well, actually its spirit sublimated. What animated Rome, is what animates Western civilization is the Soul of the West. Spengler called it the Faustian spirit of the West, a spirit of expansion driven by a sense of space, an abyss, which causes a yearning of the Western soul towards distance and infinity. Bryce referred to it as striving rightward. I call it the Cult of Gnon. The spirit that drives neoreaction is the Soul of the West, and is the same spirit that was the animating force of the Roman empire. Rome did not experience a great crash, falling instantly from its prime into extinction. No, it rotted slowly, an old man warm in his bed, waiting for pneumonia to overtake him. As Rome died, Roman culture spread throughout the West, its forms and its spirit took hold in little corners, fought for existence and flourished once again — reincarnated. Each of Rome’s last breaths washed over the West. Western culture was essentially Roman culture, kept and curated by the Roman Catholic Church. There were a few men, colonies imbued with the Spirit, who took the best of what Rome had achieved and kept the light of the West burning. They created the University system and birthed new sciences.
America was one such flourishing — for a time. I believe that time is ending. I believe the time is coming when she will breath her last breath and will expire — ex + spiritus — and release her spirit. There were many wonderful things about America, and the American project was not a waste of time. It was merely a step along a path, a stage in an evolution, one incarnation in a series of incarnations. Brave European adventurers, propelled by the Spirit of the West, boarded wooden ships — the height of technology at the time, not unlike our space ships of today — and crossed a dangerous abyss, the Atlantic ocean, to colonize a New World. A body politic was born, produced its fruits, and has now outlived its usefulness. Its death will mark a new beginning. A reincarnation will follow.
Today, new colonies animated by the Soul of the West are forming. They are small and inconsequential, for now. Imbued with the Faustian spirit, European men sense the abyss, and sense the call of outsideness, and yearn to strive rightward, and upward. Those men yearn to transcend this World. Somewhere, there are Western men who know that the abyss calls for us to cross it, to take a dangerous voyage on a tightrope. That is what I’m concerned about. I am not concerned with LARPing about some ‘Restoration‘.
On a note completely unrelated to the indomitable Western spirit being called to cross the Abyss, have you been keeping up with SpaceX? I hear they need a few good men, some men with the right stuff. Also unrelated, space exploration was once undertaken by the American government, but somehow the spirit of space exploration has left the governing body but has found itself reborn in a few small corners of private life. Mars is calling.
Some other guys can go ‘fix‘ America. I will take my sons outside and point my finger to Mars in the night sky and say, “I wonder what it would be like to live there?” I will cultivate the Spirit of the West, keep its light alive, and foretell its next reincarnation. America is doomed, but the West lives on.
I have recently been making the argument that neoreaction is a school, not a movement and not an ideology. I did not see far enough.
Bryce Laliberte’s eyes were keener —neoreaction is a culture, a culture of striving rightward:
First, neoreaction is not a movement. It cannot be identified with any individual person or group. It is a culture, with its own bywords and norms which are intended to exclude anyone who might shrink from the task of striving rightward. Individuals, groups, and organizations may persist within neoreaction, but neoreaction is always an idea beyond capture of any person, doctrine, or magisterium.
This is much better, much clearer, and more powerful. Neoreaction is not owned or managed as a school would be, because it is a culture and a culture is the creation of a society. He sees what eluded me: that while the interactions of the neoreactionaries may take the form of detailed debates among peers, academic in nature, this is merely the expression of the culture. There may be a school of neoreaction but the physical manifestation is not the thought or the soul or the animating force, merely its expression. When the finger points to the sky, the fool looks at the finger. Neoreaction as a school is the finger, but the finger points to neoreaction as a culture.
Then Bryce takes us a step further. A culture exists outside of the group, and this culture exists outside of us and has its own destiny, quite separate from ours. We cannot bend it to our will, we must bend to it. One is called into its service, for a purpose not yet foretold:
Third, neoreaction is always to your right. It does not exist for any right-oriented group’s purpose. Rather, those on the right exist for it. Neoreaction is not even for so-called neoreactionaries. You are allowed to enter its salons and discuss ideas with other like-minded and intellectually virtuous individuals, but this not for your own purposes but the purpose of neoreaction. Neoreaction is memetically sovereign; it picks and chooses what it likes from you, and not you from it.
The next step is unthinkable, logical to the point of madness.
