More cracks in the alliance:
- Elon vs Trump (I heavily dislike both)
- Yarvin vs normie masses (told them to submit to the Dark Elves and stop struggling lmao)
Personally I think that the abortion ruling was a tactical mistake, but I do understand that the SC is not something anyone owns and works in its own way. If it was me, I'd have …
- Yarvin vs normie masses (told them to submit to the Dark Elves and stop struggling lmao)
Personally I think that the abortion ruling was a tactical mistake, but I do understand that the SC is not something anyone owns and works in its own way. If it was me, I'd have absolutely went after Gender first, and enshrined biological sex as the important, legal category that matters, and then go after everything affirmative action. Abortion feels more like something tailored for religious conservatives, I guess the side effect is that it inconveniences women a bit, and women tend to lean shitlib, but overall, as a medic, I'm moderate on the issue and don't really understand what's the huge fuss about it, nor why conservatives think a pre-embrio clump of cells is life, or progressives feeling entitled to own the chuds by murdering fully healthy, viable fetuses with nervous and cardiac activity.
You're not supposed to be a dark elf, you're supposed to bend the knee and accept elite rule.
Giving up a set of shitlib elites for another mildly less shitlib ones is just stupid politics. Yarvin is not a knight, not a king, not a conqueror, not a top athlete, all he has to offer is a blog and some good analysis of power structures.
To actually lead, you should rise through merit and struggle.
And merit and struggle will never favor out of shape, mid aged library rats.
My apologies if this seemed hostile, but it is of utmost importance to not fall for any personality cult or elites of any sort.
I’m thinking about what you say, sincerely, but sorry Curtis is the shit.
Every time I read someone like Niccolo Soldo or Matt Tiabbi or Glenn Greenwald I find myself filtering it through a Curtis Yarvin analysis. I am constantly saying to myself “of course it’s like that”, that is how it works. As I see it these other rather brilliant authors are presaged by Curtis‘s theories of power. It is absolutely remarkable, I’m always saying out loud “of course it must be thus” and Curtis explains why.
Curtis confuses me 1/3 of the time but I think the central concept is his “selective advantage of dominant ideas “.
I think Curtis is saying the dark elves are people who understand what’s going on but are still fair minded and so they are on the side of the hobbits who just want to grill: the good guys.
Your approach is pretty good. Go with what works for you. You show no signs of handing over your mind to anyone. You are merely persuaded that Curtis is on the money, or at least very useful. Curtis is applying a rigorous approach to complex issues and explaining things reasonably well, certainly in comparison with the fire-hose of lies and bullshit on offer elsewhere.
Curtis is entirely correct that there are people within the elites who are aware of the dangers to which the system exposes us all, not least the dangers of provoking destructive and overwhelming reactions from those disfavoured by the regime. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that these people will be effective, but their presumed perspectives are worth understanding. And it would be naive to assume that these people are not motivated by self-preservation, even self-advantage. If/when the time comes, these 'dark elves' will make a play to replace their rivals. These 'dark elves' pose their own dangers, though there is nothing wrong with aiming to be a 'dark elf' yourself if you have a chance.
I own a business with many employees: we are in the maelstrom. Curtis explains the maelstrom of human affairs. No one else is focussed on that topic, no one.
I have my instincts and my observations and my lessons learned through hard experience and against that I find Curtis’s explanation (as you say) on the money.
Generally I find the Substack authors to be a bunch of pussies. They tend to have a tidy logic but a poor understanding of the battlefield; the rules of engagement are unknown to them and it is for me very obvious. To me it’s like they’ve been cloistered way so long they have become hemophiliac‘s and bleed out on first contact.
Mike Tyson was being interviewed and the interviewer was a smarty-pants who was asking him complex questions about the other boxers strategy and plan . The interviewer was embarrassing Mike with the fancy talk, Tyson couldn’t answer because he is poorly educated. Tyson got pissed off and eventually said everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Tyson pummelled the other boxer unconscious in the second round of the fight.
Curtis gets the punch in the face, the ancient dynamics of human power.
There was once an ancient Greek philosopher, Heracleitus of Ephesus aka Heracleitus the Obscure, who said that 'ideas are toys for children' (a double-handed compliment since Heracleitus compared the forces of the cosmos to a child at play), but he was spot on. Ideas are only as good (and in so far as) they explain things or when they work as tools for this or that task (or when they entertain us), but there is never any good reason to get over-invested in any of them.
