One of the reasons why I became motivated to begin writing again was this long debate on Foseti’s now-mothballed blog.
To simplify, the arguments were split between:
- those who wanted neoreaction to remain a small community of amateur scholarly correspondents uninterested in general influence
- people who were interested in forming an influential political sect, which would require propaganda
- those who saw merit in both approaches
The discussion was partly sparked by the style of Radish and the retirement of Moldbug from active blogging.
Going back to the comments on Foseti’s post, I was more persuaded by the arguments that Contemplationist, Spandrell, Surviving Babel, and Jim put forth than the others.
My general take on writing is that it is best used to provide information, to entertain, and to persuade other people. Writing for the public, which is what a blog does, necessarily means influencing members of that public.
There’s an alternative to writing for the public called “writing e-mails and letters,” which is more private and more effective at persuading people one-by-one besides.
Contemplationist wrote:
Lets also remember that Moldbug’s mission was to convert the Brahmin young, which is absolutely possible with a hipster intellectual attitude (I’ve done it myself).
The 60s counterculture was not supported by the old progressives. We can certainly create a reactionary counterculture. Culture is supreme.
What would be a simple example? Formal Fridays for one. Dress old school. Behave old school. Don’t take shit from women. Be the aristocrat if you can.
Also, as AnomalyUK has noted, we just need some threshold of intelligent common people to be aware that they know someone who holds the opinion for example that “the Queen would rule better than the Parliament.”
I see all of this as very doable.
Neovictorian recently wrote an article about how this sort of thing has impacted his attention span (with some direct reference to my work) along with some reference to the broader mass media, of which I’m a small part.
He and Bruce Charlton absolutely have a point in that. To the extent that you already agree with most of what’s being said, you should refocus your attention on bringing your real life in line with your changed beliefs rather than expending too much of your attention reading entertaining neoreactionary propaganda.
If you need to taper off your addiction, just skim headlines, read weekly round-ups like the ones published by Nick B. Steves or Free Northerner, or use an RSS reader to decrease the amount of time that you waste keeping up with the volume of production.
I’m a propagandist. I don’t really try to dress myself up as anything else. I do get repetitious sometimes, because repetition is necessary to get the desired effect. My writing is often derivative and makes no attempt to conceal that.
Part of the motivation that I have to write is also just to share what I’m reading with other people so that it doesn’t stay locked up in my head, which it otherwise would. No one is obligated to read what I write. Thousands of people do find it useful and interesting.
A lot of the writers who churn out of the reactosphere burn out because:
- their work responsibilities become too heavy
- they need to earn more money, which requires more of their attention
- they stop enjoying it
- they dislike the new people coming in to the space
- they dislike the additional effort needed to grab reader attention
- they become frightened of the risk involved in participating
All of these are valid reasons to stop writing.
My general goal is to support the growth of that reactionary counterculture which was napkin-sketched some years ago. I can’t guarantee that it will succeed or that I will succeed. I’m not a prophet. It might turn out to be really mediocre, and it may very well be my fault if it does.
And when I produce bad work, or make a bad argument, or include a factual error, I expect to be criticized for it.
Achieving those goals (which some people have judged to be impossible) requires developing staying power and uneven competitive advantages compared to the dominant progressive culture. One-off efforts achieve little because sustained effort is what keeps a culture alive and growing.
A lot of people who could contribute more instead prefer to invent countless reasons about why they shouldn’t contribute at length, sometimes over a period of months, or spend time explaining why what’s being contributed deserves endless scorn from critics who are themselves too frightened to contribute much of anything themselves.
I’ve called this tendency the negative pose, and it’s common on the internet in which it’s easy and pleasurable to construct that kind of entertaining-but-mostly-useless persona.
Not to be too self-help-y, but the only way to make sure that a difficult task actually is impossible is to declare it to be impossible before it’s even attempted. I don’t really put much stock in declarations like that, because it’s usually just an excuse to avoid discomfort or danger, unless there’s an accurate theoretical reason why something is impossible.
Creating a counter-culture is doable. It’s just difficult.
I feel like this post is relevant to my recent experiences writing.
I’m not accustomed to defending my work, or being pigeonholed by associates for it. After only contributing a few articles to Social Matter, I quickly realized how emotionally invested I can get in my writing, which rarely leaves my computer. Almost felt like I had done something illegal. I feel like a defendant. Can’t put it on a CV. Get immediately alienated from liberal friends who hear about it and read it. I begin to wonder why the hell I sent out any work, – what did I think I’d achieve?
