Essential Moldbug Thread

>eugenics is a subversive ugly people agenda to try and get back at the prettier people of the world?

It's definitely appreciated by ugly people, I tell you that, the examples are vast.

I don't really think they are trying to get back at the prettier people, they just want to make sure most people will look good. Being ugly makes you appreciate beauty even more than good looking people, because it's something you never had and will never have.

Homo conservatives will say you're trying to immanentize the eschaton, but that's a stupid catchphrase, there's literally nothing wrong with eugenics.

>I am not a progressive, but I'm not a conservative either. (If you must know, I'm a Jacobite.)

what a cringey twat

>socialmatter.net/2015/11/14/a-letter-to-france/

Why do you think so? Doesn't really match his style, although I don't even think he has a style after reading that Atlantic article.

You know you can sweat through deodorant, right? If you're an anxious, autistic mess, it's almost impossible not to.

What's your mix bro?

55% Italian, 25% Slav (Croat), 15% Portuguese and 5% Native Brazilian. Not good! I look like the Bogdanoff twins after plastic surgery.

And you?

get over it faggot you wouldn't be so pathetic if you weren't a self hating looser. 99% of people hate the way they look. I'm a mestizo, do I wish I had fair skin with a rock hard jaw and blue eyes? you bet I do but I'm not crying about it like a little bitch and wishing Id never been born does nothing.

And what do you do? I'm a 25 year old incel who hates living.

I'm very functional, I've been working for 6 years, already graduated, own my own apartment, but I don't even try to ask girls out because of my ugliness. I live in an almost all white city with a lot of White Chads that cuck me just by looking at my direction.

I will listen to your advice.

Not bad. I'm 40% Irish, 30% German, 10% Cherokee, 18% Cocker Spaniel, and 2% whole milk.

>South Europeans are "race" now
What the fuck, Brazil? Also, "Slavs" is a lingustic entity. And Italians aren't ethnically homogeneous.

It's from Northern Italy (the ones who came to Brazil). Blue eyes, dark blonde hair, big nose etc.

All I can say it's not a good mix. Avoid at all costs.

Kant died a virgin, I seriously doubt he looked good.

do what I told you what to do faggot
GET OVER IT
if your problem is something with a solution like being fat then just get in shape
If you can't fix it then don't worry about it because you can't do shit
getting a girlfriend won't make you happy if you are still a self hating looser
the only thing that makes you a self hating looser is yourself

Why would you not go for the much more obvious example of Hegel?

>if your problem is something with a solution like being fat then just get in shape

No, I'm in good shape.

How do I stop hating myself?

>reading that Atlantic article.
link?

>How do I stop hating myself?
I presume from what you mentioned, you mainly hate yourself because of girls.

Trust with all your heart, there is/are a girl/s out there that you can mutually love, you may just have to lower your standards a bit. Search for some happiness, and build upon it day by day, it will be more difficult to find a loving partner if you hate yourself, and get into this habit, and do no accept yourself... you must accept yourself. You didnt choose how you look, noone wants to hear this but it could always be worse. Have hope for the future!

Moldbug patented work that telecom companies picked up when he was 19

how have you justified your existence?

>justifying existence

theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/behind-the-internets-dark-anti-democracy-movement/516243/

>“Think you should speak directly to my WH cutout / cell leader,” Yarvin said in an email. “I've never met him and don't know his identity, we just DM on Twitter. He's said to be ‘very close’ to Bannon. There are several levels, but most people just start out with his public persona.” @BronzeAgePerv’s avatar is of a muscular, shirtless man and his account’s biography reads: “Steppe barbarian. Nationalist, Fascist, Nudist Bodybuilder! Purification of world. Revolt of the damned. Destruction of the cities!”

>“I know nothing about BAP personally, except that he lifts. DM him. He may not give you any info but he always responds,” Yarvin said. “Apparently there's a big underground movement of right-wing bodybuilders -- thousands. Their plan is to surface spectacularly this April, in a choreographed flash demo on the Mall. They'll be totally nude, but wearing MAGA hats. Goal is to intimidate Congress with pure masculine show of youth, energy. Trump is said to know, will coordinate with powerful EOs…”

It astounds me that this is played completely straight in the article. The writer had to have known he was joking, right?

Yes, the writer mentioned Moldbug was trying to troll her, that's why she didn't try to talk to BAP.

So what you're saying is discounted memes like social darwinism and eugenics are picked up by frogmen because they're frustrated with the world and want to be iconoclastic, and they never develop any more nuance because they never interact with real people in real life?

That sounds about right, actually.

>Austrian economics

giddings right?

Go see a therapist

>How do I stop hating myself?
get off Veeky Forums for starters.