Substack has plenty of great talent, but as a rule we are all living with too much confusion: infotainment, miseducation and the shared bullshit of a culture that no longer understands how to promote human thriving. And a few too many on substack are living inside their own heads too much...a common problem in the digital age. Good luck with the business...it must be hell at the moment, but at business life would keep you grounded.
I share your belief that ideas need to have a practical application and the business gives me a very large canvas, it gives meaning to my life (it’s not just about money).Your Greek philosopher, the obscure, he likened the randomness of nature as unto the unstructured play of a child, very cool, it suggests he felt the meaninglessness. We all live at the end of time and the edge of understanding, even 2000 years ago.
A word on my fellow Torontonian, Nicolo Soldo, fantastic!
The point, as I understand it, is that there is meaning and structure but, given its extraordinary complexity we mistake it all (life, the cosmos) as purely random. The complexity allows structure and chance to operate in competition. The risk is to simplify or, worse, give way to a perception of meaninglessness and futility that simply reproduces the chaos we perceive. The ultimate aim is to play, to utilise our capacities as completely as possible.
Random, there is much to agree with your perspective. We should always be suspicious of anything that might serve to encourage or enable hesitancy, passivity or acceptance. Leaders should be selected properly (merit and struggle are good for that), but in the real world leaders are sociopaths who have made it through a rats' maze of personal and political compromise. You are dead right about not falling for personality cults or elites.
As for Curtis, he is not a knight, king, conqueror or top athlete. But a blog and a few good analyses put him ahead of those who just offer a blog and bad analyses. He is a curious character and does not pretend to be a leader of any kind in his own right. His relative proximity to real or suggested 'dark elves' adds to his public image.
I subscribe to GRAY MIRROR and have been reading him on and off since the 1990s. There is plenty to snipe about, but why bother? Maybe I am going soft or just sentimental about a fellow Gen Xer who still has some fight in him (figuratively speaking), but I'd cut him some slack. Curtis is not the answer, but he is a useful contributor to the debate about where we are now.
I think the "tactical mistake" was the assumption people may actually read the opinions of the justices and understand it's implications, and I'm not just talking about the blue-hair land whales threatening a "sexual boycott" and who constantly harp on about "democracy".
Richard Bari's/People's Pundit routinely finds people claim they support Roe, but almost inevitably will misunderstand what it means because they also claim to be against aspects of abortion that Roe legalized.
More cracks in the alliance:
- Elon vs Trump (I heavily dislike both)
- Yarvin vs normie masses (told them to submit to the Dark Elves and stop struggling lmao)
Personally I think that the abortion ruling was a tactical mistake, but I do understand that the SC is not something anyone owns and works in its own way. If it was me, I'd have absolutely went after Gender first, and enshrined biological sex as the important, legal category that matters, and then go after everything affirmative action. Abortion feels more like something tailored for religious conservatives, I guess the side effect is that it inconveniences women a bit, and women tend to lean shitlib, but overall, as a medic, I'm moderate on the issue and don't really understand what's the huge fuss about it, nor why conservatives think a pre-embrio clump of cells is life, or progressives feeling entitled to own the chuds by murdering fully healthy, viable fetuses with nervous and cardiac activity.
Settle down, both of y'all.
Random solid post: very excellent!
Curtis is my hero and I can see myself a dark elf.
You're not supposed to be a dark elf, you're supposed to bend the knee and accept elite rule.
Giving up a set of shitlib elites for another mildly less shitlib ones is just stupid politics. Yarvin is not a knight, not a king, not a conqueror, not a top athlete, all he has to offer is a blog and some good analysis of power structures.
To actually lead, you should rise through merit and struggle.
And merit and struggle will never favor out of shape, mid aged library rats.
My apologies if this seemed hostile, but it is of utmost importance to not fall for any personality cult or elites of any sort.
I’m thinking about what you say, sincerely, but sorry Curtis is the shit.
Every time I read someone like Niccolo Soldo or Matt Tiabbi or Glenn Greenwald I find myself filtering it through a Curtis Yarvin analysis. I am constantly saying to myself “of course it’s like that”, that is how it works. As I see it these other rather brilliant authors are presaged by Curtis‘s theories of power. It is absolutely remarkable, I’m always saying out loud “of course it must be thus” and Curtis explains why.
Curtis confuses me 1/3 of the time but I think the central concept is his “selective advantage of dominant ideas “.
I think Curtis is saying the dark elves are people who understand what’s going on but are still fair minded and so they are on the side of the hobbits who just want to grill: the good guys.
