Dark Linkage: Hestia Society for Social Studies

Growth, it seems, comes in fits and spurts.  It is hard to predict the occurrence of these spurts, but if the context is suitable for expansion, then it could come at any time.

I have stated elsewhere, I don’t think we’re going to see a great deal of expansion of Neoreaction per se.  This is not to say that our numbers will not swell with time, but that the main vehicles upon which Neoreactionary ideology will spread will be Neoreaction-derived subcultures and broader reactionary movements with some Neoreactionary influences.  I also suspect that the spread of Neoreactionary memes among the larger proto-reactionary public will be another vector for the spread of our ideas, but all this is a discussion for another time.

This in mind, Neoreaction is in no way done with moving forward.  We see now the next step in this journey: The Hestia Society for Social StudiesThe purpose is simple: take the herd of cats that is the Neoreactionary community, bring them together, and serve as a launching point for projects of Neoreactionary interest.

This is another piece of groundwork upon which to build further expansion.  I recommend taking a moment to browse through the site.  The “About section, for example, contains this little gem:

The purpose of the Hestia Society for Social Studies is to not only diagnose the cancer at the heart of the West’s decline, but to propose a cure.

I’d say that’s a pretty damn good summary of what Neoreaction as a whole is all about.

NON PROGREDI EST REGREDI

Advertisements

Dark Linkage: Dark Matter Journal

A while back, there was some discussion on Twitter as to what the best name would be for a Neoreactionary scholarly journal.  It was a fun exercise at the time, but since then had drifted to the back of my mind.

You can imagine my delight, however, when I found out that such a thing was being developed.  Dark Matter Journal has just appeared on the scene, with an opening issue that is as stimulating as it is eclectic.

In its own words:

“Dark Matter collects the best essays from the “neoreactionary” sphere and publishes them in an edited form. Original articles are also published. Content in the journal ranges widely, but its primary focus is on the intersection of politics, history, and human biological diversity.

The neoreaction, or the Dark Enlightenment, is not a unified social movement. The authors published here will agree as often as they disagree, and many operate with different priors or within different intellectual frameworks. The journal therefore values and promotes intellectual diversity.

The journal is published quarterly (more or less), with special issues convened for special purposes.

We have a CanonWe have brilliant and comprehensive online magazines.  We now have a scholarly journal.  Much as I am opposed to the idea of Neoreaction ever becoming a formal institution of its own (it would lose so much of its essence), I am delighted by these manifestations of our growing momentum.

CRESCIT EUNDO

Emotion, Neoreaction, and the Hearts of Men

Neoreaction has been a bit like the communal bong lately…everyone wants to take a hit.  In the past few days we’ve had three different hit pieces directed at us (here, here, and here), the most prominent of them being published in The Telegraph.

You’ll notice a common thread among all of these arguments: There’s a fair amount of snark, inaccurate representation of Neoreactionary beliefs, and a weird focus on ideas of race that borders on the obsessive.  You’ll also notice that a nuanced and reasoned analysis of Neoreactionary ideas is shockingly absent from each of these articles.

You don’t have to be a Neoreactionary to notice this.  Even the intended audience for these pieces has noticed that the arguments put forth in these write-ups are a bit lacking. Take a look at the comment section for The Telegraph, or take note of just how many deleted comments are on that article at Patheos.  Most people aren’t stupid.  They realize Neoreaction isn’t getting a fair shake.

This has had an effect I find quite amusing.  Those who have been previously on the fence are starting to pick a side to come down on…our side.  Meet NeoVictorian, the newest reactionary writer to take up a keyboard, and someone who credits Bartlett’s less-than-stellar piece in The Telegraph with inspiring this action.  Talk about “Antifragile“…

You know why these hit pieces sway the weak-minded and repel the reasonably intelligent?  They’re all buzzwords and emotional appeals.  No powerful logos to speak of, which makes these pieces impotent in the face of any focused, intellectual analysis.  They just don’t have the strength to withstand a heavy barrage of cognitive firepower.

Logos needs to be your foundation if you’re going to wage ideological war, because logical arguments are the only argument that can weather the scrutiny of intense analysis.  This is why Neoreaction continues to make progress in the face of what is becoming a maelstrom of opposition on almost all sides.  To put it bluntly, our logos is bigger.

