Understanding the psychology of HBD/Racial Realism/Dark Enlightenment

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Understanding the psychology of HBD/Racial Realism/Dark Enlightenment

«‹›2 »

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Shbobdb posted:

Aside from the language used to justify the futurist ideology, what separates these people from third-way movements that have been around for forever?

I'm just seeing some run-of-the-mill fascists. You've got some enthusiastic modernists trying to recapture some former glory (or at least claim what is rightfully theirs), looks pretty similar to Italian Fascism. You've got some romantic, pagan-inspired enthno-nationalists, looks pretty similar to German Fascism. Then you've got a bunch of romantic Catholics who see theology as the breeding ground for a new thing that is neither Communism nor Capitalism -- which looks a lot like Fascism in Spain and Portugal. The only "new" element is the Protestant Fascism but both England and America had strong nascent fascist movements, it only looks new because we didn't trounce them in a war.

I don't have a deep understanding, but how is it not run-of-the-mill fascism?

Fascism is one of the key spices in any political system. It will always be part of what we do, since leanings toward fascism and collectivism and libertarianism and all the different ways people want to order their lives are in each of us. We will always have something inside of us that demands better behavior from ourselves, our peers and our countrymen.

# ¿ Dec 29, 2015 01:47

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 13, 2024 00:31

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Well, no. Fascism is the binding together of individuals into a greater polity, which is any political system other than purely anarchist ones. Liberal systems, communitarian systems, and systems typically called fascist in the modern sense simply have different emphases on what the polity should accomplish for the individual. All three are valid.

# ¿ Dec 29, 2015 03:20

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

rudatron posted:

It might be better to say that fascism takes some elements of all human societies and then overemphasizes them, at the expense of others. But those elements are a part of any human society and shouldn't be seen as inhuman or out of character, but should be placed in balance with all the other elements of humanity.

Right. Or, rather, liberal, socialist and fascist impulses should all be in balance. Liberty, equality, fraternity.

# ¿ Dec 29, 2015 09:43

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Kemper Boyd posted:

Late to the party, but does anyone have any sort of thought about what made this whole MRA/crazy conservative/cuckosphere thing emerge initially?

I'm going to guess The Internet. And, like, nerds becoming aware of how much rear end they aren't getting.

# ¿ Dec 30, 2015 00:42

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Motto posted:

They're just concerned about the "sudden" politicization of media. It's stunning how many of them believe that works containing messages and being colored by the views of their creators is a recent and unusual development, rather than an inherent and crucial part of any creative medium.

They are no longer at the top of the hierarchy. Why wouldn't they adopt the weapons of those who eroded that hierarchy? Everyone else does.

I mean, drat, I don't favor these dorks, but it is pretty revealing when you condemn your opponent for having the gall to fight back.

# ¿ Dec 31, 2015 01:11

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

It does indeed chafe that the dumb stemlord failures who read dragon books would dare to engage in an awkward backlash against the histrionic gender studies baristas who read vampire books. A plague on both their houses! (<--that's from a romance drama)

Maoist Pussy fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Dec 31, 2015

# ¿ Dec 31, 2015 08:53

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

rudatron posted:

Define 'top of the hierarchy' though. The world's isn't run from tumblr, and in terms of clout on the internet (whatever that is worth), reddit and the chans out-rank them both.

To me, what's kind of fascinating about their self chosen label isn't the 'enlightenment' and the contradiction there, but the qualifier 'dark'. It's there clearly to signify edginess, but it also kind of implies maliciousness. "The enlightenment was bad, but we're worse!". Seems more like the kind of things biker gangs say about themselves, rather than then legitimate political movements. Except that they're inflating their egos with long winded screeds, instead of riding around looking menacing or whatever.

It just sounds like they expect to be viewed as Very Naughty for daring to look at things from something other than a social moralist perspective. Like identifying with the anti-hero.

# ¿ Jan 1, 2016 06:47

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

The Vosgian Beast posted:

Moldbug is mostly just a frustrated liberal who hates everyone he has to associate with.

Anyone who doesn't therefore sympathize with him just a little has no heart at all.

# ¿ Jan 1, 2016 21:10

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Unseen posted:

When said conversations lead no where repeatedly, you begin to question the efficacy of reason. After this, the door opens for whatever hitlerism pops up on 4chan.

Reason has lead to everything from social darwinism to Health At Any Size.

So, yeah, you do begin to question the efficacy of reason.

# ¿ Jan 3, 2016 19:47

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

rudatron posted:

(fascism is explicitly anti-democratic, because it denies the value of human life proper and sees oppression as a desirable state, it is therefore anti-humanistic/inhuman - Democracy gives power to a majority on the basis of the equal value of human beings, therefore it is humanistic).

