When will the world recognize the genius of Nick Land?

Because he's a neoreactionary? Also, he's a really great philosopher and had a name for himself long before NRx was even a thing.

I never understood that quote.

I guess it's about exhibiting dismissive behaviour towards the feeling of urgency people most often get in relation to time, particularly the future. It seems that Nick Land knows many edges.

>the genius of Nick Land knows many edges
fixed

>Nick Land is very edgy

Fixed.

>Because he's a neoreactionary?

I wonder when he will blow the lid off the Fenno-Korean hyperwar cover up

Nobody will ever truly understand him but us.

disgusting

What's disgusting?

it's poor masturbation material

how triggered he is over a literal meme pic right now

Funny he deleted his post.

Has anyone here actually read Fanged Noumena? I'm about 80% of the way through, and it's obvious he's brilliant by 30% when it becomes apparent (retrospectively) he's started using drugs. He also pretty much predicts/explains neoreaction.

"The medico-security apparatus knows that schizos are not going to climb back obediently into the Oedipal box." -Land, Circuitries

Although D&G are basically required reading to get the most out of the middle essays.

archive.org/stream/the-silicon-ideology#page/n0/mode/2up
read this, it's really really bad

literally who?

Once his predictions become too obvious to ignore.

Wonder what his thoughts about Raptor Jesus are

just another alt-right blogger spouting Veeky Forums memes for more views from /pol/yps

someone shoot this fag

hmm...

>Nick Land
>alt-right

He's actually a communist.

nrx is just the psued version of the alt-right

Here we go again...

NRx is the Chad version of alt-right

they're fundamentally opposed

Actually it's exactly the opposite

Lol yeah because NRx is actually a communist ideology

If you want a genuine right wing philosopher y'all should check out Slavoj Zizek

Anyone who believes this is downright retarded.
This is also wrong. There's huge overlap between the two.

Nick Land is like Zizek on steroids but Zizek will always overshadow him because he pretends to be a leftist.

it's hard to get more autistic than nrx

So much this.

Not being a leftist renders you fringe and "not worth anyone's attention" by default.

Nick Land is a pseud because he apparently takes Cantorian set theory seriously.

What about Sonic fans?

>There's huge overlap between the two.
they're still opposed
alt right wants to control the Cathedral, NRx wants to destroy it

Zizek is a leftist, even if he is becoming more and more distanced from the mainstream progressive attitude of the left. He just thinks they aren't self-aware enough in acknowledging the failures of the leftist project

Those on his right accuse him of being a stalinist, and those in the regressive left accuse him of being a cryptofascist. Both perceptions aren't much more than weak caricatures of his actual arguments

What's his opinion on the communist party in China?

he lives in China my dude

Ah, then he must love it.

>As a Sinophile, and even (far more reservedly) a sympathizer with the post-Mao PRC regime

Well that's why I ask.

the Red Dwarf episode 'Back to reality' will answer any and all questions you could have about Nick Land

...

>There's huge overlap between the two.
no idea where this comes from
they're both right wing ideologies with a racial element to them but the similarities end there

You don't need to be a liberal to be a leftist you dumb shit

Zizek is left of Tumblr straw-women in his rejection of identity politics

Land loves China for its authoritarian and meritocratic nature. It's the closest to his ideal that exists.

As far as I can tell, Land generally rejects racism and aristocracy because he believes them to be impediments to effective governance comparable to the empowerment of the masses, something he opposes.

the Landian/neoreactionary ideal is small, non-demotist city states
Hong Kong and Singapore are much more like this than China
while he admires China, he doesn't see it as perfect
he doesn't reject racism so much as he rejects white nationalism (but not on moral grounds)

In what way does he reject aristocracy?

Don't expect land to be summed up by any retard here.

He rejected aristocracy only insofar as it's not a "cold" system dynamic. Alright be does recognize it's use as a "hot " system dynamic.

Also his view has changed over time. He went from: " we must foster amazon warriors for only they can dismantle capitalist patriarchy!"
To "humans are getting in the way of intellectual rizomatic accumulation, we need beasts of prey who will accelerate the death drive of humanity. Crypto currency and A.I. not cathedrals and (((university))) okay?"

>" we must foster amazon warriors for only they can dismantle capitalist patriarchy!"
He was never like this.

soon...
Secession is starting to definitely becoming an undeniable word in contemporary politics.
Nobody would've imagined 10 years ago,when globalization meant ever larger political blocks competing between themselves

meant to post this too:
wsj.com/articles/catalonian-separatists-hope-brexit-fallout-will-spur-their-secession-from-spain-1466783915?mod=e2fb

I don't think he believes in genetic inferiority. He sees all poor people as equally worthless.

He's anti-Semitic, but hates Jews based on his perception of their collective behavior and doesn't seem to bear any grudge against individual Jews. He's staunchly against any kind of genocide.

He likes hierarchy but doesn't believe it should be based on descent.