>discounted memes like social darwinism and eugenics
How is capitalism not social darwinism?
How is Evolution not eugenics?

This is actually very good advice.

Sadly you can never leave this place.

DAE love drump and hate women??

>How is Evolution not eugenics?
One's natural selection and relatively random, one's artificial and based on whatever's currently en vogue with the ruling powers

I don't particularly care for him. He's a blogger, not an academic who writes with any honesty or integrity, so his texts are a little pudgy to me.

Would be nice if the NRx movement had intellectual heavyweights.

>He's a blogger, not an academic who writes with any honesty or integrity, so his texts are a little pudgy to me.

All academics write with honesty and integrity now, do they?

Sounds like this lowly blogger hit a nerve so you're fleeing back to the tower to try and forget him.

A poor response.

It was a poor response to a poor post desu

This. What did you expect me to go with here? You said nothing more than "his texts are a little pudgy" by way of criticism.

What the fuck does that even mean, really?

What did you expect me to reply? To answer your initial post: 'No, and no.'

>You said nothing more than "his texts are a little pudgy" by way of criticism.

I said he lacked integrity and honesty.

You could have actually cited examples to support your reasoning, your entire """criticism""" stank of elitist dismissal.

>I said he lacked integrity and honesty.

You say this as though it's naturally evinced somehow. How? How have you come about this conclusion?

Use your words, lad.

Not an argument

I came to the conclusion long before I wanted to post about him on Veeky Forums. I'm sorry I didn't write an essay for you when I decided I had more important things to read (and write about) than Moldbug.

Wow this is like the worst response you could've ever given here.

It's "I'M A PSEUD AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO REPLY TO THIS FAIR REQUEST" written out in passive aggressive dismissal.

Fuckin yikes, bruv.

It was pretty obviously just a throw-away post, not really trying to convince anyone that my opinion was right. I don't care if anyone reads Moldbug or not.

I didn't know my post would invite the wrath of Moldbug's Number One and Number Two Fan.

I didn't come into the thread wanting to write a long-form, well-evidenced critique of Moldbug. It's not a fair request to ask me for one now.

Do you just type things because you think they sound right, even if they're inaccurate or misrepresentative? You've done it three posts in a row now. No wonder you like Moldbug.

>I didn't know my post would invite the wrath of Moldbug's Number One and Number Two Fan.

HAHAHA. All either of us have asked for is for you to cite an example or two so we can see how you've reached your conclusion about him. Something substantive. Anything. You demand your arrogant quips should go unchecked by user? Are you serious?

And how you're imploding like the fuckin try hard posturing ass you are. Get rekt.

I'll direct you back until you do it:
>You could have actually cited examples to support your reasoning

Cite something, please. Show your working or you'll have to do your homework over again.

If only you were this critical of Moldbug you'd want to find better writers.

>I didn't come into the thread wanting to write a long-form, well-evidenced critique of Moldbug.

We aren't asking for a bloody dissertation. It could be a single paragraph if it's a good insight. You're trying to spin this into some massive unfair demand on you because you were playing the haughty elitist but have fuck all to say behind that. Admit it, already.

I probably would have if you didn't sperg out in your first response. Now I just don't want to see any more of your embarrassing posts.

P S E U D
S
E
U
D

You're a fuckin joke, cunt.

Haughty elitist? I just said I don't care for him because he's not a convincing writer. That's literally it. I don't have to give evidence of the times he hasn't convinced me of his point. Do you want to give it a shot and convince me where he has failed or something? I have no idea why you're even talking to me.

Maybe you wouldn't want to say that if you realised how much it truly hurts my feelings to read.

Read him for the primary sources he links to.

Why are you even still posting in this thread after being this exposed? I feel bad for you.

In retrospect it's hilarious that your critiques of him were related to "integrity" and "honestly", when you will seemingly do anything to dodge even the most basic explanation of your thought when pressed.

Try writing something like CPR and see if you have time for pussy.

Yes you exposed how I didn't want to convince anyone of my opinion so I didn't attempt to. Good job.

It would be dishonest and a lack of integrity if I tried to convince anyone of my point because I haven't read all of Moldbug. Nitpicking a few quotes only for them to be nitpicked again is not my idea of honest discussion full of integrity so I avoided it.

Nothing wrong with that.

Like I said it was a throw-away post so have your last word and call me a pseud and I'll call you autistic. I just hope you are equally as critical of Moldbug when you next read him. What evidence does he omit? Etc.

it's gay that we're allowed to talk about mencius moldbug but icycalm threads get deleted

>elitist

Not saying anything about the user being called elitist, but the word itself really shouldn't be used as an insult.

Elitism is the desire to be the best, or associate with the best (as in art or culture), so shouldn't that be something we all aspire to?

