The Thielites have been scaring the crap out of me since I first encountered them online years ago. The fact that they are in SV, funding the tech that undergirds so much of our lives and economy is almost scarier than what they could do in government, given how obviously off-putting they are.
I have no idea how seriously to take them or what to do about them.
"The fact that they are in SV, funding the tech that undergirds so much of our lives and economy is almost scarier than what they could do in government, given how obviously off-putting they are." THIS PART.
"I have no idea how seriously to take them or what to do about them." Also this. I guess my best guess is "More seriously than we have been."
There is a possible charitable (sort of) explanation for Thiel:s overall behavior patternz and even more so for the behavior of many of his allies and semi-allies. I'm not saying it's the only possible explanation, but it does fit the data.
That is that Thiel believes something like this:
1. Speeding up economic growth and innovation is extremely morally important for future human flourishing.
2. Actually existing liberal democracy has done a piss poor job of that for the last 50 years.
3. Therefore it is morally justified to undermine or even overthrow liberal democracy in order to get us innovating and growing again.
This is charitable in that premises (1) and (2) are actually true. And I can sort of see how someone could get frustrated enough with (2l to delude themselves into thinking that (3) would somehow work, even in the face of all the historical evidence that it doesn't. Wishful thinking is powerful and all.
So I am curious then: do you think Yarvin has any of that mentality behind his neoreaction, or is he just a troll and mental masturbator? His writings suggest the latter to me: he says things that seem calibrated to get a rise out of people while boosting his own sense of being oh so clever and superior. But maybe I'm missing something.
I think Yarvin lacks the courage to earnestly invest in any idea or outcome other than seeming clever and superior. He is not man enough for that level of vulnerability.
And somehow, we've turned this pure Nazi bilge into fodder for late-night punchlines, and "gotcha" questions at debates, instead of drumming people like this out of society. We'll suffer for it.
The Thielites have been scaring the crap out of me since I first encountered them online years ago. The fact that they are in SV, funding the tech that undergirds so much of our lives and economy is almost scarier than what they could do in government, given how obviously off-putting they are.
I have no idea how seriously to take them or what to do about them.
"The fact that they are in SV, funding the tech that undergirds so much of our lives and economy is almost scarier than what they could do in government, given how obviously off-putting they are." THIS PART.
"I have no idea how seriously to take them or what to do about them." Also this. I guess my best guess is "More seriously than we have been."
Rachel Maddow makes my skin crawl.
I'm glad it's not just me!
There is a possible charitable (sort of) explanation for Thiel:s overall behavior patternz and even more so for the behavior of many of his allies and semi-allies. I'm not saying it's the only possible explanation, but it does fit the data.
That is that Thiel believes something like this:
1. Speeding up economic growth and innovation is extremely morally important for future human flourishing.
2. Actually existing liberal democracy has done a piss poor job of that for the last 50 years.
3. Therefore it is morally justified to undermine or even overthrow liberal democracy in order to get us innovating and growing again.
This is charitable in that premises (1) and (2) are actually true. And I can sort of see how someone could get frustrated enough with (2l to delude themselves into thinking that (3) would somehow work, even in the face of all the historical evidence that it doesn't. Wishful thinking is powerful and all.
I agree.
So I am curious then: do you think Yarvin has any of that mentality behind his neoreaction, or is he just a troll and mental masturbator? His writings suggest the latter to me: he says things that seem calibrated to get a rise out of people while boosting his own sense of being oh so clever and superior. But maybe I'm missing something.
I think Yarvin lacks the courage to earnestly invest in any idea or outcome other than seeming clever and superior. He is not man enough for that level of vulnerability.
And somehow, we've turned this pure Nazi bilge into fodder for late-night punchlines, and "gotcha" questions at debates, instead of drumming people like this out of society. We'll suffer for it.