Actually, fascism elevates human life; that is its purpose. The power of a democratic majority can vote to invoke any aspect of any political system- liberal, fascist, communist -all of which do necessarily overlap.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 03:13

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Abner Cadaver II posted:

none of this helps me understand how people who worship Reason & Science are believing in Atavistic Negroids in the 21st century

If you are an introverted nerd weirdo who feels emasculated by LeBron James, and you are reaching for something that indicates you are automatically superior to huge athletic dudes, you are probably going to land on Superior But Non-Specific Brain Ability.

# ¿ Jan 5, 2016 03:18

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Unlike Communism, of course, Fascism actually has a functioning historical example that is not based on Germanic death-metal album covers. I'll give you a hint:

# ¿ Jan 7, 2016 00:30

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Of course, the idea of unifying disparate people around the goal of a nation can be found in most polities

# ¿ Jan 7, 2016 00:52

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

rudatron posted:

. The idea of a 'fall from grace' is kind of a romantic theme, common from light conservatism (Jeffersonian america as this ideal of rural liberty/goodness as a US example) all the way to our very own Roman LARPer here in Maoist Pussy. I mean people just believe simple stories, even if they have no reason to.

Of course, the disintegration of the Roman empire (and its sacking by a Germanic blood-and-skulls circus) is an actual thing that happened, so you may want to figure that into your narrative.

Maoist Pussy fucked around with this message at 03:09 on Jan 7, 2016

# ¿ Jan 7, 2016 03:06

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

rudatron posted:

Not just that, it's fall wasn't a 'fall' as you may understand, ie-

Yes, yes, we've all read the latest historical interpretations.

# ¿ Jan 7, 2016 04:09

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Darth Walrus posted:

Also, it's a mistake to tie fascism to Imperial Rome too much. It's a modern industrial-age ideology with about as much of a relationship to the Roman political system as Wicca has to pre-Roman Celtic druids. Mussolini using the trappings of his country's semi-mythical golden age for his philosophy of dictatorship didn't mean he had a direct line to the ancient wisdom of millennia-dead consuls and senators, and while it hearkens back to the good old days, breaking with tradition is a core element of fascist philosophy. See, again, the Futurist Manifesto:

It is a mistake tie fascism to Mussolini, just as it is a mistake to tie collectivism to Stalin.

Fascism and collectivism and liberalism behave like the archaic humoral system of medicine- elements are present in every polity, and disease results from an excess or deficit of any one of them. In the West, we currently suffer from an excess of liberalism.

# ¿ Jan 7, 2016 22:24

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

The Left's transformation into apoplectic morality squad made the rise of a new Alt-Right inevitable.

# ¿ Jan 15, 2016 06:25

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Bob le Moche posted:

Ok I'm going to attempt to express some things that I feel might help to better understand the Dark Enlightenment and extreme reactionary movements in general, but bear with me because it might be a bit counter-intuitive to most and I might be approaching this from a somewhat different angle that what I've read so far in this thread.

So where do such ideas come from originally? I feel there's a somewhat mistaken intuition that some hosed up people somewhere in their basement come up with them and spread them on the internet and that they then somehow seep through and contaminate the mainstream culture and "normal" conservative ideology etc from such initial echo-chamber nuclei of extremism.
I really don't see things that way. I propose that neoreaction is actually better understood as a "distilled" form of what is quite simply the dominant ideology of our society. Its origin is not to be found within a few deranged minds but inside the very structure of how our entire civilization and its whole set of institutions are organized. Most people do not really think things through to the extent that proponents of NRx do, and are able to hold completely contradictory beliefs and values about society without ever being put in a context where they have to confront and resolve them. That is, most people actually have already internalized the logic of neoreaction simply by virtue of having existed within contemporary society since birth, but have done so on a completely unconscious level, and in their conscious lives are able to operate always in complete denial about it. The people who turn neoreactionary are those who find themselves in a situation where for whatever reason "not thinking about uncomfortable things too much" is no longer the easiest thing to do.

The set of institutions I'm referring to include things like, the nation-state, the military, the police force, borders, private property, the education system, prisons, the justice system, citizenship, the job market, etc. These things did not always exist, they all appeared in their modern form more or less around the same period of history, they are now a fact of reality pretty much everywhere on the planet whether we like it or not, and we as individual humans have to deal with their existence. These are also all institutions that both liberals and conservatives will defend as being necessary, good, legitimate, etc. Our entire society is organized around them and around the ideological justifications of "individual freedom" and "meritocracy".