Bryce leads us to a precipice, to an abyss and bids us stare into it.
As we peer into the infinite expanse, the mind flails and shudders:
Fourth, neoreaction cannot ally itself with anyone, but you can ally yourself with neoreaction. It cannot be subordinated, but as it is the manifestation of an organic, rightward telos, whatever would subordinate it misunderstands neoreaction and thus fails. You simply cannot get to the right of neoreaction, because neoreaction already occupies the extreme limit of rightward thought. Or at least that is the intent, and if it has not yet gone as far as it can, it will find its way there.
A culture. Striving rightward. Always to our right. At the extreme limit. Expanding across infinity, an unknown destination. It is outsideness. Nick Land called it ‘Draconian Teleology‘.
To our left is our animal nature: barbarism and savagery. To our right is transcendence. To our right lies the path to transcend our animal nature, to become more than an animal, to become something better. Man is stage of development, a path to something more than an animal. But small is the gate and narrow is the road that leads to transcendence. On either side of the road lies annihilation, oblivion, extinction. The path is narrow, stretching like a rope over an abyss. Our destiny awaits on the other side. The call comes from outside, calling forth our best. Nothing but our best will suffice. Each generation of Man is a step along the path, or a step onto the steep and slippery slope into the abyss, into annihilation, into extinction. The odds are against us.
Great men have seen this rightward voyage, this narrow path, and the black oblivion that waits to swallow all Mankind should we fail in the endeavor. Should we fail in becoming capable of making the dangerous journey. Should we fail in our striving rightward. Thus spoke Zarathustra:
Man is a rope stretched between the animal and the Overman — a rope over an abyss.
A dangerous crossing, a dangerous wayfaring, a dangerous looking-back, a dangerous trembling and halting.
What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not a goal: what is lovable in man is that he is an over-going and a down-going.
I love those that know not how to live except as down-goers, for they are the over-goers.
I love the great despisers, because they are the great adorers, and arrows of longing for the other shore.
I love those who do not first seek a reason beyond the stars for going down and being sacrifices, but sacrifice themselves to the earth, that the earth may become the Overman’s.
I love him who lives in order to know, and seeks to know in order that the Overman may hereafter live. Thus he seeks his own down-going.
I love him who labors and invents, that he may build the house for the Overman, and prepare for him earth, animal, and plant: for thus he seeks his own down-going.
I love him who loves his virtue: for virtue is the will to down-going, and an arrow of longing.
I love him who reserves no share of spirit for himself, but wants to be wholly the spirit of his virtue: thus he walks as spirit over the bridge.
I love him who makes his virtue his inclination and destiny: thus, for the sake of his virtue, he is willing to live on, or live no more.
I love him who desires not too many virtues. One virtue is more of a virtue than two, because it is more of a knot for one’s destiny to cling to.
I love him whose soul is lavish, who wants no thanks and does not give back: for he always gives, and desires not to keep for himself.
I love him who is ashamed when the dice fall in his favor, and who then asks: “Am I a cheat?” — for he wants to perish.
I love him who scatters golden words in advance of his deeds, and always does more than he promises: for he seeks his own down-going.
I love him who justifies the future ones, and redeems the past ones: for he is willing to perish through the present ones.
I love him who chastens his God, because he loves his God: for he must perish through the wrath of his God.
I love him whose soul is deep even in the wounding, and may perish through a small matter: thus he goes willingly over the bridge.
I love him whose soul is so overfull that he forgets himself, and all things are in him: thus all things become his down-going.
I love him who is of a free spirit and a free heart: thus is his head only the bowels of his heart; his heart, however, causes his down-going.
I love all who are like heavy drops falling one by one out of the dark cloud that lowers over man: they herald the coming of the lightning, and perish as heralds.
Lo, I am a herald of the lightning, and a heavy drop out of the cloud: the lightning, however, is the Overman!
What is the culture of neoreaction? It is obvious now, we have named it before. It is the Cult of Gnon.
“Gnon is the Vast Abrupt, and the crossing. Gnon is the Great Propeller.“
A new group of soldiers, referred to as “Facebook Warriors” will ” wage complex and covert information and subversion campaigns […] These Facebook warriors will be using similar atypical tactics, through non-violent means, to fight their adversary. This will mainly be achieved through “reflexive control,” an old Soviet tactic of spreading specifically curated information in order to get your opponent to react in the exact way you want them to. It’s a pretty tricky trick, and the British army will be doing just that with 1,500-person (or more) troop using Twitter and Facebook as a means to spread disinformation, real war truths, and “false flag” incidents as well as just general intelligence gathering. The 77th battalion will reportedly begin operations in April .