Your approach is pretty good. Go with what works for you. You show no signs of handing over your mind to anyone. You are merely persuaded that Curtis is on the money, or at least very useful. Curtis is applying a rigorous approach to complex issues and explaining things reasonably well, certainly in comparison with the fire-hose of lies and bullshit on offer elsewhere.
Curtis is entirely correct that there are people within the elites who are aware of the dangers to which the system exposes us all, not least the dangers of provoking destructive and overwhelming reactions from those disfavoured by the regime. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that these people will be effective, but their presumed perspectives are worth understanding. And it would be naive to assume that these people are not motivated by self-preservation, even self-advantage. If/when the time comes, these 'dark elves' will make a play to replace their rivals. These 'dark elves' pose their own dangers, though there is nothing wrong with aiming to be a 'dark elf' yourself if you have a chance.
That’s a compliment thank you.
I own a business with many employees: we are in the maelstrom. Curtis explains the maelstrom of human affairs. No one else is focussed on that topic, no one.
I have my instincts and my observations and my lessons learned through hard experience and against that I find Curtis’s explanation (as you say) on the money.
Generally I find the Substack authors to be a bunch of pussies. They tend to have a tidy logic but a poor understanding of the battlefield; the rules of engagement are unknown to them and it is for me very obvious. To me it’s like they’ve been cloistered way so long they have become hemophiliac‘s and bleed out on first contact.
Mike Tyson was being interviewed and the interviewer was a smarty-pants who was asking him complex questions about the other boxers strategy and plan . The interviewer was embarrassing Mike with the fancy talk, Tyson couldn’t answer because he is poorly educated. Tyson got pissed off and eventually said everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Tyson pummelled the other boxer unconscious in the second round of the fight.
Curtis gets the punch in the face, the ancient dynamics of human power.
Tyson got that one right!
There was once an ancient Greek philosopher, Heracleitus of Ephesus aka Heracleitus the Obscure, who said that 'ideas are toys for children' (a double-handed compliment since Heracleitus compared the forces of the cosmos to a child at play), but he was spot on. Ideas are only as good (and in so far as) they explain things or when they work as tools for this or that task (or when they entertain us), but there is never any good reason to get over-invested in any of them.
Substack has plenty of great talent, but as a rule we are all living with too much confusion: infotainment, miseducation and the shared bullshit of a culture that no longer understands how to promote human thriving. And a few too many on substack are living inside their own heads too much...a common problem in the digital age. Good luck with the business...it must be hell at the moment, but at business life would keep you grounded.
I share your belief that ideas need to have a practical application and the business gives me a very large canvas, it gives meaning to my life (it’s not just about money).Your Greek philosopher, the obscure, he likened the randomness of nature as unto the unstructured play of a child, very cool, it suggests he felt the meaninglessness. We all live at the end of time and the edge of understanding, even 2000 years ago.
A word on my fellow Torontonian, Nicolo Soldo, fantastic!
The point, as I understand it, is that there is meaning and structure but, given its extraordinary complexity we mistake it all (life, the cosmos) as purely random. The complexity allows structure and chance to operate in competition. The risk is to simplify or, worse, give way to a perception of meaninglessness and futility that simply reproduces the chaos we perceive. The ultimate aim is to play, to utilise our capacities as completely as possible.
Well said. That is a theistic point of view. Our boy Niccolo is a theist.
I'm good n the same boat man
Random, there is much to agree with your perspective. We should always be suspicious of anything that might serve to encourage or enable hesitancy, passivity or acceptance. Leaders should be selected properly (merit and struggle are good for that), but in the real world leaders are sociopaths who have made it through a rats' maze of personal and political compromise. You are dead right about not falling for personality cults or elites.
As for Curtis, he is not a knight, king, conqueror or top athlete. But a blog and a few good analyses put him ahead of those who just offer a blog and bad analyses. He is a curious character and does not pretend to be a leader of any kind in his own right. His relative proximity to real or suggested 'dark elves' adds to his public image.
I subscribe to GRAY MIRROR and have been reading him on and off since the 1990s. There is plenty to snipe about, but why bother? Maybe I am going soft or just sentimental about a fellow Gen Xer who still has some fight in him (figuratively speaking), but I'd cut him some slack. Curtis is not the answer, but he is a useful contributor to the debate about where we are now.
I think the "tactical mistake" was the assumption people may actually read the opinions of the justices and understand it's implications, and I'm not just talking about the blue-hair land whales threatening a "sexual boycott" and who constantly harp on about "democracy".
Richard Bari's/People's Pundit routinely finds people claim they support Roe, but almost inevitably will misunderstand what it means because they also claim to be against aspects of abortion that Roe legalized.