Live data from Hacker News

Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

newyorker.com

211–220 of 453 posts

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in the US, where a defining characteristic of the population is a belief... that everyone is out to take advantage of you all the time. I mean, living in 2025 America that's not a bad default assumption to make, is it? By default when the solar salesman (or pest control salesman) comes to the door I consider it a scam because it generally is (same for phone sales, and most internet ads). Is everything a scam? No. B…

I have no empirical evidence of this to present, but if you view every transaction as existing on some scale of scam-iness, where one side is you lose your house and wife and kids and the other is an amazing deal for you, the average position on that scale has shifted toward the backside pretty much the entirety of my life. Anything that comes to me first, I pretty much always write off as a scam. Email from someone…

> Did things always feel like this?

My perception is that people always felt like car dealers were scamming them.

BUT people saw opportunity in the big things: education, housing, reward for good work. This is the part that has unraveled. Even public universities are out of reach for much of the middle class (this was not the case as recently as the '70s). We have systematically under built housing for 2 generations, so our job centers are ridiculously expensive. And our business culture has largely de-linked performance and job stability so that well-performing people routinely get laid off for even when their firms are doing well.

It's worth noting here that all of these are enabled by deliberate policy changes that have been enacted since the 1980s.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#212
post #67

One of my favorite things about Curtis Yarvin is that one of his main ideas is laughably easy to prove wrong. He says that whenever we go into the past, the previous generation seems to be more "right-wing" than the current one. Which is almost comically wrong. For example, you get Victorian Era being much more conservative than its predecessor, Georgian Era. Same goes for Christian Roman Empire vs Pagan Roman Empire…

I'm pretty sure he gives those as examples of 'restorations' as exceptions to the general trend of society trending left.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#213
post #188
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a perfectly reasonable request, but I didn't have them. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/15/jd-vance-5... is one, I guess. Aha, https://unherd.com/2024/11/j-d-vance-de-facto-prince-of-the-... says, > Vance has described himself as a “reactionary” at war with the “regime”. He drops casual references to his personal friend Curtis Yarvin, and he’s fond of delivering thunderous pronouncements like “t…

I never quite put it together but Vance worked at Mithril Capital for Peter Thiel. Thiel's other ventures include Palantir, Valar Ventures and he's an investor in Anduril. How can someone be such a diehard Tolkien nerd and endorse government by corporation? Does he think the hero was Saruman?

The fact that he named his surveillance company Palantir tells me that he's got that story flipped around.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#215

[flagged]

You are welcome to defend rising fascism if you want. People will justly criticize you, of course. What happened to intellectual seriousness? Why should you be so frightened of people criticizing you? This is consistent with my expectation of the future of fascism. The appearance of seriousness but once you have a gun pointed in my face the presence of discussion will be dropped in favor of a bullet in my skull.

When it comes to rising fascism, the political mainstream that you so passionately defend and is currently having having apoplectic fits doesn't have the best record, does it?

If you remember the 2000s, there was a great deal of consternation with respect of George Bush, his anti-terrorism laws, etc. He was clearly marked as fascist who was going to establish a dictatorship. That clearly didn't happen.

Meanwhile, after the fascist Bush was overthrown, the Obama administration found it wise to reset relations with the government of Vladimir Putin, which had already invaded neighboring Georgia.

In fact, virtually all the steps in the annihilation of Russian democracy were clearly supported by the political and administrative class that currently seeks to insinuate the present American government is fascist (and in the pay of Putin), going as far back as Yeltsin sending his tanks against parliament in 93.

And that's just a recent example. There are worse ones. If you listen to mainstream political scholarship the Committee for Union and Progress should be the furthest thing from nazi ideology.

Which is why you should be silent in this discussion. Curtis Yarvin may be a fascist, or he may not. In any case, your opinion is just noise. You do not know what fascism is, and neither do the people that form your opinion (the writers in the New Yorker for example).

