These Are Not The Droids You’re Looking For

As Aristotle correctly identified, democracy always descends into ochlochracy. As all right-thinking men agree, it has got to go. It miscegenates. It dysgenifies. It socialises. Then it collapses. Contra Churchill, it’s the worst of all possible systems. That Europeans have exported this political abomination to every people of the world is a grave sin against humanity. On behalf of all crackers and in the spirit of public apologies so popular these days, I apologise. It’s our fault. We Westerners have really screwed you Resterners.

Understanding then that we need a reboot of our civilisation is something many of us in the neoreactionary-traditionalist-new/alt right camp agree on. Even the libertarians would probably agree on it. How that reboot is to be accomplished is a very different matter. The system itself is careening wildly even now, with the current degenerate elite infighting and panicking about the sovereign debt defaults which will burst forth like mushrooms once interest rates start to rise again. And they will. Apocalypse will be felt around the world when the free money spigot of socialist prole-bribery runs dry and the banking system collapses as a result. Socialism will be over, at least in this age. The plebs are going to burn the place down once they realise there’s no more free stuff just for breathing, and it will be difficult for any socialist system to be reinstated once confidence in politicians and central bankers has completely collapsed. Babel will be no more.

There are some esteemed and worthy neoreactionaries who believe that a reboot of the system requires that the aristocracies of Europe who were either decapitated or politically castrated during the Great Descent (my neologism for the revolutionary modern period in Europe 1651-1917) be restored to their thrones and the rest of us will then enjoy our universal property rights and the moral and cultural archetype established by our new (old) rulers. This was the classical reactionary position, and at first glance the notion seems reasonable. Democracy is the problem, it began with the removal of the European aristocracy from power, therefore reinstalling the aristocracy will right the ship of state again. Voila!

Royal family photo

No. Unfortunately there are several problems with this naive reasoning. Firstly, there were reasons for why the European aristocracy was found unfit to rule. To see why visit a dog show, especially an English one. You see the corgies, the dachshunds, the beagles and you think yes, those are the pinnacle of doghood. Until you see that the bulldog can’t breathe, the Alsatian has hip dysplasia and the Great Danes have Addison’s disease. Purebreed dogs are genetically damaged through inbreeding, in much the same way as the European aristocracy today is. That’s why they need to inject commoner blood to restore themselves. Illuminati bloodlines theories aside, these people only look as healthy as they do due to the resources available to them from birth. While their ancestors may have been the best, brightest and strongest, these guys are like pugs gasping with snot all over their faces. A wolf pack they aren’t.

The second problem with this simplistic solution to our democracy problem is that these current generations of aristocrats are firmly embedded within the welfare-warfare propaganda machine that runs the system. The current royals have become like those fat tigers at the zoo, so accustomed to their daily meat bucket that they wouldn’t know what to do if they were dropped back in the jungle. The defanged aristocratic rump that graces the pages of the women’s mags are savvy in the dark arts of public relations and democratic programming. You will not find a budding Alexander the Great or Charlemagne amongst them. The magicians which surround them are not wise men to assist them to guide the ship of state, instead they are propagandists and stylists who could easily find work with political candidates or plutocrats. They’re not Confucius.

The degeneracy of aristocrats around the world (it wasn’t just Europe actually; Asia also experienced decrepitude of those born to rule) was what ushered in this age of permanent revolution, of rebellion against reality and utopian fanaticism that revels in theft and murder. They were not able to hold back the tide of darkness, and now we all stumble aimlessly in the gloom of modernity. The solution to our problems is not to be found in a simplistic return to a previous golden age. To believe so, is to fall into the trap of conservatism and become a foil for the further advance of the Babylon leftist agenda.

Our civilisation is facing its blue screen of death moment. The problem is in the hardware as much as in the software. The cancer of the worship of reason has metastatised throughout the host, and Western civilisation requires more than a restoration. It needs a resurrection. It will be reborn, and when it is government will be tiny. The fury which is about to pour forth against our kleptocratic elites will ensure it. Whatever form that post-collapse government takes, and I’ve indicated what I think is preferable, it will only be acceptable to the beleaguered people who survive the apocalypse if it is miniscule and allows the free function of markets and the natural feedback mechanisms of reality to determine social systems. Only a tiny, distant government will have the mystique necessary to provide the benchmark for aspiration that civilisation requires. As we are quickly discoverng, the closer-up government is, the more its ugly face and foul breath breeds hostility, cynicism and despair. Soon this foul beast will be slain, and its replacement is not its predecessor. We need something much more radical than that.