Once you’ve got logos down, then (and only then) you add pathos and ethos.  To do otherwise puts the cart before the horse.  If you care about truth, you prioritize rigid logical analysis, not petty emotions and warnings against thoughtcrime.

That said, pathos is certainly effective in persuading people to do or believe certain things.  Yet, the combination of pathos and logos trumps it every time.  The co-ordination of the two is stronger than either of the parts.

This is why I call for Reaction to further establish its myths and narratives.  We’ve got the logos, and if we add the pathos, we make our appeal that much stronger.

Ethos is icing on the cake in this situation.  In our time when character is almost an afterthought (in some parts of the West more than others) appeals to honor are pretty much outmoded.  The only true appeals we see to ethos nowadays are admonishments against being a racist, sexist, or whatever -ist term is the popular epithet du jour against those not sufficiently progressive.  Still, even now ethos has some swaying power, and in combination with the other two facets of persuasion it completes the great triumvirate of rhetoric.

When all three elements are put together, and presented in proper fashion, the majority of people cannot help but be convinced of your ideas.  This is the end result that all those individuals publishing attacks on Neoreaction are trying to achieve, of course.  The problem is, they’re missing key elements of this brew, and thus demonstrating their amateur status in the art of persuasion.  Clearly they need to browse The Patrician’s Library and take a peek at Aristotle’s Rhetoric (great read, by the way)What are those men ever going to do if they find themselves in debate with someone who really knows how to sway the hearts of men?

This is a weakness of many anti-Neoreactionaries, and what do we do when we see weakness in those who are vehemently opposed to us and are trying to appearing threatening?  We exploit those weaknesses for our own benefit, of course.  We have to do so if we want to survive the modernist assault, and we better get the practice in before the attacks on Neoreaction start to have teeth.

ANTE OMNIA ARMARI

Dark Linkage: The Reaction on Tumblr

I have mentioned a few times before that I think Tumblr is a prime target for Neoreactionary expansion.  Though I personally don’t frequent it too often (proper engagement with it requires a far shorter attention span than mine, which is saying a lot given my chaotic and unfocused ENTP sensibilities), I am greatly amused by the thought of Neoreactionaries and Social Justice Warriors duking it out with gifs, memes, and quick remarks, and I’d like to make that vision a reality.

Now, the number of properly neoreactionary Tumblrs could probably be counted on one hand.  Tumblr isn’t exactly a platform that easily facilitates philosophical and intellectual musings on arcane topics, after all.  After doing a bit of research, though, I found out fairly quickly that while the number of Tumblrs that might be considered neoreactionary is small, there exists a sizable population of Tumblrs that fall within the broader Reactionary/Traditionalist/New Right community.  I found myself running across Archeofuturists, Nationalists, Evola-style Traditionalists, Hyperboreans, fascists, and more!

Ryan over at Reactionary Traditionalist was an invaluable guide to me in this process, pointing me in the direction of almost 500 reactionary-leaning Tumblrs.  Here’s the full list, if you’re interested, and a much shorter list, if you lack the focus, attention span, and determination to trawl through 493 Tumblrs to find ones you like.

Those of you who have been paying close attention may have noticed that in the past few days, a new link category has sprung up to the right: Reactionary Tumblrs.  It contains a brief list of those Tumblrs I find particularly delightful, and serves as my official declaration of support for all those Reactionaries seeking to carve out a niche on a site famed for the progressive nature of its users.

That said, here’s a few Tumblrs that I personally found to be enjoyable and heartily recommend:

ALIS AQUILAE

The Adventures of David Brin: Part Two

Amos and Gromar is having a bit of fun at the writer David Brin’s expense, kicking off an “Exquisite Corpse“-style story detailing Brin’s adventures struggling against the malevolent forces of the Dark Enlightenment.   I’ve always loved this sort of thing, and so I jumped in with a quick comment detailing what happened next.  I reprint it here below for fun and amusement.  If you care to write the next part of the story, I highly encourage you to do so in the comments.