Maybe you posters meant the word "snob".

It was feigned elitism on his part: he was all hot air and he knew it. That's why he chose to reply with anything but an explanation for the position he initially took.

It was some guy LARPing elitism, if anything.

>Moldbug doesn't convince me, I think he's full of hot air
>PROVE IT OR YOU'RE FULL OF HOT AIR

It wouldn't matter if I proved it anyway since there have been multiple times you've demonstrated your inability to read in tandem with your willingness to say shit that isn't accurate just because it makes you feel good when you type it.

>Moldbug doesn't convince me, I think he's full of hot air
>PROVE IT OR YOU'RE FULL OF HOT AIR

Are you fucking delusional? Of course this is how it is.

If you think he's full of hot air, give a substantive explanation as to why. FAILING THAT, you are also full of hot air. See how simple this is? And the fact that it's been like 10 replies now and you still haven't even put forward so much as a single decent paragraph yet to finally shut me up really does lend credence to the fact that you might indeed be full of hot air, no?

You're greetexting shit that is actually right lmao what are you even doing anymore?

>If you think he's full of hot air, give a substantive explanation as to why. FAILING THAT, you are also full of hot air. See how simple this is?

Idiot, no. Withholding an explanation is not the same as not having an explanation. I've already explained to you why I haven't given you one. But hey, you can't read.

just imagine the quality explanation you could have provided with all the time you've spent here shitposting to inflate your ego :^)

It would have been dishonest and without integrity for reasons I have already explained. But hey, you can't read.

previous 7 posts are autism

>I've already explained to you why I haven't given you one.

Yeah yeah you don't want to write an essay I heard that line for what it was back when you posted it. All user wants now is one decent paragraph and still you can't even give user that much.

You are putting time into replying still but you are somehow too busy for one lone paragraph? My noggin is so jogged by your odd time constraints, man you must really be a hyper genius or something! What a way 2 b.

I see that you can't read.

>Would be nice if the NRx movement had intellectual heavyweights.
I think some of their ideas could've been interesting, and I suppose some are. But they are not as intelligent as they like to present themselves.
I tried reading Moldbug, my complains are:
- He takes way too long to get his point across
- Reading the anti-reactionary faq it seems their ideas are build on falsehoods
- Too much rhetoric and very dorky

I thought Nick Land is slightly better.

People say all the time that his prose is too long-winded, but I never had a problem following along with it. Land actually seems more dense and pseudo-intellectual in his verbiage.

>It would be dishonest and a lack of integrity if I tried to convince anyone of my point because I haven't read all of Moldbug.

So you treat the excerpts that drove you to this conclusion. You really think you can't even put forward so much as a single paragraph defending your position because you haven't read ALL of him?

Everything about you is smoke and mirrors. You're a bullshit artist, mate. You like to move the goal posts around as it suits you: you're fine with publicly decrying your perceived lack of integrity on his part, but then you get defensive and coy and all of a sudden it's a lack of integrity on your part to simply explain yourself.

You're a fuckin bullshit artist. Biggest pseud on this board right now.

Yeah this is what I got out of my reading, same with ranking Land slightly higher.

I've only read some of the (first) introductory blog post and some other comments here and there. I haven't seen anything that suggests Moldbug has actually done research on how aristocracies have functioned (and behaved) but they have not been paragons of bourgeois morality.

He uses a lot of words in his points but is not careful with their usage so it's really a waste, and when he comes to define 'church' as a body that spreads misinformation you're not really sure how that makes sense, because it doesn't exhaust any details or explore contentious points.

Also I'm never really sure if he himself is spreading misinformation because while he does cite evidence, he doesn't seem to be aware of any counter-evidence existing. I'd have a better time reading him if he at least acknowledged it exists instead of -- how it appears -- him waiting for the evidence to be presented.

I can see how he is popular though.

I think denseness is kind of fun to read unlike Moldbug's non-jokes. It can be a handful though. I tried for 10 minutes to dissect a post on here the other day describing neocameralism because the terms weren't qualified with any information, like it was presumed I should know them.

Like I said, not trying to convince anyone.

I can't believe I just witnessed a 15 post argument over the quality of a writer wherein no discussion of the writing itself took place

Not trying to rationally defend your own assertions, either.

I guess you're just too smart for that. Right?

What gives you that idea?

I tried reading some older Moldbug and holy crap, people call liberals smug but this guy is so far up his own ass that he views himself as some kind of autist-messiah and unironically uses the matrix redd pill meme. Nick Land is clearly insane but at least he's interesting. Moldbug's version is literal mary sue ideology, when I first heard of neoreaction I thought it would be like some badass neo-mediaval shit made by huge men with beards. but nope it's an ideology where pasty autist silicon valley techno nerds rule society, gee I wonder why he came up with that.