Everyone in our society learns pretty early on, by going through the school system, that not only are we not all equal, but that society is everywhere attributing value to us along certain metrics. We are taught that people who get better grades are "better" than people who get bad grades, they will go on in life to be more respected, have more power, etc. They also "deserve" this. This continues in adult life where our value on the job market varies wildly and where some of us are just deemed to be worth more than others by society, to get promoted, etc. Others end up becoming incarcerated and this is also something they "deserve". This is a fundamental fact of existence in class society and is so hegemonic as to be something that we barely ever think about. Most kids are not stupid and they also figure out easily that the value placed upon various human lives tend to be highly correlated with things like race and gender, that there's a clear pattern there. Some "kinds" of people will tend to be successful and others not, some "kinds" of people will tend to be criminals and others not. However what they quickly learn is that you are not allowed to say that out loud. You get heavily punished through social policing if you dare externalize the observation that white men tend to be "better" along the very same values that you are forcefully socialized into accepting. This is taboo and to exist within this society you have to both internalize its hierarchy as legitimate and just, and pretend that its organization is based purely on "merit" and "individual choices" which are things that are constructed to have nothing to do with the context in which someone is born. This is the fundamental contradiction at the core of our ideology. The closer you get to the ideological apparatus, the more important your voice or the better access you have to a public platform, the stronger this taboo become. So if you're condemned to obscurity in a low-paying job where you don't have any contact with the public, nobody really cares that much that you're a huge racist, or that you don't give a gently caress about following the rules, but if you go to university, go into politics, the media, management, etc you have to learn pretty quickly to suppress and hide these feelings you might have about the (actually quite obvious) logic of very the processes that put you there in the first place.

This is why reactionaries complain so much about "political correctness" (or "the cathedral" in NRx terms), they identify this superego pressure to suppress, to live in denial about our own omnipresent racism, and it feels to them like an absurd oppression because they've fully internalized the actual, underlying and unconscious, racist and sexist, values of our society. They cannot stand these contradictions. They see this performance of liberalism as a giant hypocrisy and in that, they are correct. They find pleasure in transgression: laughing at racist jokes feels liberating when you've internalized both the racism and the social pressure to deny it.

Both liberals and reactionaries have accepted the notion that IQ is an objective measurement of something called "intelligence" which is a neutral measure of a person's worth. They also both have accepted the notion that law and order is good and that commiting a crime is bad, that criminals should be put in jail etc. When the reactionary then encounters the statistical fact that white people have a higher IQ than black people on average, or that there are a lot more black people in prison, this takes on the allure of having discovered a hidden knowledge. When the reactionary then sees that liberals are made uncomfortable by those facts and that they'd rather pretend they don't exist or not think about them too hard, the reactionary is vindicated in his belief that he holds some secret truth which is being suppressed by the "cathedral" and it's quasi-religious faith in complete contradictions.
Of course, there is another possible way of resolving these contradiction, and that is to fully reject the very legitimacy of these constructions, of the institutions of power, and by extension the logic of our entire society. To see them as the tools of patriarchy and white supremacy that they are, and to assert that there is nothing good, true, natural or universal about their justificating ideology, that our entire civilization has been constructed to enable the brutal oppression and exploitation of some groups by others. This is something that is quite difficult to do when you have been given any stake at all in the system, as most of us have. If you are anything other than an outright criminal, a self-destructing political radical, or maybe a rare tenured postmodern academic, your entire identity and sense of self-worth, your entire hope for continued existence, is based on the position that you've been given within the system, and climbing its hierarchy is probably what all your desires revolve around in some way or another.
But most people never have to resolve these contradictions at all, it's completely possible to hold them in mind without ever being force to confront them. It is a constant source of anxiety for many liberals for sure, but it's completely possible to live your entire life in denial like that, or selectively picking and choosing what parts of society you reject (the ones you don't have a stake in personally). In some ways living like that is actually a privilege though, it's the situation that liberal professionals and educated people find themselves in. They get to convince themselves both that they're "good people" and better than the stupid redneck racists and sexists, and also that they deserve the position of privilege that they've been given by a society which is fundamentally just and good except for a few "bad apples" or for exceptional "corruption".

As soon as they start being affected directly though, a liberal will usually turn into a reactionary. As soon as their own personal involvement in racist/sexist structures are what's being examined they'll lash out and defend their fragile privileged ego at any costs. As soon as a liberal white male professor starts getting students that ask why 90% of the authors in the syllabus are white males, he'll start writing online op-eds about how safe spaces on campus are destroying free speech or whatever.
Many liberals are happy to self-congratulate and feel superior by making fun of the xenophobe right-wing racists who are afraid of refugees, but ask them if they think borders should be fully open and they'll probably say no, they'll probably defend the idea that borders should exist, that they should be guarded by an armed force, that people born inside them deserve citizenship and the right to vote and state services and people born outside them don't, and they'll make up some story about why all of this is necessary and good while being completely oblivious to the ways this system reproduces the very racism they like to make fun of. What should be done with the people who are willing to risk their lives to cross the border illegally? What happens when oppressed groups are willing to confront the police in large numbers and break the law and risk their lives to liberate themselves and destroy the old society? Good liberals don't think about these questions too much, until they are forced to do it by circumstances, at which point they might very well turn out to be reactionaries.