Welcome to the future, where fucking with your head is just part of what your tax dollars buys you. Do you think it is time to freak out now? Don’t. Just breathe. This is fine and I’ll tell you why.
When we find out that public opinion is curated, and that thought in a ‘free society’ is actually controlled, then it should make one wonder: Why? and maybe even: What can I do about it?
Want to hear something that I used to believe and no longer believe? Try this answer: Propaganda is the caused by Democracy. In a demotist system, where you count the votes of the masses, it is important to those in power that the masses vote the right way. Those in power use that power to ensure that the masses vote the right way. This is done through the process of ‘Public Relations’, also known as ‘Propaganda’ or even ‘Mind Control’, in addition to buying votes through redistribution.
Hmm. Is that right? Maybe there is more to it than ‘Democracy did it‘.
What’s the difference between Mind Control and Culture?
Very little actually. What is the sociological purpose of religion? Obviously it is to inculcate minds to a certain way of thinking, to a memeplex. If the way of thinking is true to God’s will (and the manifestation of his will in Nature), the those who hold those beliefs (the religious memeplex) should have a better chance at survival and reproduction. If the hosts of the memeplex survive and reproduce, then they will transfer the memeplex to the next generation. If they don’t survive, then the memeplex dies with them. The longer the memeplex survives, the more certain you can be that it is beneficial to its host group. What is the sociological purpose of the public school system? Pretty much the same thing. What is the sociological purpose of television and movies? Pretty much the same thing. It is important that the memeplexes of any host population be curated. So what we are seeing is just a progression of the same behavior through the technology of the period: Religion > Schools > Old Media (TV, Movies, Print) > New Media (the Web) > Social Media (Facebook, Twitter).
No matter what form of government you have, it will always be in the interest of those in power to program the minds of the others in the group to get a functional society and to build group cohesion. There is no need for moral judgement of this behavior. Santa requires you to be asleep when he brings toys: don’t judge Mommy and Daddy for telling you that, just be happy you got toys. If you are getting all judgy about that, you might be a Puritan.
Is the whole world a conspiracy?
Yes and No. This is just the way the world works. Mind control is just easier and more humane than beating people with sticks when they get out of line. If by conspiracy you mean that some people are attempting control you, and this is morally wrong because muh freedom! and all people should hold hands and sing Kumbaya together, so you’re going to label this behavior with the moral pejorative conspiracy, then Yes, the whole world is a conspiracy. If you remove the assumed moral judgement, and see that groups of smart people will work together to further their own interests and that this is just normal group behavior, then No the whole world is not a conspiracy. Again, it is only a conspiracy if you are getting Puritanically judgy about the practice.
Hell, it may just turn out that they are right and they really do know better than you what is good for you. Or it could end up killing us all. Time will tell. That’s the only way you know: if the programming perpetuates itself for long periods of time, that means it did not kill (too many of) its hosts and can therefore be viewed as beneficial.
Shouldn’t I be mad that I’m being mind-controlled?
No. Not really. Someone is going to mind-control you as you are probably not smart enough, or tough enough, or hardworking enough to truly be sovereign. Sovereignty is very hard work. Don’t kid yourself.
What can I do about mind control?
Well, you can Kill Your Television™ and unplug and get off the grid and go live in a cave somewhere. That is an option, but it seems pretty nutty to me. Of course, you should not worry about what I think or even being happy, and just try to live your life in an interesting way. So living like that might actually be awesome. You would be closer to sovereign than most people, if that is your life’s goal.
Or you could be a keyboard warrior and rage on the internet about how unfair mind control is. But that seems pretty pointless too, and is a much less interesting way to spend your time than living like a nut off the grid.
Or you could realize that those who control minds probably deserve to be controlling minds. It is not always an easy gig, you need to be smart and hard-working to be really good at it. You could work to get in the club, join the CIA or ThinkProgress.
