undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdevalier11y ago0 comments

There are definitions of fascism by which Moldbug is advocating fascism. There are definitions of fascism by which FDR or Woodrow Wilson were fascists. The definition of fascist by which Moldbug is a fascist is not the same definition that made fascist a synonym for evil incarnate. Moldbug certainly does not want a mob with pitchforks to take over the government and to murder the Jews and go on a global plan of conquest. To thus smear him by association with such an ideology is to be maliciously uncharitable.

The purpose of his blog is to create hyperbole in the opposite direction of the current prevailing ideologies. The blog is shock treatment to get you to think about our society as a time traveler from two hundred years in the past or in the future might see it. He tries to snap you out of presentism. So there is a lot of crazy stuff in it. But there is a lot of information and perspectives that can be found nowhere else, and if you read them and incorporate them into your world views, you will have a more accurate picture of current reality, and you will make better predictions about world events.

I do agree with the long-winded part. Some people like his whimsical, sci-fi jargon infused, verbose writing style, others cannot stand it. That is a matter of taste.

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

mturmon11y ago· 2 in thread

"create hyperbole in the opposite direction of the current prevailing ideologies"

This is accurate and well-said.

I differ greatly in the value I'd assign to the end product. It takes way too much work to untangle the possibly true, mind-bending stuff (<5%) from the sophomoric, reactionary (in the most derogatory sense of that word) stuff (>50%). It's not worth it.

Also, and I say this as someone who enjoys reading long-winded essays for fun: the information density is too low.

And finally, given the above: way too much attitude.

devalierOP11y ago

I would say that about 20% of the time he nails it square on, and another 70% of the time he goes overboard but he is still closer to the truth the current mainstream view. I think he appeals more to people who 1) are significantly disaffected with mainstream politics, and 2) do not believe that that problem with politics is insufficient progressivism.

If you believe the political situation is more good than bad, or if you believe it is bad only due to not being progressive enough, bad due to America not being enough like Sweden, then you won't find Moldbug at all convincing.

But if you are disaffected with both the mainstream right and progressives, then you are in search of an alternative theory of why everything is going so rotten. And in that case, Moldbug's theories are a revelation.

dmfdmf11y ago

"But if you are disaffected with both the mainstream right and progressives, then you are in search of an alternative theory of why everything is going so rotten. And in that case, Moldbug's theories are a revelation."

Far from being a radical repudiating "the currently prevailing ideologies" I would say that he is steeped in the currently ideologies and just advocating their logical end; dictatorship. The Left and Right are both intellectually bankrupt and now just seek power for power's sake, i.e., they stand for nothing. The society is ripe for a dictator and we will get one as soon as another economic or other crisis arises. The Left and the Right secretly are hoping for such a crisis and that their gang happens to be in power when it happens. Writers like Moldbug are a harbinger of the future of the US as we drift toward dictatorship and they existed in Germany before the rise of the Nazis, laying the intellectual ground work.

Fortunately there is real intellectual opposition to this fate in Ayn Rand's philosophy. You should read "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal" and more importantly her intro on ethics "The Virtue of Selfishness". She identified what is wrong with the Left and the Right and proposes an alternative ethical and political theory to support Capitalism and her writings are crystal clear and to the point.

2 more replies

dmfdmf11y ago

There is a lot to say about paragraphs one and two but I'll limit my comment to number three;

"I do agree with the long-winded part. Some people like his whimsical, sci-fi jargon infused, verbose writing style, others cannot stand it. That is a matter of taste."

I would agree that such a style, up to a point, is a matter of taste. But beyond that point I think that verbosity, long run-on paragraphs, detours and "long-cuts" into side issues and irrelevant historical background, etc. serves two rhetorical purposes. First, to obfuscate and ameliorate a point he can't state plainly; that he is advocating a dictatorship [I call it fascist, you can call it whatever you want]. Second, it gives him the appearance of saying something deeper and more important than what he is actually saying, i.e. pseudo-intellectualism.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

mturmon11y ago· 2 in thread

"create hyperbole in the opposite direction of the current prevailing ideologies"

This is accurate and well-said.

Also, and I say this as someone who enjoys reading long-winded essays for fun: the information density is too low.

And finally, given the above: way too much attitude.

devalierOP11y ago

dmfdmf11y ago

2 more replies

dmfdmf11y ago

There is a lot to say about paragraphs one and two but I'll limit my comment to number three;

"I do agree with the long-winded part. Some people like his whimsical, sci-fi jargon infused, verbose writing style, others cannot stand it. That is a matter of taste."

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse