I am an Aristocratic Egalitarian/‘neoreactionary’ because of Curt Doolittle. He has by far the most well developed piece of work in the Dark Enlightenment. I had developed a good amount of the Burkean sentinments myself and from Taleb, but I wasn’t quite sure. Moldbug tipped me over, and then I found Aristocratic Egalitarianism. I’m probably somewhere between Thiel, John Gray,Taleb, Curt. + Influences from Machiavelli and Isaiah Berlin. With Elizier and Robin as well of course.
If you want a coherent framing point that is articulate, well stated, and non-obscurant Aristocratic Egalitarianism is it. You don’t have to have hate in your heart to be NRx. It can be forward and positive, and it is mostly. However, before that it is.… ‘sober’. There is no eliteness without appreciation and paternalism. It’s not people’s fault for how nature rolled the dice for them and it wasn’t say high intelligence or executive functioning; no matter what the kids say. Being blessed with a lot of ability comes with the responsibility and that also means that people who are very intelligent but do not have responsibility are strictly looked down on in my point of view.
If it helps, I used to be an ultra-leftist & I’m not white and I can accept what every one is saying. Nyan/Nick Land is a good example of forward looking persons. Check out nickbsteves, and the people over at Social Matter.
By the way, the futarchy is way less cogent as a viewpoint than any of the plural viewpoints in ‘NRx’. I chose to reframe around Curt because he can just say it and get it over with. He has convinced me of how class, race, and environmental value loading deeply influences the way you state things. I must insist every one check out his work.
NRx—Outer Right/New Right/Vague, fluid, and shifting community of associates, including people who do not like the term ‘neoreaction’. Alternate Name: Antiquarian Modernism via Nick Land @ xenosystems.
Everything else: http://www.propertarianism.com/glossary/
The point isn’t that I can’t figure out who Burke happens to be when I run a google search. The point is that it would be possible for you to write in a way that easier to understand for everyone instead of Moldbuggese.
Burke is an extremely famous author and people use Burke all the time. Edmund Burke. People do NOT use Akrasia/In-group/outgroup/status/ all the other absurdities. If you can’t be expected to figure it out it’s your fault.
My writing style is completely different than Moldbug’s. But my utter distaste for those posers that represent such hubris considering themselves so advanced in knowledge above most other people, but cannot be expected to do any amount of work themselves is just the same.
People do NOT use Akrasia/In-group/outgroup/status/ all the other absurdities.
That’s local jargon. If you use local jargon that’s generally doesn’t need an explanation. On the other hand you were the first person to use ’Burkean sentiments” on LW. In general if you use terms with aren’t common in a field, it makes sense to explain them or replace them with more easily to understand terms. Especially as the thread title asks for an explanation for beliefs.
I am an Aristocratic Egalitarian/‘neoreactionary’ because of Curt Doolittle. He has by far the most well developed piece of work in the Dark Enlightenment. I had developed a good amount of the Burkean sentinments myself and from Taleb, but I wasn’t quite sure. Moldbug tipped me over, and then I found Aristocratic Egalitarianism. I’m probably somewhere between Thiel, John Gray,Taleb, Curt. + Influences from Machiavelli and Isaiah Berlin. With Elizier and Robin as well of course.
If you want a coherent framing point that is articulate, well stated, and non-obscurant Aristocratic Egalitarianism is it. You don’t have to have hate in your heart to be NRx. It can be forward and positive, and it is mostly. However, before that it is.… ‘sober’. There is no eliteness without appreciation and paternalism. It’s not people’s fault for how nature rolled the dice for them and it wasn’t say high intelligence or executive functioning; no matter what the kids say. Being blessed with a lot of ability comes with the responsibility and that also means that people who are very intelligent but do not have responsibility are strictly looked down on in my point of view.
If it helps, I used to be an ultra-leftist & I’m not white and I can accept what every one is saying. Nyan/Nick Land is a good example of forward looking persons. Check out nickbsteves, and the people over at Social Matter.
By the way, the futarchy is way less cogent as a viewpoint than any of the plural viewpoints in ‘NRx’. I chose to reframe around Curt because he can just say it and get it over with. He has convinced me of how class, race, and environmental value loading deeply influences the way you state things. I must insist every one check out his work.
http://www.propertarianism.com/2014/11/11/newest-most-precise-definition/ http://www.propertarianism.com/reading-list/
Any chance of translating those from the original Moldbuggese?
None of the books in http://www.propertarianism.com/reading-list/ was written by Moldbug.
I was looking for a summary of the summary, not the opposite.
I’m not sure what you’re asking for. At first glance, seems like a poseur insult.
Moldbug is notorious for a jargon-heavy and hard-to-read writing style, which your comment is being compared to in a request for a clarified version.
Glossary:
NRx—Outer Right/New Right/Vague, fluid, and shifting community of associates, including people who do not like the term ‘neoreaction’. Alternate Name: Antiquarian Modernism via Nick Land @ xenosystems. Everything else: http://www.propertarianism.com/glossary/
Not really. Burkean sentinments isn’t in that list.
From the outside it’s not clear what “I chose to reframe around” means.
I can guess at “forward looking person” but I’m not quite sure.
Burkean sentiments is used by plenty of writers. If you can’t figure it out then it’s your fault.
The point isn’t that I can’t figure out who Burke happens to be when I run a google search. The point is that it would be possible for you to write in a way that easier to understand for everyone instead of Moldbuggese.
Burke is an extremely famous author and people use Burke all the time. Edmund Burke. People do NOT use Akrasia/In-group/outgroup/status/ all the other absurdities. If you can’t be expected to figure it out it’s your fault.
My writing style is completely different than Moldbug’s. But my utter distaste for those posers that represent such hubris considering themselves so advanced in knowledge above most other people, but cannot be expected to do any amount of work themselves is just the same.
That’s local jargon. If you use local jargon that’s generally doesn’t need an explanation. On the other hand you were the first person to use ’Burkean sentiments” on LW. In general if you use terms with aren’t common in a field, it makes sense to explain them or replace them with more easily to understand terms. Especially as the thread title asks for an explanation for beliefs.
Look, plenty of people use Burkean. You’re over-reacting, and you’re wrong. Give me a break. Please save this and look back at it at a future date.
I’m not reacting strongly. I’m simply pointing out that you choose language that’s not as accessible as it could be.
Those aren’t the same person.
I’m well aware they aren’t. Just missed the s there.
Is that Black Swan/Fooled by Randomness Taleb?
Yes. Also see http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2392310
People have a lot of distorted opinions about him, so make sure to check the appendix recommended readings etc just to get an accurate idea of him.