Or you could do a better job of choosing just who is controlling your mind. Curate your media wisely. Read a book written before you were born. If mind control is used to direct a society, and curating the correct memeplex can be a matter of life and death for that society, then should you bet on programming that is 50 years old, or programming that is 2,000 years old? Here’s a thought: Don’t be a total modern-dildocratic-rainbow-parade-marching-zombie, do something that every modern movie and television show is programming you to believe is stupid (because it will program your brain with the wrong thoughts) — put down your phablet and go to Church. Put on a fucking suit, too, whydontcha?
Identarianism and ethnonationalism have recently been topics of hot debate in the React-o-Sphere, prompting some rather premature announcements about the demise of Neoreaction. It was curious to me that a debate about ethnonationalism should lead to this idea that Neoreaction was being overrun or swamped. At root, I think the fear is that Neoreaction is becoming a movement. That would be bad. Here is why it won’t happen, or at least why it shouldn’t happen.
Neoreaction is not a movement
Movements are concrete, they occupy space, they have trajectories through time, they are the physical manifestation of thought. Movements can be squashed or perverted, they can take on momentum and veer off on unseen trajectories. Movements are populist, they require a lot of bodies to get to critical mass. How could Neoreaction, with its open aversion to populism, become a movement? Only by accepting populism. As long as Neoreaction remains firm in its commitment to not pander to the masses, especially a particular group, then it is guaranteed to not become a movement.
The goal of ethnonationalists is to create a state, and that requires a movement. Ethnonationalism should not be a direct goal of NRx, else NRx risks becoming a movement. Should NRx theorize on ethnonationalism, to attempt to dissect how ethnonationalism operates, what are the uses of this particular concept? Yes. Should NRx be an ethnonationalist movement? No.
For Neoreaction to become a movement is for Neoreaction to incarnate itself, at which point the clock on its lifespan begins to tick. Could the theories of Neoreaction be used by an ethnonationalist (or other) movement? Certainly, but that would be a separate group using NRx theories, not NRx morphing into that group. I would not have any ill wishes towards any ethnonationalist group that was able to use Neoreactionary thought to further their movement. Where I would have a problem is if said ethnonationalist group then attempted to hijack the Neoreactionary brand. If said ethnonationalist group wants to condemn Neoreaction and reject its theory, that is fine with me. Best of luck, fellas. Like any open source project, you are free to take and use what helps you and leave what does not help you. Like any public library, you are free to browse for new ideas and inspiration.
Neoreaction is not an ideology
Ideologies are systems of ideas that are used to inform economic, or political theory and/or policy. Eurasianism is an Ideology, it is a system of thought with a political goal and provides a theory of economic interaction and policy. Politics is a populist pursuit, and ideologies are systems of thought intended to galvanize particular groups. Again, Neoreaction is not populist, it does not have a goal of defining and leading a movement. For Neoreaction to become an ideology is to build it for use by a populist movement (such as Eurasianism), and the likely candidate would be an ethnonationalist movement. Could the theories of Neoreaction be used by a group building an ideology? Certainly. If certain ethnonationalist groups would like to use Neoreactionary theories to build an ideology for their movement, then be my guest. But Neoreaction itself should not take on the goal of becoming an ideology, because then incarnation into a movement is the next step, and the clock on the lifespan of Neoreaction begins to tick. As long as Neoreaction remains firm in its commitment to not pander to the masses, especially a particular group, then it is guaranteed to not become and ideology which could then propel a movement.
I believe that this is why some were taken aback by Nyan Sandwich’s Why NRx is Winning post, which I think of as the NRx is Sovereign post. It appears that this may be a proclamation of orthodoxy or dogmatism. If there is an NRx orthodoxy or dogma, then does that mean that it is an ideology? Although I agree with many of Nyan’s positions in his post, I would caution any readers against viewing this as dogma, it is not dogma, it is what Nyan asserts as true. We can debate whether or not his positions are indeed true, but we could not if they were dogma. Neoreaction does not have an orthodoxy or a dogma because it has no mechanism of purging, and purging is a necessary function by an institution that wishes to maintain an orthodoxy. Neoreaction does not even have an institutional structure from which one could be purged.
Neoreaction is a school
I recently stated position this in my post The University of Neoreaction. Neoreactionaries are intellectuals, busy with intellectual pursuits.This is a major difference between previous reactionaries and Neoreaction: it’s caste. This is not an intentional snootiness, it is simply the way the group is organized: it happens to be a group of intelligent men studying, debating, and analyzing the truth in the best tradition of the Western civilized world. Pragmatic, working-class men want to get things done, while intellectuals want to intellectualize. It is not better or worse than pragmatic reaction, it simply is not pragmatic reaction. Neoreaction is a self-organizing school engaged in science, and science is truth-telling.