Witcher: The Government

>Land actually seems more dense and pseudo-intellectual in his verbiage.
I've seen Land's older work and was put off, it is what I call 'postmodern' writing. Whatever it is fair or not to call it that, for me it takes too long to decypher. I am more of a Veeky Forums with a bit of Veeky Forums, and the time spend learning to decypher it and understand could be used reading other books.
So I've read his "Dark Enlightenment" and a few of his blogposts and they were okay.
The little that I know of Moldbug (admitted) he seems to argue that progressivism is puritanism in disguise. Philosopher John Gray has a similar view. I would personally want to look at it from a psychological perspective: the same psychological processes that are behind religion are behind ideology and non-ideology is simply impossible. And it seems reasonable to think that past ways of thinking creep into current thinking.

Then there is the Cathedral. I don't doubt there is some kind of self-selection process going on that makes the media a-like in views. Though I do think that they take the idea of the Cathedral too far.

Then there's human biodiversity, which from a biological perspective could make sense but is of course is also controversial. However it seems that it really is just the same old 'whites' vs 'the lesser races' in disguise.

Since I am not fully immersed into NRx maybe I am wrong, so please point that out.

>willingly scooping yourself out of an interview with the leader of the bronzed ab death squads
Wewlantic

>discounted memes
Something being discounted doesn't make it false. Heliocentrism and hand washing were also discounted in their early years.

>I could but now I'm not going to
You could save yourself a lot of pain if you just admitted that you made a claim without being able to back it up.

>However it seems that it really is just the same old 'whites' vs 'the lesser races' in disguise.
What if that's true though? It certainly makes sense that the further a population is from the equator the more logic and forethought would be required to survive winter and train your children to be capable of doing so. Your skin would also tend to be whiter to absorb more sunlight. Is it then surprising that the highest IQ people would be snowniggers and the lowest IQ people dark coloured gentlemen? I mean, what if it's true? Surely that's a better place to look than whether it's politically taboo. At one point copernicanism and atheism were taboo, but they turned out to be true. At one point Bolshevism hijacked Russia and people started believing Lysenkoism. It's possible for innovative new thought to be nonsense, for taboo thought to be true and for currently unfashionable views to be true.

Another point would be that NRxers fap to Singapore, a multicultural Asian commercial powerhouse. So they're not exactly old school white nationalists who want segregation of white people. They want exit of all intelligent, law abiding people to refuges like Silicon Valley, Japan, Shanghai, Hong Kong. Nick Land, for example, mentioned in a tweet lately that the Vietnamese obviously don't cause trouble in Paris.

And what if it's true? If you believe in egalitarianism if makes no difference, same reason why you still support retarded people. If you already hate blacks and believe in an in-elegatarian society, you don't need any further scientific justification. In the old world there was never any real justification for the existence of aristrocrats aside from some religious bumbo jumbo, it was just the way things are.

I have an ecological/biological background. So it absolutely does makes sense for populations to have adaptations to the environment. But it does not make sense to group people together with skin color. You can have distinctions between populations, but not based on skin color.

Additionally, I find it doubtful that past adaptations matter in our current environment.

>If you believe in egalitarianism if makes no difference
>If you already hate blacks and believe in an in-elegatarian society, you don't need any further scientific justification.

You say it as if prejudice is the only distinction, and the science of the matter is meaningless.

How much do Moldbug and Land differ in their stance on human biodiversity? It seems Land is more of a "intelligence supremacist" if I can call it that.
While with Moldbug I am unsure.

>Nick Land, for example, mentioned in a tweet lately that the Vietnamese obviously don't cause trouble in Paris.

They did cause lots of trouble in New York though: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_to_Kill_(gang)

>It certainly makes sense that the further a population is from the equator the more logic and forethought would be required to survive winter and train your children to be capable of doing so.

That doesn't explain why Mesopotamia, Indus Valley, China, Egypt, Greece, Rome, all supported massive civilizations while Northern Europeans were messing around in huts and being scattered about by Steppe horsemen who presumably also faced the same harsh winters. There were no pristine civilizations that appeared independently in Europe; everything was imported.

Also if you're living off the land in Africa you're not exactly letting your dumbest survive.

And presumably the average IQ was pretty low in Europe when it was a shithole.

The science is meaningless because in an anti-egalitarian society, there is no meritocratic justification for the social order. This is ultimately an ideal derived from modern democracy and I think it's ultimately incompatible with a fundamentally undemocratic, reactionary ideology. Here again to me there is the obvious flaw of NRx, the fusion of oldschool, anti democratic values and weird modern silicon valley ideology that just do not mix.