I know that The Thomas Carlyle Club for Young Reactionaries that Radish refers to so often doesn’t actually exist. Last week, in the midst of some Twitter discussion about it, I decided that someone ought to  at least start talking about how we could actually put it together.

To me, it seems important that this effort be started now, to prevent the neoreactionary community from developing more of an ant-heap social structure than it already has. Informal social arrangements have hard limits of scale far lower than formal ones do.

Please tweet at me, write blog responses, or leave comments below about what you think.

WHY CLUBS?

• Prevents us from becoming overly intellectual.

• Gives action-oriented people something to do.

• Builds up the human components of the social structure we’re building.

• Gives noneggheads something to do besides hang out on Twitter and blogging

• Prevents eggheads from lowering the discourse to match the broadened audience

• Gives people studying a structured learning environment

• Generates social capital (™)

• Enforces minimum standards of intellect and character.

I

TENTATIVE RULES

• Gender segregated; male-only.

• Each section has 12 members and one leader

  • Why 12 + 1 leader? Small enough for discussion, large enough to achieve significant objectives.

  • Leader has discretion on whether he wants to name a treasurer, note-keeper, etc.

  • Not chosen by election. Leader is whoever started the group. Leader decides whom to pass leadership to.

  • There’s an entrance exam, personal statement requirement, and an application fee.

  • Also a physical fitness requirement (just plagiarize the Army’s physical fitness exam and charts — it’s not stringent but is enough to enforce a minimum standard)

  • If the size of the group goes past 13, the group should metastasize, with a new leader chosen by the parent group.

  • Members are discouraged from blogging, tweeting, etc. publicly about group activities. Leaders and senior members are to be encouraged. Media output isn’t the primary goal of the organizations, however.

• The membership pays dues to club, and the club must send a portion of collections to the larger parent organization.

• Dues go towards projects to benefit the membership, like book advances, research funding, etc.

• The membership lists aren’t published publicly.

• The leader arbitrates disputes.

• Entry requires saying an oath.

CLUB FUNCTIONS

• Each month, the club leadership promotes a certain topic.

  • This can be a book or author. It can be a theme. It can be a skill like riflery or housepainting.

  • Leaders have broad discretion on how to go about fostering the month’s theme.

  • Books and other material can be sold at discounts to members.

• As the organization develops, the top leadership becomes less about programming and more about broader coordination and pursuing long term initiatives and institution building.

• Club fosters professional development, tight networking, knowledge + resource pooling.

• Chapter leaders can send reports up the hierarchy. Knowledge gleaned can build up our institutional learning.

• Encourage profitable projects. 12 men of ordinary ability who trust each other can start companies or do things like buy foreclosures, renovate them, and flip it.

• Encourage emegency preparedness.

  • In a blizzard, your cell is there, plowing streets, shoveling snow for grandmas with diabetes

  • In a blackout you’re ready with flashlights, battery radios, and fresh water

  • In a riot you have spare guns and ammunition

  • During a price control regime like after Hurricane Sandy, you’re running gasoline

LONG TERM GOALS

• Rebuild the evil patriarchy

• Create an entity that can raise funds, show traction, growth, etc.

• Prevents over-centralization or the clogging of different sections of the pyramid w/ too many people.

• Encourages team spirit vs. individual squabbling while still leaving space for individuals to have extraordinary impact

• Conceal numbers of affiliated men while increasing the paranoia of political opponents

  • Semisecret society vs. Completely secret.

• Makes local political takeovers far easier. Small trusted networks can perform quiet, slow-motion subversions at a far lower cost with less reliance on public relations.

  • Loudly declaring intentions before establishing the network means massive Cathedral retaliation.

  • Doing so with the appropriate level of discretion permits power consolidation.

• Enables people who can’t express their support publicly to still contribute; gives people who can be public sources of revenue and political cover.

• Regulates intra-nrxnary conflict while creating an avenue for fruitful competition.

PRE-EMPTING CRITICISMS OF THIS PLAN

• Nazi! This is just like the SA!

  • No, not really.

• But I just wanna blog a lot.

  • Then you’re attempting to compete with your enemy in the same domain in which they have overpowering advantages.

  • Then you will lead by example to get more people to write and tweet. While nice, this has limitations. The marginal benefit of one more part time blogger is low.

• I’m too fat to pass a fitness test.

  • Go fix that.

• This is just like the Freemasons or the boy scouts or…

  • Yes, but with new and improved anti-progressivism.

• None of us live close enough together to start a club.

  • Start online or partially online. Keep splitting and sorting until it’s possible.

• The rules are cis and heterosexist.

  • Yes.

• What do you do when a cell or sect becomes overly heretical?

  • Then we’ll have to create an Inquisition.