The modern University system is a perversion and is utterly destroyed. I firmly believe this. They are petri dishes of despicable memes and culture. They are propaganda mills, where you receive status, a near worthless degree that acts merely as a license to work in a white-collar job, a healthy dose of Modern ideology, and (more than likely) a mound of non-bankruptible debt, a good start on a working alcoholic lifestyle, and a minor venereal disease. You will get very little truth from a modern education, because so much of what is true can no longer be spoken there.
The Western Identity of Neoreaction
Curt Doolittle wrote:
While Propertarianism does provide the missing logic of cooperation that Mises promised us, and that the prohibition of free riding is the single cooperative problem to be overcome, that the central proposition of Propertarianism is the western struggle to testify truthfully to one’s jury, and that trust is the result of that struggle, and economic velocity the result of that trust. And that economic velocity is the reason for both phases of the west’s rapid advancement: the classical and modern worlds that both times have dragged man out of ignorance, and in our most recent case, dragged him out of poverty.
So if I want something to be learned, it is that: we discovered truth telling.
This idea is echoed by Ricardo Duchesne in the work The Uniqueness of Western Civilization. Kevin MacDonald writes in his review of the book:
Duchesne argues that Western science is a unique accomplishment. Although the Chinese made many practical discoveries, they never developed the idea of a rational, orderly universe guided by universal laws comprehensible to humans. Nor did they ever develop a “deductive method of rigorous demonstration according to which a conclusion, a theorem, was proven by reasoning from a series of self-evident axioms” (p. 250). (The same is said to be true of Indian geometry.) Whereas there was a strong tendency within China for intellectuals to uphold ancient wisdom (emanating from Confucius), the Greeks “challenged existing explanations by trying to deliver new and better explanations and by seeking incontrovertible truths [i.e., objectively true—true for all observers] based on the strictest modes of demonstration” (p. 251). Thus while the Chinese essentially gravitated to collectivist reaffirmation of social wisdom, the Western tradition was one of individuals questioning received wisdom and the weight of tradition.
By merely engaging in science (which is the act of telling the truth), Neoreaction displays its Western identity. We can do nothing else. This drive for truth-telling is a central part of the power of the West: by telling the truth we create trust and that trust dramatically increases economic velocity and that economic velocity powers our societies. Telling the truth also has the advantage of allowing is to model the world accurately, in order to harness its resources more effectively.
Neoreaction is Western, it is European, therefore it is White. I believe that the theory of gene-culture co-evolution is correct. The genetics of a population and the culture of a population work to modify each other in continuous feedback loops. The culture of debate and scientific inquiry of Neoreaction are direct manifestations of its Western identity. I assert that Neoreaction has a White identity, but it does not follow that Neoreaction is therefore ethnonationalist. We can discuss the semantics of the term ‘Identitarianism’, but let’s look at Metapedia for a moment (emphasis mine):
Identitarianism rests on the assumption that ethnic-cultural factors have a central role in human welfare and the functioning of society. Man is viewed as a combination of inherited and environmentally acquired traits, and the need of ethnic Europeans to defend and develop themselves as distinct peoples is emphasized. Accordingly, identitarians oppose large-scale extra-European immigration to Europe, regardless of its possible economic utility. This standpoint has caused it to be viewed as racist. At the same time, it has been heavily criticized by certain nationalist groups, since it has (among other things) clearly distanced itself from national socialism.
Identitarians claim to view the nation state through a pragmatic lense, and points out that it is only one of several possible historical forms of organisation for ethnic groups and peoples. Many identitarian theoreticians, such as Guillaume Faye, have championed a federalist imperial ideal, where hundreds of local and regional communities, with a high degree of autonomy, would be organised into a “Eurasian” confederation, the latter working to defend the peoples and interests of Europe as a totality on a global scale. This is a natural consequence of the identitarian interest both in Europe and Europeans as a totality, and in local, regional and traditional expressions of culture, which are viewed as positive sources of community and cultural development.