If you were to support a resistance movement, the government that you would fight to bring about is more likely to engage in ethnic extermination than the "fascist" regime that was overthrown.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#217
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

What makes Scott a crank?

pretending that there's a legitimate, good faith, reasonable-people-can-disagree debate about "race & IQ" is one of the most obvious giveaways.

from January 2025 [0]:

> Richard Lynn was a scientist who infamously tried to estimate the average IQ of every country.

a bit of additional context from Wikipedia [1]:

> Richard Lynn was a controversial English psychologist and self-described "scientific racist" who advocated for a genetic relationship between race and intelligence. He was the editor-in-chief of Mankind Quarterly, a white supremacist journal.

he claims that Lynn's work is still "hotly debated" and links to an article in "Aporia Magazine" which is published by the "Human Diversity Foundation" [2]:

> The Human Diversity Foundation (HDF) is a far-right company founded in 2022 to publish "race science" through the Aporia Magazine and Mankind Quarterly. It also publishes Edward Dutton's The Jolly Heretic podcast. Key persons of the HDF including its founder support remigration and white nationalism.

the role that Alexander plays reminds me of the attempts in the early 2000s to "teach the controversy" [3] about evolution vs. creationism. there is no actual scientific debate, but people with a political axe to grind want to shift the Overton window and give the impression that there is one.

0: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/how-to-stop-worrying-and-le...

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Diversity_Foundation

3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teach_the_Controversy

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#218

Didn't have time to make it through the entire (long winded) article, but is it wrong to boil down his thinking to the simple idea that a benevolent, competent dictator is the best form of government? I ask as this seems like a very simplistic and obvious idea. The problem isn't that this is necessarily incorrect, it is how do you find this mythical figurehead? History has shown that we have never discovered a system…

I'm not an expert on Yarvin's ideas, but have read enough of his stuff to suspect you're not quite representing his position accurately.

In his opinion democracy is flawed in the same way a business owned by all its employees wouldn't have the right incentives to succeed, or how a plane piloted by the collective wisdom of it's passengers likely wouldn't make it very far beyond the runway.

I think his idea is that you want a system which selects a competent individual then align their incentives with the success of the nation. I think he has suggested a system similar to that of a board of directors in a company where the CEO would have executive power, but the board collectively retains the right to oust the CEO.

Whether this would work as a system of government I don't know, but on the face of it I think it would be an interesting experiment. It addresses issues that monarchical and autocratic systems have in that they often don't select for competency and have no checks and balances, while also addressing issues of democracy in that it's hard for leaders to make decisions and that the average voter is about as intelligent as the average person you'll meet on the street.

My guess is that it would be difficult to prevent corruption, but it's not like democracy perfectly solves the issue of corruption. Democratic systems are quite unstable outside the West and monarchy arguably didn't work out terribly for Europe over the centuries. Don't get me wrong, I like democratic systems, but I do think our systems are a little too democratic as it stands. One of the things I like about the US as a Brit is that money plays such a central role in US politics. I think this is the main reason why a US worker doing the same job as me today would receive at least 2x my salary while paying less tax. The economic incentives in US politics are completely different from that of the UK where the average household receives more from the government than they put in.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Understatement of the millenium, but Yarvin has written a lot more than "let's do fascist technocracy!" I find his writing style wastes a lot of one's time and I disagree with him on nearly everything, but there's no denying that there are many interesting ideas in there.

I agree with the other replies that I've never been able to find any interesting ideas amidst his schlock, but I'm wondering what "many interesting ideas" you see, from your prospective? Just a couple examples would be useful. It's totally possible I've missed them because I haven't ever been able to engage with his writing.

He's pretty thoughtful about how power is actually leveraged and has interesting insights around these ideas, particularly areas of democratic failure that I think are worth thinking about. I think his solutions are more questionable, but his writing is at least worth engaging with.

I think people just dismiss him out of hand because he's a political enemy.

Post reply on HN