Report comment

I was under the impression that neoreaction was fundamentally a political movement.

It’s been a while, but perhaps this post from Sunshine Mary can help. It’s called “The Response to Reality”.

Report comment

Report comment

https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/tag/watsoning/
http://hbdchick.wordpress.com/tag/two-minutes-hate/

As an academic myself, I’m extremely concerned by these. No, I don’t think we live in the free speech equivalent of Soviet Russia. Things aren’t that bad. But I would not (and probably could not) publish an article in my field expressing the views I express anonymously in discussions like this. And that’s a problem.

Report comment

Inculcating these values doesn’t necessarily mean we need to “put a king in charge.” We could, for example, have family-friendly government economic policies, stop discriminating against religious employers and charities (see the contraception mandate in the ACA) thus reducing religion’s effectiveness in society, and (individually, as upper class people) move to lower-class neighborhoods and model stable families for them.

2) I don’t find the lead theory terribly persuasive. IIRC, Steve Sailer crunched the numbers for various counties and found little correlation between lead and crime when race was controlled for, or when only whites were present. Moreover, the proposed mechanism (lowering IQ) doesn’t explain the increase in black crime in the 1960s. As far as I know, black IQs have been increasing or at least not decreasing for the past century, so it doesn’t seem that lead could be causing greater black crime by lowering black IQs.

3) There’s good data on liberal bias in academia in at least some areas that doesn’t fit well with your narrative. See especially Jonathan Haidt’s page on liberal bias on social psychology — http://people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/postpartisan.html — and Lee Jussim’s anecdotes — http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201310/liberal-bias-in-social-psychology-personal-experience-ii .

Report comment

Report comment

most of the individual-level advice I’ve read seems to fall into Roissy’s “enjoy the decline” idea, with some other people suggesting that you look for a bride in a third world country

Whoops, I got my bloggers mixed up. “Enjoy the decline” is Captain Capitalism’s phrase, not Roissy’s. Roissy’s phrase is “poolside, getting a tan.” Then again, both express the same idea.

@Multiheaded: Believe me, I am NOT happy about living in the world Roissy describes. Realizing that God doesn’t exist, that heaven is a lie, and that we live in an uncaring universe? Weaksauce. Realizing that the PUA worldview was correct was easily the hardest truth I have ever had to face. But what is true is already so, owning up to it doesn’t make it worse, and not thinking about it doesn’t make it go away.

Report comment

Report comment

Democracy, with proper feedback tools, like rule of law and mass media is OK (ask everyone)… sluttiness is OK (ask the Romans)… feminism and social democracy might not be eye-grabbing but rapists hate it… the “social justice” activism on the internet doesn’t work like you think it works, and learns plenty from its own errors… militant atheism and enforced multiculturalism and single motherhood and abortions and cheerful Communist youth brandwashing squads get you into space!

At this point I really see little reason to view the “neo-reactionary” memes as more that anti-proletarian propaganada by an emrerging bro-ish tech elite. Same as all the nasty long diatribes against the vicious lower classses that were hot shit during the British Industrial Revolution. Only this time it’s about the other groups whom you despise, like women who don’t confirm to your idea of womanhood.

Report comment

It also seems to me like (to a zeroth approximation) people who oppose no-fault divorce are OK with at-will employment (i.e., right-wingers) and vice versa (i.e., left-wingers). Sure, the differences in bargaining power are different for the two, but…

Report comment