Thread by @0x49fa98

Curtis Yarvin has posted some cring, but his core insights are critical for Americans to understand: our democracy doesn't work like you think, and even if it did, it wouldn't be good. Now Yarvin is becoming "mainstream" because the right has nowhere else to turn

In a way it's a riff on an old joke: "if voting could change anything, they'd make it illegal." Yarvin's innovation, simple as it sounds, is taking this joke seriously, and convincing others to take it seriously, too

https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1333501368934551552

and I mean you hear these jokes, maybe you laugh and repeat them, then you carry on acting like it's not true. Republicans are dems driving the speed limit. Dems are the real racists. These are also mental stopsigns, if they keep you playing the game

https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1306657368684605441

The centers of political bodies are low energy; only acting when they allow the fringes to animate them. The left has always drawn from its radicals while the right has cut them off. This is why the left has won victory after victory against us

Yarvin understands how to speak to the elites and be heard. Yes, we agree, the elites are vacuous midwits. Whatever makes you feel better. They’re still in charge. Their glory is faded but not extinguished, just like America

You want to know why he called it the cathedral and not the synagogue? Because in America only trisomatic mongrels hate Jews, but the people running the show? They hate Christians. Yarvin knows how to talk to them, how to make them hate the right things

https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1311066324785917953

(And don't get me wrong, we must dismantle hall-of-cost-ianity with all the gusto of a joolattress (rhymes with mattress) on a FAANG hiring board, but most of y'all aren't ready for that conversation)

https://twitter.com/yama_pain/status/1215788770743738369

Yarvin used ideas from critical theory and even new atheism to subvert elite ideology. He bent the Dawkinsian critique of Christianity back against progress by highlighting its essentially religious nature when elites were seething against religion

https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1025366487928696833

This is also why he teaches that the Cathedral is a fully decentralized conspiracy. The higher your social class, the more memetic antibodies you have against "conspiracy theories." But if the conspiracy is decentralized, that's a novel infection

https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1281386386088775688

We call something dextrogenic if it moves people right. Sinistrogenic if left. Yarvin's ideas are dextrogenic. Parts of the decentralized conspiracy are centralized, sure. But elites and left-normies are never going to believe the latter without passing through the former

But we must disambiguate the word "elite". The elite are a "class", and Americans, I'm told, are bad at understanding class. We reduce it to income brackets, which is wrong. Just as a race is an extended family, an elite is an extended circle of friends

The members of an elite may be rich or poor. It's not just about money; they are supposed to be united by a shared taste and sensibility, as illustrated by Fussell's (dated) book Class. This is still true, though it's muddied by strivers who try to imitate elite "culture"

An elite is a class, and an elite is an extended circle of friends. Yarvin likes Mosca, and Mosca he say: Voting is only effective if you vote for someone who can win, who is championed by his circle of friends. The voters in a democracy don't elect you. Your friends elect you.

So how do your friends elect you? By manipulating procedural outcomes. The left operates mostly within the law by controlling the context where it is enacted. Yarvin explains how power works in the USA, vs how you were taught it works. Read this thread

https://twitter.com/i_contemplate_/status/1047679498009923584

More than one circle of friends can exist can compete for elitehood. The polar opposite of our present ruling elite is a class of extreme social outcasts who see themselves as the owners of reactionary thought in the winter of the long 20th century

The better ones know the stereotypes of reactionaries, that the rest of the world sees them as stupid, inbred hillbillies. But now, in defiance of the stereotype, they like to overcompensate by reading lots of books, especially history and philosophy, especially from Germans

These people have genuine, surprising insights, doubly so if you have studiously avoided them. I would never have given them a single glance were it not for a truly subversive line by Yarvin: "I'm not a white nationalist but I'm not exactly allergic to the stuff"

But the huh-wyte nationalists, (rhymes with rationalists) have some problems. The sort of person who openly admires hitler no only has no social capital, he also does not understand to build it. You might say they are missing a mood

https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1276138327729737729?s=20

Many of these older guard reactionaries don't care for us because they see us as latecomers, and because they cannot abide their ideas becoming popular. They don't want to be elite, they want to take a voluptuous pleasure in alienage

https://twitter.com/0x49fa98/status/1079436004505743360

I'm not interested being the king of the disaffected losers, or in adopting a victim mentality. I AM interested in kingship as such, and in agglomerating a new, replacement elite, which is to say, an extended circle of friends. Friendship is a necessary fundament of kingship

As BAP notes, A king can only be understood as “the most noble of the nobles” and has meaning and continuity only in a society ruled by nobles, which is to say, by armed men who are also able to lead other men

https://twitter.com/spring_pierian/status/1436449543801946112

Friendship is usually served to us as watered-down pablum for children, and taken to mean something like "we play video games together" – but this is in fact a degradation of a noble impulse, the impulse to go to war as a band of brothers

So when people ask what we are doing here, why we say what we say, that's why. We are cultivating friendship, incubating a new nobility, from which we hope a king will emerge. I know this sounds grandiose and crazy to many of you, as every grand endeavor must from the outside

And it is natural sometimes for us friends to fight. The source of civilization is not the family, the market, the electoral process, or scientific committees of "experts" – it is the Mannerbund, the organic organic hierarchy of men that springs from their competitive instinct

We are cultivating a shared taste and sensibility which is antithetical to the regime that contains us. We are not so worried about populism or "the masses" – we are not communists with dreams of new soviet man, though we may be otherworldly at times

https://twitter.com/DarrenJBeattie/status/1436346365626494978

To do this, we will need to discredit such ideas as democracy, equality, and yes, even "individual liberty" – in so far as it is one more pacifier to the latent new elite that is even now, despite everything, listening intently to what we have to say.

Not all who who consume our culture are of it, but still they receive our ideas: An idea is a conscious form taken by our feelings, which covers both an intellectual act and a direction of the will. Every idea is a force, tending more and more to realize its individual end

The goal of speaking in a mass format is not the mass itself, but to reach those KINDRED SPIRITS who are can embody the beautiful ideas that we nurture. Or as Nietzsche said,

A nation is a detour of nature to arrive at six or seven great men – Yes, and then to get round them