Even writing a few articles on a relatively obscure site has given me the feeling of being “all in.” These goddamn prog journalists have it so easy they have no idea.
To hell with it. I’m not going to stop. You just really nailed it all with this post. If I could pitch in my two cents it would be that nrx writers are under-appreciated because what they do is actually a personal risk. Hopefully, its not all a futile waste.
I’ll probably post this comment and immediately wonder why I would even share my opinion. Part of my problem is that I am more or less what you would call a “convert.” I have a long history in the left. I’m aware of how proactive and psycho many of these people are. On the positive side, this means that the propaganda you are all churning out over time – it actually works on some people. I’m just beginning to wish I ate the blue pill.
I’ll see you at FEMA camp.
A very nice post all together.
Perhaps I am being a little too romantic, but I imagine the whole NRx scene as a kind of an intellectual “league”. There are giants, erudite thinkers with original theories and superb knowledge. There are very smart people with good comments and good inside from whom one can learn a lot. And there are marginal thinkers who came late to the party, but whose will and determination could maybe bring some minute contribution in finding the truth. They all have their place, as long as there’s a healthy natural hierarchy.
I consider myself the latter type – I really can’t say I brought some original thoughts and valuable information into the whole scene. One could easily argue that I am actually helping the Cathedral to build better and more powerful memetic defenses against the reactionary line of thought. However, having received e-mails from some readers, especially younger ones, who thank me for opening whole new horizons to them, and having heard from some pretty clever people (who I consider to be far superior in intelligence to me) that through my blog they found much valuable insides, simply makes the whole thing worth while. Maybe it’s just rationalized egotism, and maybe I am doing more damage than good, but I’m betting on the other horse. Let’s plant seeds, and see how they’ll grow up.
He and Bruce Charlton absolutely have a point in that. To the extent that you already agree with most of what’s being said, you should refocus your attention on bringing your real life in line with your changed beliefs rather than expending too much of your attention reading entertaining neoreactionary propaganda.
At this stage a lot of people have been on the extreme right for a long time. They want some action. The problem is there is no valid action to take. Some small steps are being taken as to meetups and that is about it.
Endless blog posts can be counter-productive – they encourage endless splitting, often about the JQ. To a certain extent I also don’t really see a lot of the theory getting anywhere. For a bunch of people who a/ seem to pride themselves on their intellects and b/agree that democracy has to go – the NRXers don’t seem to have come up with any detailed, practical alternatives to it. (it may be there somewhere, I don’t read a great deal of this stuff).
[One reason the Stormer seems to capture the zeitgeist is that it provides some form of ‘action’ (ie they mass-troll) and it is so extreme that it brooks no splitting – if you are there, you agree.]
But as I said I don’t really see any valid action to be taken. In the meantime there is self-help and community building. You seem to have the balance OK – no enemies on the right.
If this thing ever gets off the ground it will need to be a counter-culture as you say. Such a counter-culture needs to be wide and cover a lot of ground – music, food, movies, clothes. Blogs can build that up – you get a group of people with a wide variety of implicit beliefs. Endless theory isn’t really needed.
The left can shut down a fascist political group. They can’t shut down a bunch of guys who meet to talk about reading Beowulf in Old English – and who necessarily hold a number of implicit beliefs associated with that.
Mindweapons From Ragnarok used to have some interesting things to say about this stuff. Until they got him.
This isn’t a fascist blog, although a lot of fascists seem to want to make it one, and it frustrates them to the extent that it isn’t. NRx is also not fascist.
My best guess as to why the confusion keeps happening is that people keep flashing fascist aesthetics rather than more trad ones. There is also not really a deep understanding of literature and art within NRx , and this has to be corrected (imho).
The other thing is that most places on the internet will just ban fascists outright. I let them stay around unless they are advocating putsches, socialism, racial egalitarianism, and voting. It’s a mistake to think that fascism is compatible, but we’re socially entangled with some writers who do (because they have not thought everything through or think that we can be used cynically to advance their interests).
There are also a few people without a strong theoretical understanding who simultaneously try to say that they are both fascists and monarchists because they have tastes for both aesthetics and don’t understand either fascism or the theories of government or the historical understanding of such that makes NRx distinct.
This is why more cultural work has to be done on our end, also.