Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 453 posts

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#341

Post by rendang »

jrflowers wrote: post #307
rendang wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just a preaching-to-the-choir description of the fact that Siskind does not hold 100% to egalitarian leftism. Unless you're already a doctrinaire egalitarian leftist, I don't see why reading this would change your opinion of him by a millimeter

> Unless you're already a doctrinaire egalitarian leftist, I don't see why reading this would change your opinion of him by a millimeter It seems possible that if someone wasn’t familiar with Scott’s position on race science, they could read about his position on race science and then have that influence their opinion of him. Out of curiosity, are you lumping everybody into two groups? The way your sentence was worde…

[flagged]

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#342

Post by animal_spirits »

Hikikomori wrote: post #265
animal_spirits wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yarvin stated in an interview that he barely knows Vance - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcSil8NeQq8&ab_channel=TheIn...

And Trump said he knew nothing about project 2025 before the election. Yarvin has been close to Thiel for many years, is his advisor in some capacity, has invested in Yarvins companies, likely even friends. Vance worked for Thiel and his political career was bankrolled by Thiel. And you believe they barely know each other?

Is it plausible? yes. So far evidence directly from Yarvin contradicts this and there's no hard evidence pointing to them being good buddies so I'm willing to accept his account.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#343

Post by UncleMeat »

freedomben wrote: post #177
UncleMeat wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't like Yarvin's ideas that I've heard, but GP has a point. There's almost no point to posting something that will just get downvoted quickly (which any defense of Yarvin certainly would), regardless of whether it makes any interesting points. Once it's dead it won't get much if any interaction. It's not about being afraid of people criticizing, it's about expending the effort to write a quality comment that won…

Yarvin’s views spread on hackernews and reddit. The world would be a better place if he was just downvoted to hell initially. I will not participate in something that we already know led to harm.

Academics and anti fascist activists should study authoritarians. But in some random web forum the person boosting these ideologies isn’t engaged in any sort of meaningful anti fascism. They are at best a useful rube and at worst genuinely advocating for these illiberal positions.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#344

Post by UncleMeat »

username332211 wrote: post #215
UncleMeat wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, aft…

The US has ample evil within it and has a long history of authoritarian monstrosity. I also spend time and money fighting illiberalism within the existing system.

The problems within the US do not justify constructing a system that has illiberalism as a goal, which will permit no possible internal resistance to authoritarianism.

I am not saying that Yarvin’s state is the only one that will kill me. I am saying that it is substantially more likely to do so.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#345

Post by jrflowers »

rendang wrote: post #341
jrflowers wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unless you're already a doctrinaire egalitarian leftist, I don't see why reading this would change your opinion of him by a millimeter It seems possible that if someone wasn’t familiar with Scott’s position on race science, they could read about his position on race science and then have that influence their opinion of him. Out of curiosity, are you lumping everybody into two groups? The way your sentence was worde…

[flagged]

Thank you for clarifying that you are using the term “doctrinaire egalitarian leftist” to refer to any individual that does not believe in race science, or more specifically any individual that doesn’t agree with Scott Siskind’s position on race science.

I’m personally not super familiar with that label and assumed because of the definitions of those words that it would have some sort of philosophical or ideological connotation — but since a person needn’t be doctrinaire, a philosophical egalitarian, or a leftist to not be a fan of Scott’s blog, when you say “doctrinaire egalitarian leftist” here you mean it like when a Juggalo says somebody isn’t “down with the clowns”

I’d pick another word for non-Codexers or Scott Thots (I’m guessing, I don’t know what label your fandom self-applies here), as someone could mistakenly think that you are trying to make some sort of point. (Which we know that you are not, since your original post was essentially just “Bringing up Scott’s positions on race science won’t change the opinions of the fans of Scott’s positions on race science” just phrased in a maximally-confusing and belabored way)

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#346

Post by disambiguation »

I've never read moldbug but I know people who know people in certain circles - and I can't tell if his ideas genuinely captivate the imagination of the elite, or if he's a kind of Judas goat, because the non-elite are definitely captivated by his ideas. I feel like his work came at a time when the Right lost its core conservative values. Libertarianism was poised as the successor but was defeated, leaving a vacuum for something new. I think yarvin's ideas also satisfies the right's need for something intellectual to stand up to left wing ideology, but there's the possibility that its simply an intellectual trap - consistent and elaborate, but untrue due to false assumptions. Strange times.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#347

Post by UncleMeat »

archagon wrote: post #275
kypro wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

That could all be well and good in a vacuum, but you can't install this kind of system without some serious violence, since a large percentage of the population would not consent to being ruled in such a manner.

Not just install, but maintain.

No surprise that Yarvin’s writing suggests a ton of violence done to undesirables in his system.

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#348

Post by pas »

sanderjd wrote: post #173
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem isn't that this is necessarily incorrect, it is how do you find this mythical figurehead? That's exactly why the idea is incorrect. People wise enough and unbiased enough to be entrusted with unchecked power are few; ones that are incorruptible enough to be trusted with it for long are even fewer. And those who want such power are almost always the people who are least to be trusted with it. So, yeah. T…

Yeah but you've said that the conclusion is correct by rejecting the premise of the question. The conclusion could be correct given the premise, and also it could be moot because the premise is impossible, but those are two different claims. Obviously I agree with you that the proposed system is unworkable because the premise is impossible. (This is a "duh" thing that really isn't worth debating, anyone who fails to…

What moral reasonings (if not utilitarian)?

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#349

Post by pas »

disambiguation wrote: post #346

I've never read moldbug but I know people who know people in certain circles - and I can't tell if his ideas genuinely captivate the imagination of the elite, or if he's a kind of Judas goat, because the non-elite are definitely captivated by his ideas. I feel like his work came at a time when the Right lost its core conservative values. Libertarianism was poised as the successor but was defeated, leaving a vacuum fo…

ideologies usually perform better if they are inconsistent (or "not even wrong" and vague), so they can serve the emotional/rhetorical needs of the group promulgating them, no?

Re: Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

#350

Post by pas »

legitster wrote: post #40

Growing up, one of my criticisms of Orson Scott Card's "Enderverse" was how unrealistic it seemed that children could literally rise to power simply through posting theories and arguments on the internet. How wrong I was.

But who actually did rise to power through posting? Trump inherited money, and spent years as a strange real-estate and projects guy (casinos, university), like Musk, who had more smarts for his projects, and so on.

Well, Hitler and Szálasi (crazy Hungarian Nazi guy) and Lenin/Stalin come to mind as the closest actually, so maybe that's where OSC got the idea.

Hm, now I'm curious who was the youngest elected head of state...

edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_youngest_state_leade...

Post reply on HN