Brilliant. Yes. It's axiomatic (imho) that we "gut check" what's right and wrong, then scramble our cognition to figure out sentences that explain why we feel that way. Temperament seems as good a word as any for that proclivity. Very helpful. Looking forward to more.
tyvm. indeed, brain scans confirm how a lot of our information is processed and where this morality.... er "political beliefs" are coming from. temperament rules most imho.
Rufo has won several significant victories that are not pyrrhic. The anti-DEI legislation in TX and FL have changed both the overt content (fire/reassign DEI administrators), but also weaponized the bureaucracy against DEI proponents. UT Austin is one example of this. It's one of the most liberal state universities in Texas. Now student groups (that are allowed to exist under current legislation) cannot even reserve rooms because the bureaucrats are so afraid of losing their state funding.
The commies haven't figured out how to deal with Rufo yet, and they will counter-attack. Maybe they will prevail longer term, but that happens only if Rufo et al loses the fight.
The joke of "monarchy" vs "democracy" is that the real form of gov't is bureaucracy. I'm not clear on what Yarvin has accomplished in terms of dismantling the bureaucracy or subverting it to his purposes.
before replying I want to emphasize that my opinion on Rufo's tactics are by far the least interesting, even borderline not relevant, points of this piece. the essence of this essay is what you think of his tactics is essentially a temperament derivative.
>the year is 1984. Regan just won 49 out of 50 states. the conservative energy has swelled to new heights. the overton window has pivoted to bagging on commies and "hippies", the rightwing energy is palpable. institutions are taking notice.
>the year is 2016. the Brexit vote just passed. the UK will leave the neoliberal bureaucrats who run an oligarchy that masquerades as a democracy. UKIP surges in popularity. the overton window shifts decidedly right. the wokes have been dealt a fatal strike. this is a huge blow to the EU and GAE.
and look where we are today in both instances. both of these were rightward surges of energy in an undeniable left-bound drift. Reagan's dominance/popularity and Brexit were orders of magnitude more salient and impactful than getting some college administrators and the head of Harvard fired.
the leftward swim is a systemic, inexorable byproduct of something much deeper. and getting some wokes fired does not cure it. what Yarvin advocates is much more distal-cause focused than Rufo's cultural victories.
I think one point of disagreement is the inexorable leftward swim. I was taught it was inexorable in school, but I no longer believe that. I believe there is a deathmatch of ideas, except ideas are immortal. There isn't one victory that will win them all, nor is their ultimate victory assured. It takes continued vigilance and energy.
Brexit was a huge victory, but the globalists did their best to mitigate it. Plus, Brexiteers lost on immigration, and got outflanked on still other issues. IIRC, Reagan was also pro-amnesty for illegals. But I think these are best analyzed as battles won/lost in the context of a larger war.
If Rufo stopped where he was and said 'got the president of Harvard fired, I'm all done', then I would agree that his victories would be short-lived. But his approach is institutional because he aims to make his victories last as long as possible.
Brilliant. Yes. It's axiomatic (imho) that we "gut check" what's right and wrong, then scramble our cognition to figure out sentences that explain why we feel that way. Temperament seems as good a word as any for that proclivity. Very helpful. Looking forward to more.
tyvm. indeed, brain scans confirm how a lot of our information is processed and where this morality.... er "political beliefs" are coming from. temperament rules most imho.
will post more on it soon.
Rufo has won several significant victories that are not pyrrhic. The anti-DEI legislation in TX and FL have changed both the overt content (fire/reassign DEI administrators), but also weaponized the bureaucracy against DEI proponents. UT Austin is one example of this. It's one of the most liberal state universities in Texas. Now student groups (that are allowed to exist under current legislation) cannot even reserve rooms because the bureaucrats are so afraid of losing their state funding.
The commies haven't figured out how to deal with Rufo yet, and they will counter-attack. Maybe they will prevail longer term, but that happens only if Rufo et al loses the fight.
The joke of "monarchy" vs "democracy" is that the real form of gov't is bureaucracy. I'm not clear on what Yarvin has accomplished in terms of dismantling the bureaucracy or subverting it to his purposes.
before replying I want to emphasize that my opinion on Rufo's tactics are by far the least interesting, even borderline not relevant, points of this piece. the essence of this essay is what you think of his tactics is essentially a temperament derivative.
>the year is 1984. Regan just won 49 out of 50 states. the conservative energy has swelled to new heights. the overton window has pivoted to bagging on commies and "hippies", the rightwing energy is palpable. institutions are taking notice.
>the year is 2016. the Brexit vote just passed. the UK will leave the neoliberal bureaucrats who run an oligarchy that masquerades as a democracy. UKIP surges in popularity. the overton window shifts decidedly right. the wokes have been dealt a fatal strike. this is a huge blow to the EU and GAE.
and look where we are today in both instances. both of these were rightward surges of energy in an undeniable left-bound drift. Reagan's dominance/popularity and Brexit were orders of magnitude more salient and impactful than getting some college administrators and the head of Harvard fired.
the leftward swim is a systemic, inexorable byproduct of something much deeper. and getting some wokes fired does not cure it. what Yarvin advocates is much more distal-cause focused than Rufo's cultural victories.
I think one point of disagreement is the inexorable leftward swim. I was taught it was inexorable in school, but I no longer believe that. I believe there is a deathmatch of ideas, except ideas are immortal. There isn't one victory that will win them all, nor is their ultimate victory assured. It takes continued vigilance and energy.
Brexit was a huge victory, but the globalists did their best to mitigate it. Plus, Brexiteers lost on immigration, and got outflanked on still other issues. IIRC, Reagan was also pro-amnesty for illegals. But I think these are best analyzed as battles won/lost in the context of a larger war.
If Rufo stopped where he was and said 'got the president of Harvard fired, I'm all done', then I would agree that his victories would be short-lived. But his approach is institutional because he aims to make his victories last as long as possible.