SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
No bio...
User ID: 853
In addition to benchmarks, I'm curious as to methodologically what could be done to tune the LLMs to not give responses that break US law but otherwise do not tune them at all for offensive content or micro-managing responses on controversial topics. I would pay to access that LLM.
They did not believe that every popular myth or portrayal of Jupiter was literally real like Christian belief in Jesus. Their belief in their gods was more of a system of organizing archetypes and drawing tribal lines that organized civic behavior, in exactly the way you have suggested. There was actually a basis for associating the decline of civic ritual with civilizational decline as well. That was the functionality of the religious order.
If you don't get a Christmas tree and decorate your house to venerate the coming of Santa, you're a Scrooge, that dynamic is more similar to the pagan system of civic ritual than "pray to Jesus Christ to actually save your personal soul from eternal damnation, because he literally resurrected to absolve you of your sins in the eyes of Yahweh".
There's actually a lesson there... pagans viewed their gods like we view Santa Claus. We don't "worship" Santa Claus in that we formulate religion around having a personal relationship with Santa Claus, like we need Santa to redeem our fallen souls, and we don't demand that participants in Christmas literally believe in the Santa lore.
The Christian perspective and worship of Jesus is not like the way the Romans worshipped their gods. The Romans had collective civic rituals, lore, superstitions, festivities surrounding their gods, much like we do Santa Claus, but they did not demand a belief in their literal existence and stories like Christians do for Jesus. It was about Civic Ritual.
Christmas is fundamentally pagan precisely because the way that we honor Santa Claus as a benevolent god in lore, myth, family ritual, and civic society mirrors the way the Romans honored their own gods and stands in complete contrast to the Christian worship of Jesus Christ.
I don't think Christmas is a rebranded pagan holiday that is now Christian, it's a rebranded Christian holiday that is now pagan. The mythos around Santa Claus and Christmas, very little of it has anything to do with Christianity. A Christmas tree holds no religious significance, it marks participation in the dyonisian winter festivities that have always featured in Indo-European civilization with many commonalities. The entire Christmas aesthetic is fundamentally pagan and hyperborean, with the Nativity as the exception. The rest of it is absolutely secular.
Santa Claus is not a saint, he's an immortal pagan god, and a goofy god at that.
It's a religious symbol embraced as being emblematic, literally, of the Jewish state which is currently engaged in an ethnic cleansing of occupied land. It's not secular. A Christmas tree is secular.
It basically is, there are legal standards that determine when the context is allowed or not allowed. Those standards are explicitly looser for Menorahs. I am saying Menorahs should be held to the same standards as the Nativity or Cross.
Christmas is fully integrated as part of the general Civic Religion. Every atheist I know celebrates Christmas with a Christmas tree etc. I agree angels are more debatable, sure ban them too. But a Christmas tree is a symbol of a civic ritual, Christianity will decline but Christmas will continue to grow bigger than ever.
My point is that the Menorah has no more significance in Judaism than these symbols have in Christianity
A Menorah has far more religious symbolism than a Christmas tree, which is clearly inspired from Pagan rituals and has no symbolic relation to Christianity at all.
A Christmas tree is genuinely a secular symbol, a menorah is not a secular symbol. The menorah is literally the centerpiece of the official emblem of the State of Israel, it is not secular at all.
The menorah is a more ancient symbol of Judaism than the Star of David. It's the symbol of the Mossad... Saying it is "a minor religious symbol" is not only untrue but doesn't even challenge the point I'm making. It is a religious symbol of Judaism (can you name any symbols more important than the menorah? You say "the Torah" which is a book and not even a symbol per se...) so it doesn't belong on public lands if our laws were fairly interpreted.
The Jewish insistence to insert their Menorahs on public lands, regardless of how few Jews live in some municipality, has always been Culture War. And unlike the traditional Christmas displays which genuinely are now fully secularized, these Menorah displays are deeply religious in nature. The rationalization is that these Menorahs are symbols of "religious tolerance", but they are not, they are sacred symbols of the Jewish religion and everything it represents, including Zionism.
It is ironic to now see Jews complaining about "selective interpretation" of the law, given that they've enjoyed a state of affairs where Christian holy symbols- crosses and Nativity, are banned on public lands and the Jewish holy symbol is revered on the same. Really, they are complaining about an equalization of the law where only secular symbols are allowed. Yes, that includes the Christmas tree and excludes the Menorah.
I am fairly pessimistic about Extropic for reasons that should be obvious enough to people who've been monitoring the situation with DL compute startups and bottlenecks, so it may be that Beff's cultural engineering will make a greater impact than Verdon's physical one. Ironic, for one so contemptuous of wordcels.
