askchapo

I've been reading Neoreaction a Basilisk and, through the books criticisms, getting more acquainted with the current theories right wing "intellectuals" are propagating. That's led me to consider reading through at least some of Nick Land's work, maybe to better grasp what theory Silicon Valley elites are huffing at the moment.

I've done this once; before I ever became more ideologically aware, I read through Atlas Shrugged not knowing what it was and after finishing, even then, walked away pissed off I spent any time on it. However, it was useful for catching right wing references and understanding the basis for libertarianism later. It's also been interesting, though not quite useful, to trace how right wing thought has evolved and what the resulting "praxis" has looked like; the Koch brothers using the tea party as an entryist/infiltration strategy for promoting libertarianism in government, the resulting frustration of those efforts leading to Steve Banon and the promotion of Trump and the beginnings of more "authoritarian" or dictatorial strategies, and now to Moldbug and Land promoting straight up accelerationism and fascism amongst the ascendant tech CEOs after they all abandoned their former siding with liberals.

But is it useful to know any of that? I feel like all that's happening as I come to understand how they think and how they implement their vision for the world, the more I understand how fucked we are (let's assume we're fucked, right?).