Regarding economy, the sole general identitarian viewpoint is that the economy always must be subjected to other, more vital, interests. Identitarians contend that the well-being of the people always must trump economic growth and similar considerations, and criticises globalisation as ecologically and socially destructive. No comprehensive identitarian theory of economics exists as of yet, and theories ranging from corporatism and distributism, over libertarianism, to socialism, are frequently discussed in identitarian circles. This is fully in line with the identitarian ambition to be non-dogmatic and flexible, but could also be understood as a serious flaw.
I see much of Neoreaction in this. A comparison and contrast of Neoreaction and European Identarianism is in order. Notice in this that Guillaume Faye theorizes around a Eurasian union, but I do not believe he could be characterized as an Eurasianist activist as is Aleksander Dugin. Theoretician vs Activist. In this same way, I believe that Neoreactionaries are theoreticians, not activists.
Notice that the Identitarians are not well liked by the National Socialists, nor is Neoreaction. NatSoc is populist, NRx is not. The Identitarians see the nation state as only one of many possible organizational forms. This is one of the problems with ethnonationalism, that it contains embedded within it the idea of a nation state. What if it is time for the giant nation state to go the way of the Roman empire?
In this section I have attempted to show that Neoreaction is uniquely Western, European, White, but that our Western identity in no way means that we must be White Nationalists, or National Socialists, or any other brand of ethnonationalism. Neoreaction does not need to condone any ethnonationalist positions in order to prove its European identity. Europeans do not necessarily need a nation state, that is not a precondition, and NRx should remain flexible around that analysis. Like the Identitarians we should attempt to remain non-dogmatic and flexible.
I have asserted now that Neoreaction has no need of ethnonationalism. This presents a problem: Ethnonationalism is one of the spokes on Spandrell’s trike. The spoke is still there, but I believe that it is mislabeled. It should not be labeled ‘ethnonationalism’, but something else. Perhaps ‘Western Identity’. Ethnonationalism is rather vague also, because it evades the actual ethnicity of the project, which is undoubtedly Western or European. Fix the trike.
Neoreaction should remain independent
The moment that NRx stops being a vehicle for truth-telling, then it will have become a tool. It will no longer be an engine of science, it will no longer have as its goal the production of truth, but will become a marketing department, a public relations department. I warn Neoreaction not to become an ideology or a movement, not because I want Neoreaction to live for itself, but because I think it is valuable as a forum for debate and analysis of what is true. Its value is tied to its commitment to telling the truth. Because Neoreaction is committed to theory, analysis and debate does not mean that it is not useful to for the creation of ideologies or movements, it is, but the moment it becomes an ideology or movement is the moment it is controlled by outside forces.
When Neoreaction stop telling the truth, that is the sign that it has been co-opted. Then a dogma will form, an orthodoxy will be held out as inviolable. As long as NRx is openly discussing the merits of ethnonationalism, then it is not controlled by ethnonationalists.
“To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?” — Kevin Alfred Strom
Annie Lennox, of Eurythmics fame, has recently been castigated for not conveying the narrative that the Social Justice Warriors want conveyed. What is this narrative? Well, it is “CSWMs Are Evil”, of course. CSWMs is an acronym for Cisgender Straight White Males. If you don’t know that this is the narrative then it is quite possible that you are a cisgender straight white male, or maybe you are an earlier generation of American who watches football and the nightly news and is quite happily oblivious to the fact that the young, college-aged, 20-somethings of America (you know, the guys who will be running this country in 20 years, if it still exists) are batshit insane.
What was Annie’s crime?
I’ve already given you her crime in a nutshell, but here’s the background. On her latest album, Annie covered Billie Holiday’s Strange Fruit, a protest song about lynching. It’s very poetic actually, as the lynched Negroes are metaphorized as strange fruit swinging from Poplar trees. Pretty high concept for a woman that dropped out of school at age 11 (more on that in a bit). I’m sure that because Annie is now in her 60’s, and probably had no clue about the strange new fruits in this world that she inhabits, that she thought this song would be a classy track to strut her liberal street cred, covering a 1930’s pre-pre-pre-Civil-Rights protest song about lynching. No, that wasn’t her crime, that’s just how she got involved with the batshit insane Left, by daring to whip out her shock-topped, genderblending, worn-out-like-a-cassette-tape, 1980’s-style Leftism and wave it in the face of the New Left. You see, when you pledge allegiance to the Left, you are now pledging allegiance to the New Left, and they will make damn sure that you know it. You had better be on message with the narrative: CSWMs Are Evil! You will not be allowed to whitewash it (by leaving out the white). Annie’s crime: Whitewashing.
