/polpol/ - Politically Incorrect Discussion

I think reaction and neoreaction are on the whole as different from one another as conservatives and neoconservatives and largely for the same reasons. One is largely spiritual and essentially conservative in character while the other is materialistic and largely progressive in character.

I like reactionary writers and most of the ideals neoreactionaries follow, but most self-described neoreactionaries and neoreactionary reading are pretty fucking stupid. There's a general lack of real intellect, a mass simplification of issues and just a lot of low-tier writing, concept introduction and idiotic assumptions. There's a few good pieces worth sticking around for, but the quality ratio is quite poor.

I also kind of reject the term of Neoreactionary, and what it claims, much like I would reject the term "Neo-Nazi"/Neonazism, because the core conceits have not changed. The fight for national autonomy, rejection of usury, and strengthening of people has not stopped or changed, and the ideology hasn't changed. The enlightenment ideals reactionaries were against back in the day are still being carried out and have the same forms today as they did back then. "Neo" implies some resuscitation or new shifts in ideals, and this has yet to occur either in the case of National Socialism or Reactionary theory.

Also, I didn't know Moldburg was alive, I though he was a classic writer like Spengler or Evola.

>>15035

An incredible amount of fluff and posturing to hide that fact that their very simple ideas are incredibly stupid.

>>15035

I'm grateful to the NRx "community" for introducing me to a lot of thinking that I otherwise would likely never have read. That being said, the whole scene isn't something I'd be interested in hitching my wagon to.

As for the NRx ideas themselves… it's a mix of good and bad. Digging out the good from the bad is worth it, imo, however.

Someone explain to me why people feel the need to ad Neo- to existing ideologies. It just makes them seem like a watered down version of the original. Which it usually is.

>>15258

With jews, you lose

>>15258

It's usually used to indicate some new shift, some fresh take that revitalizes and ultimately changes an ideology or concept. I think Neopaganism would be the best example, because you're taking beliefs that have been forgotten and out of human experience for thousands of years, and were built for man in a physically harsher and more direct age and are refitting them for the dying modern world. Neoreaction whilst not bad, doesn't diverge very far from original reactionary ideals and is really just a codeword for a network of true right and traditionalist bloggers on the internet, with a few hardcore monarchyfags involved.

Put briefly, 'neoreactionaries' bring up some good points but a lot of it is watered down by unnecessary theoretical debates which are narrow in scope and have a limited impact on influencing politics in the real world.

That said, in a very short amount of time these writers have been able to spread their ideals across the internet, however Gawker and these other radical leftist news publications are much more influential.

>>15035

It's amusing to read if you're in the mood to digest something excessively verbose, but in the end it's all just bloviation.

They never do anything but talk at great length, if you want to see a movement that actually get something done, even a pack of straight up Australian bogans like "Stand Up For Australia" are doing more.

It doesn't matter how intelligent you are if it never manifests into real world action.

They're not "reactionaries". They're libertarians trying to rebrand, and Lovecraft, a real reactionary, would have despised them.

Moldbug changed his name because Curtis Yarvan would immediately have been identified as a shill with his needlessly long proselytizing that pretends to make a deep intellectual point but ultimately only obfuscates the real issue - that communism, progressivism and feminism were largely Jewish ideologies pushed onto western society.

that being said, there have been some interesting writers to come out of NRx so it's not a complete loss.

Neoreactionaries have basically the same mentality, the same reasoning as Libertarians. Libertarians roughly work from

>material/physical well-being is important above all else

>capitalist economics lead to better material well-being

>therefor we should be governed entirely by economy

Neoreactionaries are a bit more nuanced and sensible, because they think about larger societal function, giving man purpose and all that, but the underlying mentality is still the same.

>physical/societal well being is important above all else

>monarchism/minarchism/neofeudalism/aristocratic what-have-youism is the most efficient way to govern society and give people some higher goal to motivate them

>therefor we should implement this system

On this, they may be right, and I can't necessarily think "it works" as a poor reason to use a system, but it spits in the face of real reactionaries. It's tradition without values, morals without belief. Same as with libertarianism, communism and all other bullshit modern ideologies, it has no higher ideals to strive for, merely the efficient continuation of the human race. The neoreactionaries that claim to be/are christian, catholic, pagan, etc, speak of it as a effective method to keep communities together, or rulers in inarguable positions, rather than anything resembling true faith. That's why very few of them read actual reactionary writers and stick to moldbug and their blog cicle jerk, beyond a few quips and Spengler and lip service to "riding the tiger".

My point is, there's some good work in "neoreactionary" on a technical level, but it is more of a pretentious circlejerk than anything resembling actual reactionary readings or ideals.

fascism for pussies and jews

nobody needs it

its also fedorable as fuck

>>15777

The other problem is that they're reactionary. They react to things, the don't act on things. Reactionaries are the objects in a sentence, they're never the subjects. That's why they aren't popular, they're the goalie not the star player.

>>15035

The formalist theory of power, while not completely Moldbug's, was greatly clarified and expounded by him. Being so well read he sort of summoned the idea back from the dead, and his writings on this are IMO the best political writing in our lifetime, and will probably continue to grow in influence and be remembered for a long time. I've a lot of people say that hes too materialistic, and I agree, however his analysis and deconstruction of the "Cathedral" is masterful and should not be dismissed.

With that being said, Nrx is nothing more than a Moldbug cargo cult.

>>15777

Libertarians believe that goodwill, charity, morals, strong community, etc. complement economic prosperity, instead of being determined by economy or state. Moral strength has persisted in nearly every economy and regime and time period if it is practiced with enough vigilance. There is the guard at Pompeii who defended his post until his death, the Ukrainian christians who maintained their faith while being starved and tortured in Gulag death camps, etc. Morals are also a function of the individual, laws that contradict public morals are ultimately unenforceable and significant change in a people's beliefs or principles happens at a grassroots level instead of top down. Rome being Christianized was due to christians spreading the good news, it was later hijacked by the Roman government to get their populations under control and evolved into the corrupt charlatan abuse of Christianity known as the Catholic Church. No matter how much you idealize monarchs or aristocrats, trusting the state with determining public values and "higher goals" is fucking stupid and sets a precedent for totalitarianism. There is no ideology that provides an easy solution to morals or lackthereof, it begins and ends with the individual and his convictions. So find your principles and maintain them at all cost and opposition, and talk to others about doing the same, surrendering principles to the state renders you barely more than a slave.