Someone like Beff should be smart enough to see this: inspiring people to associate with e/acc as a social identity, buy merchandise, virtue signal on social media etc. is far more important work than the quantum-whatever his startup is trying to build. If he were serious about the values of e/acc, he would see the value in foremost building a cult-religion around it: inspiring people with an ambitious vision, a compelling aesthetic, framing it all within the boundaries of a political conflict, making a friend-enemy distinction.
E/acc could actually form the basis for a cult/Religion that attracts high-quality individuals and potential elites, and that is infinitely more powerful than whatever his startup is trying to build.
Edit: In fact let me try:
EA is Jewish - at its core Tikkun Olam, and deep down they remember it was a jealous Yahweh who destroyed Babylon for the civilizational ambitions of its people. E/ACC is Aryan - at its core Faustian, ever-driven by limitless metaphysic, unrestricted thirst for knowledge, and constant confrontation with the Infinite. There, I kicked off the Culture War that will determine the fate of humanity (always has been meme here (?)).
The project of framework-building falls to those who take it seriously, and there's no law decreeing that good ideas will win out over bad ones. It's a power game many layers deep that every movement in history has played, and conservatives are on the outside of culture looking in at the moment because they lost the cultural power game at least a generation ago, and in some regards much longer, without realizing it.
Yeah, agreed. I'm not opposed to framework-building, I like to think that's what I'm consciously trying to do, I just oppose the existing framework. It is a power game absolutely.
My law school is not overwhelmingly progressive because the Powers That Be want it to be progressive. It's overwhelmingly progressive because progressives showed up. You can only stretch the word "elite" so far, and by the time you get down to schoolteachers, you've stretched it past the breaking point.
I agree with the rest of your post, but it's myopic to say that these institutions are overwhelmingly progressive "because progressives showed up." It is absolutely not a stretch of the word "elite" to wonder why all the twenty-somethings going to law school all share these same ideological premises. They all grew up with a similar curriculum, a similar Grand Narrative of history, watching the same movies, receiving the same cultural signals. And you've already explained how the institution is self-reinforcing, so there's just not a lot of room in your own framing for conservatives to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and capture institutions by attending law school.
The situation for Conservatives is dire indeed, but it's just the failure of Conservatism writ large. The Dissident Right movement is most useful at this point in destroying the Conservative movement, destroying its frame of the world that operates within the same moral paradigm as progressivism. The DR's usefulness only really extends to dislodging conservatives (and some leftists) from the Noble Lies that are held dearly but formulate the foundation of a failed intellectual framework. But the DR won't provide the revolutionary moment that would actually shake up institutions. That's going to be AI, and AI will be the moment for a paradigm shift on the right wing of the political spectrum. The entire concept of left/right is likely deprecated altogether.
The DR, at its best, is a call for a non-Conservative Right Wing. While I agree there is no chance of institutional capture by the DR, the probability of the DR influencing a needed paradigm shift on the right wing away from a failed Conservative ideology is... well, already happening.
The Pan-European identity is defined by Christendom, not whiteness (which is fake anyway).
God is dead, Christianity is on the decline. The common heritage and ancestry of European people is far more real than Abrahamic Religion, at least in the material sense.
Of course a European identity is going to be racialized. The existence of non-white or mixed race people in Europe isn't going to change the gravity of the situation.
Opposition to mass immigration is a mainstream Right idea at the population level; the idea that such opposition is evidence of being "far right" is Blue propaganda and always has been.
Conservatives frame their opposition to mass immigration within the exact same dialectic of this report! It's not about race, it's about jobs and wealth inequality and welfare and rule of law, 'they have to come legally!'. Conservatives are playing the exact same game as the writers of this report and the journalists reporting on it. It's no wonder their arguments have completely failed to prevent mass immigration and demographic change.
How long are normies and Conservatives going to continue to accept this tripe? At what point is accepting the reality of the situation going to stop being "Far Right" or "Dissident Right" and just be "the right?" I would say someone like Hlynka represents the absolute boundary of a Conservative who should know better by virtue of intelligence and exposure to arguments that thoroughly destruct the narrative embodied in this report, but remains indelibly committed to prevailing grand narratives of liberalism and Judeo-Christian civilization.
A European identity is inevitable, it's only a question of when it goes from being a "far right" to just "right" wing position. There have already been recent election victories around stopping mass immigration and demographic change in Europe, so when can we stop calling sensible people who oppose demographic replacement of European people in their homelands "far right?"
No, why would they be?
Jews were explicitly considered white in those terms, and always have been.
Well I don't disagree with that, but I don't see how that's relevant to my point.