Part Two (click here to read Part One)

“…grabbed hold of the chandelier, swinging himself across the room and landing with a (less-than-graceful) “THUMP” in front of the fireplace. Grasping a poker, he turned round and decried at the intrusive fop “Turn and draw, foul vagrant! I shall best you at your own little game!”

Yet the Aristocrat remained unperturbed. “Oh, I get it. You want to fence. How quaint.”

Brin pressed on, hoping to end this shenanigan quickly “It would not be noble of you to ignore my request for a duel!”

Yet still, the Aristocrat refused to play Brin’s game “It’s a good thing not all you naughty peasants are this way. You’d be even more insufferable than you already are. No, I come to you tonight with neither sabre nor rapier. We adherents of the Dark Lord have other means at our disposal for combat…”

Tentacles pulsating with dark magic erupted from the floor, seemingly sapping all the light from the room as they twisted and tangled in the firelight. Chills ran up Brin’s spine, but the thought of how the Enlightenment had enabled so many individuals to watch slightly less menacing tentacles penetrate young, animated Japanese schoolgirls gave him courage.

“NO” he cried, “I am a wielder of the Flame of the Enlightenment! I shall not let you defile and enslave these poor tentacles with your powers of Hierarchy and Tradition! All shall be free and enlightened before me, even those non-human entities that are nonetheless deserving of our respect and tolerance!”

It was the last thing he remembered before the tentacles wrapped around him and his consciousness faded away…”

 

Update: Continue on to Part Three here

Looking Backwards, Looking Forwards, and Dark Linkage

Once again, as occurs every year, our brush with Janus has been completed.  Now, as we move further away from the boundary between the years, it seems prudent to follow tradition and allow a moment of reflection for what has past and what will be.

Nick Land has put up a short recap of this year in Reaction, but if that’s not enough for you, head on over to Radish for what can only be described as the “Not-Quite-Yet-But-Soon-It-Will-Be Definitive Guide to Reaction in 2013”.  As of this writing, Radish only covers the first 5 months of the year (hence the “not-quite-yet” bit), but what they do have at the moment is incredibly detailed, and one can be certain that Mr. Boetel’s analysis of the latter seven months of the year will be equally meticulous.

Just as the new year is thought of as a time of rebirth and new beginnings, so too are we witnessing new beginnings in the Reactionary community.  The year is young indeed, but already we welcome new Reactionary blogs into the world.  First, we have the long-awaited blog of famed Reactionary Twitterer E.H. Looney.  Granted, it’s on Tumblr, bastion of Tumblr feminists and other social justice warriors, but it suits Mr. Looney’s style, and in conjunction with a few other Reactionary Tumblrs, could serve as a beachhead on which to establish a presence on that social network.  Reactionaries versus Tumblr feminists on their hometurf?  Talk about lions among lambs.  I can’t wait to see how that goes down…

On an unrelated note, we need to create a reactionary neologism for “one who uses Twitter” that sounds less effeminate that “Twitterer”.  I propose “Twitter Lord”.

Second, we have a blog that technically isn’t a child of 2014, being born in the final days of 2013, but I’m a big picture person, not a details person, so permit me this oversight.  I present to you Henry DampierHe may just be a twitter bot designed to market açai berry, but I look forward to seeing more from him nonetheless.

On a more personal note, I’ve quite enjoyed this blogging thing greatly.  It took me some time to get into a consistent rhythm, but I think I’ve got a fair handle on this whole “regular posting” schtick.  I honestly thought I’d run out of things to say, but as 2014 dawns, I find myself with more, not fewer, ideas I wish to put forth.

My personal schedule has ensured that I don’t know how consistently I’ll be able to post in the first several months of this year. Make no mistake, though, this blog will not be going dark anytime soon, not when there’s so much excitement on the horizon.  The reaction has only really just begun, and you can be damn sure that this Legionnaire will continue to march onwards.

AD MULTOS ANNOS

A Schema for Understanding the Reaction

There seems to be some tension building between the Neoreactionary sphere and the “New Right”, a lot of it stemming from this article over at Counter-Currents written up by Matt Parrott.  In it, we see the beginning of fault lines show in two movements that are, in all fairness, incredibly similar and believe in many of the same ideals.