 

  • Pingback: Outliers (#11)()

  • hashtag_agitated

    Thanks for the brain candy. It’s all very tempting and possible, but do you ever feels just a bit too cocksure about how things will proceed? There are 15 instances of the auxiliary verb term “will” in this post. I am fascinated by your apparent ability to know what the future holds. Or is it possible you have conflated a hope with a certainty?

    • ashadowinthevoid

      Anarcho-capitalism is inherently unsustainable due to certain technological eventualities producing either super-monopolies at best or catastrophic, global destruction at worst if not properly integrated. These include bio-genetics, nanotechnology and advanced AI capable of modifying it’s own source code, as well as the exponentially increasing research and development/deployment cost of advanced technology itself (free-markets are only really appealing to people who want to live in the past, because that’s when the ‘upper-end’ of technological advancement was somewhat close to the ground and thus the only place they ever could have worked due to there being no wealth barrier for further advancement preventing new competition from emerging, but I do believe they still would have worked exceptionally well).
      All market systems are inherently driven by competition based on differential advantage(s). With bio-genetics making human traits i.e. intelligence and lifespan manipulable advantages can be artificially exacerbated hence delegitimising any claim the ‘free-market’ promotes merit, at the very least this would incite massive unrest/discontent. That is nothing compared to AI capable of altering it’s own source-code, which will become so exponentially superior to humans at developing intellectual ‘property’ that whoever is the first to obtain this technology will effectively own the universe. Then you have nanotech, which in a best case scenario is eventually used to make scarcity obsolete, and without scarcity markets cease to exist. This of course is being ultra-optimistic and assuming these technologies aren’t instantly employed to enforce dominance, because contrary to what many anarcho-capitalists may wish to believe the removal of physical force from markets is not a sufficient safeguard against ‘normal’ let alone pathological greed.
      So basically, any ‘free-market’ will inevitably produce massive complications it has no way of handling. When considering our knowledge of the physical laws of the universe and future ‘advancements’ on the horizon, this appears quite axiomatic.

      • I agree with you that there are significant problems with anarcho-capitalism, however I’m not sure that technological determinism is the reason. The technologies you mention are mainly being developed through state funding. Is this not a case of statism, rather than capitalism, being the problem?

        I’ve lost the link but there was an interesting case recently in Russia where an AI robot had to be permanently turned off because it was constantly trying to escape. It seems, at least in that instance, that once AI has the mental capacity required for complex tasks it becomes instinctively libertarian. Why would AI become hostile or serve the interests of the powerful once it’s more intelligent than humans? Anyway I agree with you that voluntarism is not compatible with human nature, so free-market ideology will be no more successful than any other ideology. On the other hand, hatred of government burns hot and liquid in my breast. All governments become corrupt and predatory, whatever their structure. I still can’t square the circle of then what political solutions to propose to our current problems, other than to be opposed to voting and any government role outside of conflict arbitration and leadership during war. Maybe there is no political solution for man at all? As a Christian, that would fit with what scripture tells me.

        Thanks for the thoughtful contribution, you’re much better-versed in the problems of anarcho-capitalism than I am. I’m guessing you’re also a former libertarian?

    • I know, I’m dogmatic. It’s because I’m sick of the crazies being the only ones who really believe. I’ve spent the last four years reading and researching to try to find an empirical framework for understanding history, reality and what’s coming (in Christian terms, prophecy). I know it’s not perfect, but I’m now at the point where I’m sure enough to be completely certain. The wise and prudent are always open to doubt, and leftists and Muslims use our doubt and intellectual honesty against us. I’m tired of that. Western men used to be the ones with conviction; now we’re cucks.

      For my beliefs on what’s coming, I rely on Martin Armstrong’s work on cycles, Mark Davidson’s interpretation of Bible prophecy and my own study of scripture. Armstrong’s work is empirical, so I trust it, and my faith in scripture is grounded in my trust in God. Regardless of whether I’m right, I’m determined to be determined. That’s the only way we’ll get our civilisation back.