MichaelAnissimov's Comments

Open thread, Dec. 8 - Dec. 15, 2014

It's crimethink in the sense that people automatically downvote anything critical of the Enlightenment.

Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary?

1) Way too many to list here.

2) I still consider a near-future Singularity possible but not likely.

Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary?

In reference to your first comment, basically yes.

1) The only reason I joined this thread in the first place is because someone attacked me, I don't particularly advocate neoreaction among LW groups, because I understand the community is hyper-liberalized to the point of absurdity.

2) Yes, my estimates of when the Singularity will occur moved from 2030-2040 to 2070-2080 over the last five years. This change is partially what has caused the neoreaction thing. I think there is a real risk that Western civilization will fall apart before we get there.

Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary?

I personally think that many of them are confused. Given that it's a liberal society, I respect people's decisions to do what they want. Yes, strong families are beneficial. Various alternative lifestyles get in the way of that. Eventually societies need to choose between maximizing personal freedom and having strong families. This is a tradeoff that most liberals have yet to really consider seriously.

Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary?

That depends. Was he once a spokesman for the Singularity Institute?

I was media director and also came up for the idea for Singularity Summit, yes.

Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary?

It promotes gender dysphoria by introducing it where it didn't previously exist.

Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary?


Read this.

You, and Moldbug, and advancedatheist, and every other neoreactionary are putting forward specific views of how society should be structured, specific views which is not merely "something other than the present arrangements". There may be a range of views in the nrsphere, but their doctrines are characterised by what they want, not by what they hate. They do a lot of the hating, to be sure, but they have a positive base of reasons for that.

Their doctrines are actually more characterized by what they dislike. As I said, NRx is a criticism first and foremost.

For example, monarchy and libertarian anarchy are incompatible with each other, and neither of them are Enlightenment structures (as "Enlightenment" is used by neoreactionaries). Are either or both of them compatible with or implied by neoreactionary principles? My reading of neoreactionaries suggests to me that monarchy is, and libertarian anarchy is not.

Some of the most prominent neoreactionaries are libertarian anarchists.

Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary?

To clarify further, I'm not a universalist, so I don't think everyone "should" condemn or approve of any particular individual or group. I said that for groups that care about strong families, they will need to denormalize alternative lifestyles. If groups don't care about strong families, they can do whatever they like. The "strong families" bit is essential to the meaning of the paragraph.

Load More