/lit/ - Literature

>>19734180
yes, moldbug will work as a serf in the new establishment

>>19659879
Yep, CIA codename Moldbug. He larps as a dissident but lies to his audience all the time.

better yet, what would Mencius Moldbug think of the pandemic? oh wait......

https://graymirror.substack.com/p/some-of-you-are-not-yet-clearpilled/comments

>>19014750
What do you think patchwork is? Pop a quarter into your street corner monarch.

>Let’s start with my ideal world – the world of thousands, preferably even tens of thousands, of neocameralist city-states and ministates, or neostates. The organizations which own and operate these neostates are for-profit sovereign corporations, or sovcorps. For the moment, let’s assume a one-to-one mapping between sovcorp and neostate. […] Let’s pin down the neocameralist dramatis personae by identifying the people who work for a sovcorp as its agents, the people or organizations which collectively own it as its subscribers, and the people who live in its neostate as its residents.

>A Neocameral ‘neostate’ is not owned by its residents or its agents. Its ‘monarch’ (or ‘CEO’) is an executive appointment. (90% of all confusion about Neocameralism, and Neoreaction in general, stems from a failure to grasp this elementary point.) Note: ‘subscribers’ (plural). More coming on this immediately.

>Every patch of land on the planet has a primary owner, which is its sovcorp. Typically, these owners will be large, impersonal corporations. We call them sovcorps because they’re sovereign. You are sovereign if you have the power to render any plausible attack on your primary property, by any other sovereign power, unprofitable. In other words, you maintain general deterrence. […] (Sovereignty is a flat, peer-to-peer relationship by definition. The concept of hierarchical sovereignty is a contradiction in terms. …) […] The business of a sovcorp is to make money by deterring aggression. Since human aggression is a serious problem, preventing it should be a good business. Moreover, the existence of unprofitable governments in your vicinity is serious cause for concern, because unprofitable governments tend to have strange decision structures and do weird, dangerous things. […] (Nuclear deterrence (mutual assured destruction) is only one small class of deterrent designs. To deter is to render predictably unprofitable. Predictably unprofitable violence is irrational. Irrational violence is certainly not unheard of. But it is much, much rarer than you may think. Most of the violence in the world today is quite rational, IMHO.) […] General deterrence is a complex topic which deserves its own post. For the moment, assume that every square inch of the planet’s surface is formally owned by some sovcorp, that no one disagrees on the borders, and that deterrence between sovcorps is absolute.

We must imagine the LARP boring.

>>17312129
>Wait Zizek thinks democrats cheated too?

it means he also reads Mencious Moldbug

>>16631705
Spanish Curtis Yarvin

>>15967509
this.

he sounded SOOOOO good.

Will the Anglo Liberal establishment come stronger after this or is America going towards the Yugoslav route of extinction?

> I was raised as a scientific atheist, and I’ve never seen the slightest reason to think otherwise. These days I prefer the word “nontheist”—for reasons which will shortly be clear—but there’s no substantive difference at all. Except in the context of role-playing games, I have no interest whatsoever in gods, goddesses, angels, devils, dryads, water elementals, or any such presumed metaphysical being.

Is this what it feels like to attain Dark Enlightenment?

>genius
>self-made millionaire
>award-winning academic
>serial inventor
>one of the greatest living computer scientists
>arguably one of the most influential bloggers of all time
>friends with Peter Thiel
>literally reads encyclopedias for fun
>father of two children, both of whom are also gifted
>predicted current events more than a decade ago with 80%+ accuracy

Why haven't you read Moldbug yet, /lit/?

I had no idea this dude dunks on christianity and religion in general as hard as he does.

i figured the whole extreme rightwing thing meant he'd be anti-science but it's actually the opposite. hes like everything dawkins wishes he was.

it's so invigorating to see.

>>14610117
>he seems more of a history guy rather than a philosophy guy

shame, if i wasn´t familiar of his poetry output, i would´ve think of him as a soulless bugman, did he ever talked about current corporate culture? because i don´t think living in a Google type of state would be my ideal dream nor living in a theocracy authoritarian regime like Abu Dhabi where even making out in public is illegal

As for the rest of these “governments”? In many ways, these agencies really do resemble actual sovereign authorities. This is certainly their formal status. However, if you were to describe them as locally-staffed branches of the State Department, you would be also be grasping at a truth.

The official role of State is not supervisory, but advisory, a distinction we discuss in some detail below. Nonetheless, it is undeniable that the function of a US mission to a non-US country is not comparable to the function of a non-US mission to the US. I am quite confident that the French Embassy, for example, expends very little effort on telling the US how to reform its financial system.

This is all very confusing. What, exactly, is the difference between supervising and advising? Is Washington supposed to be running the world, or isn’t it? Please allow me to explain.

Perhaps you’ve wondered how a perspective that considers “imperialism” and “American exceptionalism” taboos reminiscent of the Big H himself can produce phrases such as:

>The possible decline in America’s power does not mean that the United States would not remain powerful. This country can and must continue to lead.

or, more gloriously (Chauncey Depew would be proud),

>And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of our world: our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.

Is Washington supposed to be ruling the world? Is Washington supposed to be leading the world? Is there a difference between “leading” and “ruling?” If you replace “lead” with “rule” above—a new dawn of American rule is at hand—you definitely don’t have a line that either the President or the Times could be imagined uttering.

So there must be some difference. But what is it?

Clearly, if America “leads,” its relationship with those it is leading must be anything but equal. Neither the Times nor President Obama will tell us that, while America should “lead” Europe, Europe should also “lead” America. Not even such scoundrels can torture English so.

Any unequal relationship between any two parties, be they sovereigns, colleagues or family members, must involve some combination of two models of control. Call them authority and dependence.

>>14580893
>>14580917
>>14581812
>>14586802
damn, call Moldbug now, we need reinforcements

>>14471776
recently i was reading this

https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/08/america-vampire-of-world-part-1/

>>14294896
t.

>>14243679
yes

https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2007/09/how-dawkins-got-pwned-part-1/

can a joint stock corporate state stop the decline of western civilization?

Is there any good opposition to this man or the ideas he draws on?