Not your typical intellectual

People say the Alt-Right is dead. They say NRx is dead. I dunno, seems pretty alive over here. But, people always say all kinds of nonsense.

Over my blogging years, I just sort of naturally ended up in neoreactionary circles. They were, after all, the only ones talking about that juicy stuff, the stuff that actually interested me. It took me while to consciosly realize, but I’ve always been a great fan of Moldbug’s ‘formalization’, the idea that you explicitly state what is going on. This seems obvious, but really isn’t. Very, very few sites on the internet explicitly state what they are doing. Youtube isn’t about what You want to Tube, it’s about censorship. Facebook isn’t about being connected, it’s about censorship. Twitter isn’t about politics — it’s about censorship.

I like truth. I like saying things like they are. Moldbug, who was the first neoreactionary, said that we should say things as they are, therefore he had my attention.

This does not mean I am bound to other reactionaries. I tend to clash with your typical intellectual, usually because I get the urge to push their face in the toilet, which is funny because I used to get bullied when I was a kid, but mostly just logical because there was a sound reason I was bullied when I was a kid, just as there is a sound reason most intellectuals deserve to get bullied.

(Bullying is code for: ‘you are weak, you do not protect your borders.’ Bullying is nature’s way of telling you to man the fuck up. I am grateful for my bullies, who were a lot more honest with me than any adult telling me there it was unfair that I was being bullied, while truthfully it was completely fair that I was being bullied.)

Intellectuals are word warriors, and the one problem with word battles is that they come with lots of cowardice dressed as ratio. Often, I’ll find myself having a thousand-word discussion with an intellectual on some abstract topic, until I realize: this guy is just masking his insecurity. We’re not talking about political history, we’re talking about his fear of being socially rejected. He’s just pretending to be tough, using a bunch of ten-dollar words to mask how he fears having a two-cent tiny penis. He’s not looking for truth, he’s looking to intellectually intimidate, intellectual intimidation being a step below verbal intimidation, two steps below physical intimidation. The intellectual very often is a paper tiger.

Naturally, neoreaction is full of this type. It’s similar to the manosphere effect, where every man would tell you how he was banging five hot chicks on the side, only in neoreaction they’d tell you how their theories had solved all the world’s problems five times over. Same fronting, different name.

Now, while the intellectual blogosphere has died a little bit, the intellectual twittersphere is alive and well, and has exactly the same tendency. Guys blowing smoke up their own asses. I don’t like it.

But, that is the nature of intellectuals: I am smart, watch me be smart! This is natural: if you communicate solely through words, be prepared for people to hide behind their words.

The way to blow through word-fronting is to pick a fight. If someone hides behinds words, you tell them they hide behind words. Someone acts like an entryist, tell them they act like an entryist. The reason I instinctively want to push some heads into toilets is because that is the way to deal with an overcompensating intellectual. To establish peace, must establish dominance. Can’t compliment an intellectual on what he is doing right before you’ve made him accept what he does wrong.

Of course, that kind of stuff is not allowed on twitter. Formalization is hatespeech. So, I’ll stick to where I am allowed to do my thing. Here at the Garden, we like to grow stuff, see what happens.

Take the Alt Right. According to some intellectuals, it is dead. ‘Bad optics’, ‘Charlottesvillesgate’, blah blah. Entryist nonsense. The alt-right, as its name tells us, is the alternative right, meaning it is rightists who refuse to be cucked, unlike the mainstream right. The left vehemently opposes an uncucked right, and since the left is still in power, of course it comes down like a ton of bricks on anyone publicly defending the alt-right.

Even if Charlottesville never happened, even if every closeted alt-right rang every doorbell in America handing out cookies and dollars and saying how much they love America, we’d be in the exact same position. The alt right is public enemy number one.

The alt right is faceless – that is the brand. This is what scares the bejesus out of leftists like Hillary Clinton: millions of hardcore Trumpists who are all alt-rightists. Thus, while I do not go out of my way to call myself alt-right, I really don’t mind being associated with the label, for it gives us power. Similarly, people giving a different account of the alt right are entryists, for they try to take away our power.


  1. What do you mean with “intellectual blogosphere”?

    Before reading your post, I would not have hesitated to call Jim or Heartiste an intellectual, but somehow they don’t fit to the behaviour you desribe.

    1. More typically the old NRx blogosphere, or I guess would fit the description too.

      Heartiste sometimes tried to be an intellectual but really isn’t.

      Jim is an intellectual, but, like me, tries to be a different kind of intellectual; mostly, the type that gets along with warriors. Thus, the emphasis on lifting iron and raising testosterone.

      1. Americans used to say “pumping iron” (this was the title of a 70s documentary about bodybuilders) and still say “lifting weights”; we don’t say “lifting iron” — our lovable friend Jim mixed up the expressions. (I remember this mixup from a couple of years ago.)

        Also, the strongest weightlifters at any gym I’ve ever attended are always nerdy, quiet, sort of obsessive, private people. Well, except for that guy who I saw bench a set of 6 at 405 lbs — he wore bright pink and green spandex — kind of a cheerful steroid-homo I guess. So not “always”, but almost so. Like, the fat black guy who squatted a set of 3 at 620 a couple of days ago — definitely a nerd. Another guy I chat with there confirmed that this 3 x 620 guy’s a comic-book nerd, but it’s kind of obvious anyway, just from how he talks, that he’s that type. I say all this just to raise some doubt about the testosterone issue.

  2. >I tend to clash with your typical intellectual, usually because I get the urge to push their face in the toilet, which is funny because I used to get bullied when I was a kid, but mostly just logical because there was a sound reason I was bullied when I was a kid, just as there is a sound reason most intellectuals deserve to get bullied.
    (Bullying is code for: ‘you are weak, you do not protect your borders.’ Bullying is nature’s way of telling you to man the fuck up.

    I think that is not the whole story. Being weak but also being being respectful, submissive and servile would also avoid bullying. I was bullied because of being weak AND a pain in the ass smartass, know-itall, , trying to humiliate the stronger boys for being stupider and being a worse student. This is the same with many adult intellectuals, they are not recognizing their place in the hierarchy.

    When weaker men are respectful and even servile, they can avoid bullying even in prison. Rape and suchlike is actually rare. It’s more like “Make me a coffee!” Sadists exist everwhere, but the majority of the strong are not sadists, who provide protection for the weak who know their place.

  3. Often when people are angrily arguing online there’s some very specific personal association that moves them. You basically said this above with “… I realize: this guy is just masking his insecurity,” but I wish to emphasize that the motivating personal association might be something very specific, and of course this is especially likely to be the case when people are arguing about sexual or ethnic things (their fantastic yearnings, their dear old dad).

    (I’ve always felt, reading Nietzsche in translation — and he’s sort of the godfather of bloggers — that there was some personal association behind pretty much everything he wrote. If so, this would explain both one’s personal affection for him and the weird maddeningly ALMOST comprehensible character of his writing.)

    When you real-life-converse with people you can like them on a deeper(?) personal level that you get to via physical rhythms (“Oh, he’s 3/4 ADHD 1/4 Aspie with a coating of schizoid just like me!”) and you’re okay with their saying things that you would hate them for if you just redd these things online. I guess it might work the other way too, though — someone that seems very likable to you when you just read his stuff might not be someone that you can connect with in real space. (Still, it’s hard for me to believe that Nietzsche and Philip K Dick and I wouldn’t have enjoyed each other’s company a lot.)

    1. I tend to avoid philosophy convos in real life, because many people’s philosophies are just not well thought out. I will, sometimes, engage in a sort of philosophy lite, where I drop one wisdom soundbite and leave it at that.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *