You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

TheAncientGeek comments on Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary? - Less Wrong Discussion

10 Post author: Capla 17 November 2014 10:31PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (616)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: HopefullyCreative 18 November 2014 04:05:51AM 15 points [-]

I have to admit that I greatly enjoyed this topic because it introduced me to new concepts. When I clicked on this discussion I hadn't a clue what Neo-Reactionaries were. I knew what a political reactionary is but I hadn't a clue about this particular movement.

The thing that I have found fascinating is the fundamental concept of the movement (and please correct me if I am wrong) is that they want a way out. That the current system is horribly flawed, eventually doomed and that they want to strike a new deal that would fix things once and for all. The recognition is that even if abolished governments will again form. As such they hope to devise a government that is no longer a sham, and structurally will have finally the best interest of the people at its heart instead of selfishness.

What fascinates me about this is some of the discussions about AGI here. Plenty of people apparently feel that eventually agi will rule over us. They essentially are interested in building "a better tyrant." I don't know, give me a thumbs down on this comment if you want but I found the parallel interesting. Of course many ideologies are more alike then people care to admit. For example communism is supposed to be economic and social power sharing and to ensure at the very least everyone's material needs are met. Capitalism and the corporate structure actually aim for the same thing.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 18 November 2014 02:56:55PM 9 points [-]

I tend to consider Exit and We Want a King as different theories.

Comment author: skeptical_lurker 18 November 2014 03:55:49PM 3 points [-]

Exit starts to get close to libertarian/anarchic schools of thought (e.g. seasteading is generally thought of as ancap), which is almost diametrically opposed to We Want a King.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 18 November 2014 04:21:16PM *  5 points [-]

Hmm. Well, the monarchists think they are going to get some Vetinari style ruler who lets business faire, although that hasn't been common historically.

It looks like I further need to distinguish between We Want Exit, and Everyone has a Right to Exit. The latter fads up to World Government, the former falls apart over biological sustainability.

Comment author: skeptical_lurker 18 November 2014 05:12:47PM 3 points [-]

It looks like I further need to distinguish between We Want Exit, and Everyone has a Right to Exit. The latter fads up to World Government, the former falls apart over biological sustainability.

I don't understand, surely "Everyone has a Right to Exit" is the opposite to world government? And why is "We Want Exit" unsustainable?

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 18 November 2014 09:37:20PM 2 points [-]

Who guarantees the right?

A bunch of mostly male geeks in a boat doesn't look very sustainable to me.

Comment author: skeptical_lurker 18 November 2014 09:50:35PM 2 points [-]

Well, seasteading is certainly not particularly scalable. But while its mostly male geeks now, who knows what the demographics would look like when it gets going?

As for who guarantees the right, well, most countries allow their citizens to emigrate if they want.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 18 November 2014 10:45:04PM *  2 points [-]

Exactly. Which is why exit is actually about entry.