= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
polymathwannabe comments on "NRx" vs. "Prog" Assumptions: Locating the Sources of Disagreement Between Neoreactionaries and Progressives (Part 1) - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (340)
The transition from traditional to progressive societies has been painful most of the times (mainly in the form of revolutions). It is possible to say that Ivan's Russia evolved into Nicolas's Russia, but claiming that Nicolas's Russia evolved into Stalin's Russia is stretching the meaning of "evolve" too much. Rather, "went extinct and had its niche occupied by a fitter competitor" is an apter description. (Remember I'm talking about social systems here; the fact that the old regime's grandchildren are alive today does not mean the social system didn't go extinct.)
Edited to add: I'm in no way claiming that Stalin's Russia was a progressive society. I'm noticing that debating with neoreactionaries tends to blur categories that shouldn't be confused.
For Imperial Russia (and China), maybe. For the US or the United Kingdom, not at all. For much of Western Europe or, say, Japan, not really.
In fact, Soviet Russia and Mao's China are also good examples of societies which "went extinct and had its niche occupied by a fitter competitor" :-)