(Before we begin though, I would like to take a moment and commend Mr. Parrott at this point for his work with The Traditionalist Youth Network).

I admit, I am not quite sure why there needs to be conflict between the two camps.  We are both critical of egalitarianism, modernism, feminism, and other hallmarks of this age.  We both understand the importance of tradition and ancestry.  We both understand that races are different, and we should behave accordingly.  Indeed, it is not uncommon to find Reactionary and New Right blogs and websites linking to each other (I, for one, have had Counter-Currents and Alternative Right on my blogroll since this site’s inception).

Rather than delving into the mess and making a further mountain of out what seems be a molehill, I’d rather try to make sense of the various collective terms that encompass the Reaction as a whole.  In doing so, perhaps we can get to the root of why the Neoreactionaries and the New Right are really going at each other.  Granted, what I propose is just as arbitrary as any other paradigm that has been put forth, but I hope this will hope to at least clarify some things nonetheless.

Reaction: The overarching term for all those who take issue with the way society is currently progressing and seek to alter the current arrangement to be less modernist.

Red Pill: Reaction in the sexual realm.  The Manosphere types who’ve figured out that mainstream advice on how to attract women is a bit off are a prime example of this type of Reactionary.

The Dark Enlightenment: With a name that  started off as a joke but somehow managed to gain traction (the debates about whether to find a new name are unceasing), The Dark Enlightenment comprises a grab-bag of some Red Pill blogs, some Human Biodiversity, some anti-modernist political and social commentary, as well as the Neoreactionaries and a few other miscellaneous sorts.  Note that not all within the Dark Enlightenment community happen to be as politically reactionary as might be expected (Jayman, one of the leading lights of HBD blogging, happens to be politically liberal).

Neoreactionaries: The pontificating intellectuals of the Dark Enlightenment.  We tend to focus mostly on discussions of politics and social orders, with occasional forays into other aspects of The Dark Enlightenment.  We’re against the current arrangement, and seek to critique it, but beyond that we can’t agree on too much.  We are acutely aware of this, we just don’t consider it to be too much of a problem.

The New Right: The New Right has been percolating since before The Dark Enlightenment began to coalesce, so I’m loathe to stick it under that umbrella.  However, as I mentioned earlier, they do have very similar positions to us Neoreactionaries in regard to certain issues.  The devil is in the details though, and there are a few key points of dissent.

While Neoreaction has no real goal other than the intellectual discussion of various ideas, The New Right (for the most part) advocates for the creation of a White Nationalist state and wishes to bring attention to the Jewish Question.  Most neoreactionaries feel some sympathy for ethno-nationalist ideas, though few of us openly advocate for them ourselves.  Additionally, we tend not discuss the Jews, viewing other factors as being more influential in the decline of Western Civilization.  It isn’t that we’re necessarily against discussing either of those things, our minds are just elsewhere.  Finally, as I said, Neoreactionaries tend to be intellectuals first, men of action second.  This must irk many in the New Right, who often favor action over discussion, but both approaches have their merits, which speaks more to how much more effective we could be if we work together than if we spend time squabbling over “the best approach”.  Each way of doing things will be more effective in certain contexts than the other, rendering each one necessary at times.

Given the similarity of the two camps though, the recent kerfuffle comes off as more of a family squabble than a clash of two opposing and hostile ideologies.  Parrott’s piece can be boiled down to “These people aren’t nearly extreme enough, but they’re alright and we may find a use for them yet”.  Implicit in the argument is an understanding that we’re more closely aligned with them than most of the other people out there, so it would be off-base to criticize Mr. Parrott for failing to understand this.

The Neoreactionaries and the New Right do share much common ground.  We both realize this.  Any disagreements between the two probably won’t get resolved, due to the nuances of our respective positions, but will tend to be rather minor points in the grand scheme of things.

In any regard, adopting the maxim of “No enemies to the right of me” seems to be most suitable for neoreactionary purposes.  I suspect in time that some sort of tentative arrangement will be reached, upon which further compromises and co-operation could be built.  I see no need to sabotage the chances of that happening with inane sniping and pointless bickering.  We only hurt both our camps that way.

MEMORES ACTI PRUDENTES FUTURI