We refer to Strange Fruit as Billie Holiday’s because she popularized it in the 1930’s. It actually came into existence as a poem penned by Abel Meeropol, a Jewish schoolteacher from the Bronx. Meeropol first published the poem in 1937, in the Marxist magazine The New Masses, which as far as I can tell was edited entirely by Jews. The magazine launched in 1926 as part of a number of publications run by the Communist Party USA in New York. I’ve included an image of a 1933 cover which portrays a giant King Kong-like non-White factory worker breaking his chains to attack a King, a Pope and a tycoon. I’m sure that this is a reference to King Kong which was also released in 1933. One can only assume that the commies envisioned a happier ending for the factory worker than for the great beast.
Meeropol, when he wasn’t busy writing poems for Marxist magazines, or molding young minds in New York City schools, helped the ‘community’ in other ways. You may recall Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, both Jews from NYC, who became involved with the Communist party. They were eventually executed for spying and passing information about the atomic bomb to the Soviet Union. Julius and Ethel had two sons, Michael and Robert, who needed to be cared for while Mommy and Daddy did time in the big house before buying the farm. Guess who cared for and adopted Mikey and Bobbie? Right, Abel and Annie Meeropol. Isn’t that swell? It sure is great to know you can count on your friends when you get caught for treason. The two boys took Meeropol’s name to avoid embarrassment at being the children of traitors. As you shall see, the embarrassment did not last long.
Little Mikey has done pretty well for himself. He became an economist (a teacher like his adoptive father) advocating leftist economic policy, teaching at Western New England College. Since 2006 he has been a monthly commentator on an NPR affiliate. It’s good to know he’s helping to educate the youth, you know, like the ones berating Annie Lennox. Yes, we are still talking about her.
“A wonderfully accessible discussion of contemporary American economic policy. Meeropol demonstrates that the Reagan-era policies of tax cuts and shredded safety nets, coupled with strident talk of balanced budgets, have been continued and even brought to fruition by the neo-liberal Clinton regime.” — Frances Fox Piven, Graduate School, City University of New York
That review was of course given by the illustrious Frances Fox Piven, a Jewish professor of political science and sociology at CUNY, where she has been molding minds since 1982. She is most famous for the Cloward-Piven Strategy detailed in her 1966 article The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty, in which she advocates that in order to force reforms to the social welfare system, that it should first be collapsed by the weight of the poor, which could be accomplished by increasing enrollment in these systems. Her strategy seems to be moving forward briskly. It’s good to know she’s helping to educate the youth, you know, like the ones berating Annie Lennox. Yes, we are still talking about her.
Baby Bobbie (Rosenberg) Meeropol has also done very well for himself. He briefly taught anthropology at Western New England College and is now a practicing attorney. For a couple of years in the 1980’s he was the managing editor of The Socialist Review, a socialist magazine in the San Francisco Bay area. In 1990, Bobbie started the innocuous-sounding Rosenberg Fund for Children, which is a charity to support the children of <scare-quote>Progressive</scare-quote> activists who are targeted by the Fascist-Nazi-White-dictators-who-run-the-USA-despite-the-fact-that-these-freaking-commies-are-everywhere.
The New Masses has another connection to Negro music like that of Billie Holiday’s other than publishing Abel Meeropol’s poem. The magazine also provided funding for a couple of concerts called From Spirituals to Swing and held at Carnegie Hall right at Christmas time in 1938 and 1939. I’m sure it is pretty coincidental that the Jewish-run Marxist magazine decided to hold these concerts at Christmas, it’s not like they were busy celebrating it, amiright?! No, they wanted to help spread a little Cultural Marxist cheer into NYC with all black acts such as Count Basie and the Jewish Bennie Goodman as the token ‘White’ act. Do you think this concert says anything about Goodman’s politics? I’m sure it is just a coincidence. The audiences attending the concerts were integrated. Why do you think it was important for The New Masses to stage this integrated concert, which at the time was quite radical? Do you think it is possible that fomenting cultural changes could have something to do with Marxism? If integrated concerts were important to Marxists, then does it follow that an integrated country could also be a Marxist goal? But wouldn’t that mean that the entire Civil Rights platform and era could be seen as a Marxist triumph in America? Who cares, we’re talking about Annie Lennox here, right? Yes, we are still talking about her.
