Burke is an extremely famous author and people use Burke all the time. Edmund Burke. People do NOT use Akrasia/In-group/outgroup/status/ all the other absurdities. If you can't be expected to figure it out it's your fault.
My writing style is completely different than Moldbug's. But my utter distaste for those posers that represent such hubris considering themselves so advanced in knowledge above most other people, but cannot be expected to do any amount of work themselves is just the same.
People do NOT use Akrasia/In-group/outgroup/status/ all the other absurdities.
That's local jargon. If you use local jargon that's generally doesn't need an explanation. On the other hand you were the first person to use 'Burkean sentiments" on LW. In general if you use terms with aren't common in a field, it makes sense to explain them or replace them with more easily to understand terms. Especially as the thread title asks for an explanation for beliefs.
Through LessWrong, I've discovered the no-reactionary movement. Servery says that there are some of you here.
I'm curious, what lead you to accept the basic premises of the movement? What is the story of your personal "conversion"? Was there some particular insight or information that was important in convincing you? Was it something that just "clicked" for you or that you had always felt in a vague way? Were any of you "raised in it"?
Feel free to forward my questions to others or direct me towards a better forum for asking this.
I hope that this is in no way demeaning or insulting. I'm genuinely curious and my questioning is value free. If you point me towards compelling evidence of the neo-reactionary premise, I'll update on it.