It is almost as if people use liberal ideas AND collectivist ideas AND fascist ideas all the time because they are complementary rather than contradictory.

# ¿ Jan 15, 2016 06:30

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Tesseraction posted:

Which is true, but not necessarily something that disproves the assertion that the person doesn't tie their self-worth to an arbitrary definition of 'masculinity.'

What should a person tie his self-worth to? Note the qualifier: 'self'. And ask yourself whether you have actually considered the phrase 'arbitrary definition of masculinity', and what any bepenised person would benefit from your opinion of it.

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 06:20

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Arguing with people on the internet. How are you?

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 06:36

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

What if Space Sweden is really dull and it isn't the sort of environment where people are self-actualized and its really just an agnostic telling of Protestant Heaven?

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 06:39

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Twerkteam Pizza posted:

Well if we're being really collectivist

We aren't being "really collectivist", so, no.

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 22:59

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

rudatron posted:

The only external requirement of self-actualization is that there is a challenge, so space sweden is just as capable of providing that as anywhere else.

Being a man is a challenge. Many people fail at it. I suspect that the residents of Space Sweden would fail at it in impressive numbers.

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 23:02

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Xand_Man posted:

Does that mean no free blowjob robots?

I don't want to gently caress a robot. Robots can't cry.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 23:03

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

No definition would mean anything to you. You haven't the ears.

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 23:23

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Pththya-lyi posted:

But perhaps it would mean something to the potential men reading this thread, so why don't you tell me anyway?

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 23:29

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

I don't expect you to understand anything. The message is not for you.

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 23:38

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Nessus posted:

so to whom, exactly, are you signalling?

I am signalling to you that your discussion of 'masculinity' is as meaningful as a toad's discussion of meteorology.

# ¿ Mar 11, 2016 23:52

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Twerkteam Pizza posted:

Next up,

Pffft, you believe in the secular lie of biology? Did you know that Darwin invented racism?

# ¿ Mar 12, 2016 00:16

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

As a Marxist, I would argue that human nature is the result of the material conditions of their existence and, why no I don't think a person's literal body counts as material conditions why do you ask

# ¿ Mar 12, 2016 00:20

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

rudatron posted:

If gender was a simple result of biology, then it wouldn't be necessary to tell anyone to 'be a man' - they'd just be. The fact that that's not the case, that it has to be imposed, disproves your assertion.

This does not mean anything. All adult males are men. Some of them are just poo poo at it.

# ¿ Mar 12, 2016 00:34

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Who What Now posted:

Presumably this includes you, who cannot even define what it even is.

Sure thing, WarHams guy.

# ¿ Mar 12, 2016 00:36

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

When I was in high school, I used to gag on cocks all the time after school, because weiners are cool, right? They are the shape of light sabers and dinosaur tongues. Since I lacked a double-X chromosome set, people would of course pick on me. "Why are you doing gay stuff?" I replied: as I am a straight, and as I am doing it, it is obviously straight stuff. It was quite a shock to me when I later learned that more or less simultaneously, Judith Butler had made a similar argument, and, even later, when I was proved wrong by modern evolutionary psychology. Nowadays, I exclusively mouthify vaginas because biology. Even the one I hade surgically implanted!

# ¿ Mar 12, 2016 01:20

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Who What Now posted:

Sexuality is non-binary and the way society treats it is entirely arbitrary, just like gender.

No doubt your understanding of other people's sexuality is as well-founded as your understanding of other people's sense of masculinity.

# ¿ Mar 12, 2016 01:35

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

If you believe that everyone is bisexual, then it becomes quite apparent that your understanding starts and ends with yourself.

# ¿ Mar 12, 2016 01:39

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Somethingsensitive has unearthed quite a few pedophiles masquerading as militant do-gooders.

# ¿ Mar 15, 2016 06:51

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Nerd infighting. Girl-nerds seek out and destroy the hiding places of the only people lower than them: boy-nerds.

# ¿ Mar 16, 2016 00:26

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

Would I read that if I want to understand and see more of the alt-right influence and give it some dignity, or is it all piss-taking?

# ¿ May 1, 2016 19:26

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

What are some good resources if i am into alt-rightness but without the racism?

# ¿ May 1, 2016 19:26

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 13, 2024 00:31

Maoist Pussy: Feb 12, 2014; by Lowtax

I am hoping for serious answers from non-racists, thank you.

# ¿ May 1, 2016 19:47

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Understanding the psychology of HBD/Racial Realism/Dark Enlightenment

«‹›2 »