Why bring up Meeropol, the Rosenbergs, the offspring of the Rosenbergs, The New Masses and Annie Lennox? Well, Strange Fruit, of course, and these are some pretty strange fruit. What we are seeing is intellectual fruit. This little trek through earlyish 20th century New York City Marxism is a walk through a garden. In this garden, men work to plant and tend seeds. They nurture ideas which are important to them, they grow them and spread them.
I know of a guy named Matthew who had some words about strange fruits:
15Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
We are almost to the part where we talk about what it was that Annie Lennox actually did, but first, let’s look back at an Israeli election in 2009. Tzipi Livini is running for office and she wants to use a Eurythmics song on her campaign trail. Earlier that year Annie had made it clear to fans that just because she performed at what the Jerusalem Post calls an ‘anti-Israeli rally’ in London, that she is not anti-Israeli. Annie objects because of the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians. She just wants to give peace a chance, you know? She’s an older model Leftist and so is still deluded into believing that the Left wants peace. From Annie Lennox: I was wrong about Israel:
Singer Annie Lennox has stepped back from comments she made about the Gaza conflict, to conclude that “both sides are right and both sides are wrong”. […]
Last year she attended an anti-war rally and held a press conference with comedian Alexei Sayle and other prominent opponents of the Gaza operation. […] She objected to the use of the Eurythmics song I Saved the World Today as part of Tzipi Livni’s 2009 election campaign.
The fact that she shared a platform with Ken Livingstone and George Galloway led to condemnation within the Jewish community. Her stance was considered all the more surprising because her daughters, Lola and Tali, are half-Israeli, from her marriage to film producer Uri Fruchtman.
So, now that we are clear that Annie Lennox is not anti-Israeli (just because she supported the Palestinians which seems awfully anti-Semitic), because she has two half-Israeli children. We would not want you to even get the faintest notion that Annie Lennox could be accused of violating one of the world’s greatest taboos. I’m sure that Richard Juzwiak, who’s Twitter handle is @RichJuz (get it? Rich Joos — still not sure if he’s Jewish), is probably not even aware of Annie’s misstep. I’m sure if he has a problem with Annie, that there could be no ulterior motive, other than forgetting the narrative: CSWM’s Are Evil. Richard is part of the New Left, so he will show this old dog some new tricks for sure.
This is how she flubbed the narrative. While on the media tour for her new album Nostalgia, Annie was asked about Strange Fruit and she didn’t mention lynching! <gasp> OMG!! Can you believe it? Instead Annie whitewashes the issue, dancing around how Evil Are CSWMs by talking about “violence and bigotry, hatred, violent acts of mankind against ourselves”. No mention of White people. None. Just a vague condemnation of unracialized bigotry and violence. You can see the problem here, right?
Well, luckily, Juzwiak is there to tell us how Annie should have done it, because he got it from another famous molder of young minds, Maya Angelou:
[Billie’s] face became cruel, and when she spoke her voice was scornful. “It means when the crackers are killing the niggers. It means when they take a little nigger like you and snatch off his nuts and shove them down his goddamn throat. That’s what it means.”
You see, Annie, you have got to be clear here: It’s the crackers. You cannot forget to mention that the Evil is the crackers. Otherwise you are whitewashing, or spinning the story to the advantage of Whites. You cannot talk about violence as a human problem. That doesn’t do the New Left any good.
Isn’t it a little ironic, though? When you think about all those Jews tending their Marxist intellectual garden at the beginning of the 20th century… do you think they could have imagined that in 100 years that the Marxist seeds that they had planted would be yielding such strange fruit? That Jews like Jonathan Chait would be attacked as CSWMs or Sad Progressive White Dudes? That Israel would come under attack from the Marxists around the world fighting for the rights of the oppressed Palestinian minority? That a Scottish White woman who married a Jew and bore his children and stood for every Marxist cause she could think of would be attacked from the Left for not condemning her own children’s race vociferously enough? That the New Left that grew out of the Marxist Old Left would not be able tell the difference between a Jew and a Cracker?
Dear Open-Minded Progressive Jews: “Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.” You might want to think about getting on the side that’s ready to tear this tree down, now that you’re White too.