>"Victorious third world struggles, so long as they have been successfully localized, do not lead to realistic post-capitalist achievements, and certainly not to post-patriarchal ones, since the conversation of the form of the nation state is itself enough to guarantee the reinsertion of a society into the system of inhibited synthesis. For as long as the dynamic of guerrilla war just leads to new men at the top . . . History will continue to look bleak. For it is only when the pervasive historical bond between masculinity and war is broken by effective feminist violence that it will become possible to envisage the uprooting of the patriarchal endogamies that orchestrate the contemporary world order . . . But the only conceivable end of Kantianism is the end of modernity, and to reach this must foster new Amazons in our midst"

From " Kant, capital, and the prohibition of invest: a polemical introduction to the configuration of philosophy and modernity"

Lots more shit in there too. Encourages and justifies feminist violence. Borderlines on identitarian bullshit throughout.

It's like a 30 year old essay though.

He had changed a lot. Was still a professor probably when he wrote this.

Ahh yes. I recall him implying he was a little ashamed of this essay, now I realize why.

what did he mean by this?

>Accented
Kill urself my man

>it's a Nick calls /pol/ niggers edition
>it's a Nick laughs at the suffering of Venezuelans episode
>it's a Nick calls the Koch brothers cucks episode
>it's a Nick labels abortion as the "mass extermination of Untermenschen-Kinder"
>it's a Nick tries to understand EVE Online episode
why's he so funny bros

Here's how it actually goes:
>NRx
Autistic IT guys that love chinamen, probably will buy chinese bride at 30s then pay alimony once she cucks them
>alt-right
normalfag memers with no actual convictions or knowledge, syncretic and unpredictable.
>frogtwitter
Esoteric far right Chads

What was it?

So is Land's techno accelerationism and antihumanism a kind of autistic crypto-misanthropism? He doesn't seem to like humanity of any kind all that much.

He's always going on about "monkey business" and in the video where he explains tech secessionism he's pretty clearly drunk, and discusses how "hot" (in the McLuhan sense?) (ie humanism, populism, family ties, loyalty, idealism in general) as opposed to "cold" are just the result of billion-year evolutionary processes. Is he trying to trigger a xenocidal death drive?

I can't tell if his vagueness on this is just the result of drug use or if his silence means doesn't want to let the cat out of the bag. Whenever directly questioned on it he doesn't respond.

lol

yeah, he pretty much want's to encourage scenarios where game theory ensures we create a malevolent god to destroy us

>He's staunchly against any kind of genocide.
>Wants all of humanity to be killed by AI

that's different, it's speciescide and an impartial one at that.

>He's anti-Semitic
he really isn't

also pretty sure his wife and therefore children are Jewish

Do you even read his blog? He praised the coincidence detector and reposts antisemitic articles regularly.

Source?

what is this nigga even talking about lol

He's a very elaborate memer then

Has anyone read his short fiction? I was thinking about reading his two horror novellas

BAZINGA

I don't think he is anti human in the anti nat or depressive nihilist fashion. I think his (very idealist Hegelian although they never like to admit it) deluzian concept of intelligence as a form of capital like accumulation takes place in many "modes"; the hot/cold societies being one, but now the internet, and capitalism itself in its own way; all essentially mean that "pfft nothing personal kid" humans are just a hardware for intelligence gathering that will quickly become outdated (by A.I. (*cough* absolute spirit*cough*) or whatever)
Societies are just the patches we apply to update the process and try to keep humanity comparative but garbage time is running out and monkeys who like to dance the virtue signifier dance, or dues vault, or jerk it to Jew brain control porn so end up obsolete in the long run.

It's not a good or bad thing for him, so I don't think it's correctly "anti-human"; but maybe "none-human" or "un-human" (not human centric, but coming from a human) perhaps.

This

he thinks that prominent Jews make it easy to be antisemitic but that most Jews are perfectly normal
it's just more tribal nonsense to him

Just like most great thinkers: after his death.

>muh intelligence optimization

Actually he is brilliant, but he avoids talking about Aristotle even though that's the most obvious point of entry in hindsight.

Plato too I've noticed.

He does talk an awful lot about teleology though, possibly something he picked up from Aristotle.

Do you even read his blog? It's pretty obvious he's not anti-Semitic. His praise for the coincidence detector is for different reasons than anti-Semitism altogether, and he links anti-Semitic articles because he's not a whiny leftist bitch.

Also, his wife is Jewish.

Do you have a source on his wife being Jewish? Also, I'm not saying he is antisemitic but I don't think his wife being Jewish would contradict his hypothetical version of antisemitism seeing as how it'd be a general distaste against the actions of Jews and not individual Jews.

I think it's something he picked up from D&G; he proposes "teleoplexy" as opposed to teleology, but I'm not sure what the difference is supposed to be. Like many continental philosophers his knowledge has depth but lacks breadth. I also want him to stumble on Augustine but instead he got all excited over John Calvin instead.

How do you think?

His wife is Anna Greenspan.

I think it's more a general distaste against the action of humans than Jews specifically. You could make the anti-human claim stick.

I don't see any evidence they're married but I'll take your word on it. I see where you're coming from but he does seem to be of the opinion that Jews are *especially* or disproportionately destructive. He's always vague about what he really believes though, so maybe I'm wrong.

By right of conquest, Land must submit.

It's over for NRX, they can't recover from this.

>1 like after 2 months
>ALL JEWS EVERYWHERE HATE WHITE PEOPLE

It's amazing how media illiterate some people are. Please return to /pol/. Or, if you'd like to stay, give serious consideration to the idea that you're wrong about nearly everything.