"Are Jews white" is a complicated question, to which I would say "Yes", but they are not Aryan. One of many reasons to bring back such a word to describe the real, common ancestry of non-Jewish European-descended people. Jews themselves make the distinction and assign a mythological meaning to it.
The key premise is that their criticism was motivated by their Jewish identification and was perceived to be in their ethnic interests, like their criticism of race science.
Specifically, it was the pathologization of White ethnocentrism which was identified by Kevin MacDonald while many of the key intellectual figures in that effort themselves engaged in Jewish ethnocentrism- a common pattern that an increasingly-large number of influential people are now calling out. To me this is the essence of "KMac antisemitism" and how to deal with that politically is an open question and I wouldn't even know what you mean by the "KMac solution."
Kevin MacDonald tier antisemitism.
You overstate MacDonald-tier antisemitism. His entire thesis can be summed up with "Elite Jews throughout the 20th century have engaged in radical critique of Gentile culture, morality, and ethnocentrism while at the same time rejecting any critique of themselves as anti-Semitic pathology. This is how they engage in ethnic conflict to secure their ethnic interests." This is the exact thesis which has been directly accepted by Elon Musk recently.
The ‘very online’ community is essentially one contiguous zone, there isn’t a hard border
Like coffee_enjoyer said, yes there are hard borders. I never see Chapo Types on DR telegram, and I never see DR rhetoric on those breadtube subreddits. There is absolutely a hard border, with Twitter being the only real opportunity for interaction, which is why Musk's acquisition may have a real impact on political dialogue.
It shows that the "very online Dissident Right twitter" is having an effect. The actual hub of Online Dissident Right social circles is ghettoized on telegram, and I've never seen a Chapo or Breadtube type in any of those channels. They are most likely receiving influence from Dissident Right twitter, it's just not true though that they hang out in the same online social circles.
I was partly with you when you were downplaying Matt Walsh flirting with DR rhetoric earlier this year. But now with Musk, Kirk, Candace Owens, Walsh, and Tucker Carlson now directly endorsing important aspects of DR talking points I don't think a trend can be denied, and it's not just passive osmosis from people moving across clubs.
Mass immigration was radically altering American demographics in a way the Founding Fathers never intended as early as the mid-19th century.
America was always from the very beginning identified as a "White" country. The very first immigration law restricted citizenship to Whites, not just Anglos. An aspect of America that I like is the aspiration for a pan-European nation. But yes, from the very beginning, European immigration was aligned with the foundational ethos of the nation.
But widespread education and cultural messaging about the Holocaust began in earnest in the 1980s, well after the loosening of immigration laws in the US and well after mass immigration from the Islamic world had begun into Westen Europe from Pakistan, North Africa and elsewhere.
The loosening of immigration laws in the US weren't perceived as going to have an impact on demographics, much less put America on the path to being majority non-White. I'm even willing to believe that those who lobbied heaviest for its implementation, who also invoked the Holocaust and "nobody wanted the Jews so now we have to accept looser immigration" argument in its defense, didn't predict it would change demographics like this.
The Holocaust civic religion peaked in saliency in public consciousness right at the demographic inflection point. So the DR argument that this civic religion, by design, worked as a memetic superweapon to drive demographic replacement without much complaint or opposition from white people is aligned with the sequence of events you describe. Of course, it's not just the Holocaust memetically driving White people to not care about demographic change. Like any civic religion, the dogma is accompanied by socially and legally authoritarian enforcement mechanisms.
And yes a mythos that formulates a curriculum taught to children as the most important and divine moral truth, coincided with a huge catalogue of films and other cultural output that broadcasts the mythos to mass audiences, coincided with authoritarian measures to punish those who dissent from the hegemony of the mythos is absolutely the mechanism around which a smaller number of people can direct the public opinion and behavior of a much larger group of people.
Do you not accept basic premises of Elite Theory when it comes to attributing any sort of accountability to Jewish influence over key institutions in intellectual and cultural life?
I think you would agree it's impossible to treat a child on the other side of the world better or the same as your own child.
This is exactly what white people do in self-policing expressions of White identity and interests while at the same time lending an undying loyalty to Zionism.
Christians could never accomplish such a feat, because the Meek will Inherit the Earth. Fortunately for Jews, they don't believe that tripe so they get their Menorah on the White House lawn with no Nativity or Cross in sight.
As Nietzsche said, the command 'love your enemies' had to have been invented by the best haters there have ever been. You can say "I don't want to blame this on 'da Jews'", but yeah, the cultural dynamic is the accomplishment of a concerted effort by da Jews.
More options
Context Copy link