You Are So Close To Getting It

Attached: tumblr_inline_mle76tn4x11qz4rgp.gif (250x188, 453.64K)

– Ray Brassier on Nick Land

Attached: tumblr_mkuszgg4UI1qadqfco1_500.gif (500x250, 262.5K)

I have read Moldbug, and not only is he a pretentious, shitty writer but his entire ideology revolves around these traits.

…

…

-JONATHAN RATCLIFFE

Attached: tumblr_lwmy4pB66R1qjo4f3o1_250.gif (200x300, 296.75K)

No.

Retarded.
big brain

Ah yes. Americas ruling communists.

Yarvin and other NRx don't really want to demolish "The Cathedral" but restructure it for their own believers. All they will do is substitute one form of social norms for another with no fundamental changes.

I only know him because of Dark Enlightenment by Land

care to explain why he's wrong then?

on no government ever were colleges in control of the state. even the Soviet Union cracked down on students voicing their opinions.

It's literally the "caltural marxesm" meme.

no it's not. Have you even read an "A Gentle Introduction to Unqualified Reservations"?

He argues that colleges in the West are basically ideologically synchronized with each other, with Harvard especially being the primary promulgator of liberal ideology, both due to its influence on the University system as a whole, and its enmeshment with the Washington establishment.

He argues that Harvard basically IS the state

You mean it isn't? Because honestly, it (and institutions like it) is the nerve center of the political class in the First World. You do not rise in this system without paying dues to the university and passing through its filter. Old money and aristocratic status can get you in the door, but you don't get to sit at the big kids' table unless you pay dues to the university and can get into the club. The elite universities, and by extension the education system as a whole, is the true base that makes our present system of government even possible. Ruling a technocratic national security state through nothing but fear and bribery is a near impossibility. It is through the education system and its sorting of the populace into grades that you have the real basis for making such a system stick and perpetuate beyond its founders.

The USSR was quite explicitly NOT such a state, the leaders of the USSR were generally from humble origins, and from the revolutionary generation. They often didn't have rich educational pedigrees, they were men that were able to rise through the ranks of the Party and play the game of politics well enough to make it to the big show.

If we look at the past 40 years, then it is obvious to me that "the Cathedral" really is the government in all but name, although his notion that it's a shadowy conspiracy tied to Communism is just silliness. There's no great big conspiracy, it's just what happens when power is consolidated and the institution most necessary for that consolidation to survive gains more and more prominence. We take notions of intellectual merit for granted today, the NRx people themselves fully internalize this ideology and delude themselves into thinking they're the master race or some nonsense like that. You have, today, widespread belief that failed students should literally be killed off or sterilized and control of them should be maintained through violent force, almost all of it passive but definitely ingrained into our brains at an early age. It's impossible to avoid, and it's only going to get worse.

How ironic that worthless right-wing bloggers who circlejerk about the intellectual decline of the west are one of the most egregious contributors to it.

Yarvin, attacking the accepted "World War II mythology" in a speech to the 2012 BIL Conference, claimed that Hitler’s invasions were forgivable acts of self-defense, and that this historical fact was suppressed by America’s ruling communists, who invented political correctness as an "extremely elaborate mechanism for persecuting racists and fascists." "If Americans want to change their government," he said, "they’re going to have to get over their dictator phobia."[16]

So… this…. is the power … of right-wing theory……………………….. whoa….

So he is just another Hitler apologist.
Wow, so smart
big thunk

A good book on who rules America is the very straightforward "Who Rules America?" by G. William Domhoff which has been updated and republished over and over since the 1960s with some slight modifcations: but basically yeah it's a self-perpetuating corporate power elite that exercises control via ownership major industries and institutions such as think tanks and various foundations. The actual top-tier elite *start out* in very exclusive prep schools from practically birth and their parents are the owners and top-level managers in large income-producing properties.

Also the "SJW" stuff is really overstated as an elite thing. If you want to know what top-tier elite people think about that, just read David Brooks columns in the New York Timnes where he tut tuts about ornery left-wing scolds. Rich people have a kind of "South Park Republican" view about things that laughs at both "ironic" racist jokes while also mocking the rubes who go "dey took our jerbs."

Attached: power_elite.jpg (335x499 21.38 KB, 20.01K)

Who owns the corporations? Who staffs the corporations? Who runs the state that makes those corporations able to continue existing, that is able to mediate the many disagreements between corporations? At some point you start to realize that it's not the corporations that bend the Academy, but the other way around - the Academy accepts overt corporate rule for now because it ruffles the fewest feathers, and maintains pressure on the lower classes under existing capitalist norms. Educated professionals run the army, run the government, and run the everyday operations of the corporations. There is no inherent reason why the rich prep school kids couldn't themselves be Academics, but the Academy is not subservient to capital. The Academy is too big to be anyone's servant.

I think the academy is totally subservient to these big corporations and the rich benefactors who own them: chronicle.com/article/Major-Private-Gifts-to-Higher/128264

Attached: wPBtF9z.png (2400x800, 743.65K)

The press and universities are beholden to the state and the bourgeois economic interests that control it. These people may utilize these institutions as a way of gatekeeping others from attaining power in the larger apparatus of politics, but they are still just tools. They do not have power in and of themselves. Their influence on the general populace through education and propaganda is important, but the lessons they teach do not come from themselves. Their knowledge is also dependent on their masters.

This is your biggest misunderstanding. That just because the ruling class must be formally educated to hold power, that the systems of education thus control who can and cannot be powerful. This misconstrues the nature of the American education system. In every step of the American child's education, their experience is made significantly easier, they are given special treatment, taught techniques others are not, and generally given more opportunities to succeed if they come from a moneyed background. From the get go these people are prepared in ways their peers are not to make it through university easily. This is not even mentioning the outright bribery that is epidemic in universities, or the system of student debt that greatly decreases the chances that a proletarian student would be able to achieve as much as a bourgeois one.

You are right to say that the Academy has its own sort of agency, and moves in ways the benefit it the most. But you fail to see that the environment that makes such decisions the most beneficial has been artificially constructed by capital, to work in its interests.

Corporative funding and needs are what allows the academy to exist, however, even if this is a codependent relation. What makes you think actors within the academy have any power to resist capital?

Last I heard the title to the university's land wasn't being bought by those gifts. What those institutions fundamentally are hasn't changed. Again, there has to be a reason why the gifts are necessary in the first place. If the universities are just a guise for the corporate rulers and all the plum university positions go to their kids, the gifts aren't necessary. If corporations were utterly dominant (and again, "the corporations" are not a collective hive mind in the first place), there would be no need for gifts, because they have the government and the academic institutions under their thumb already. It would not be necessary to send gifts of this size to buy the mere loyalty of institutions, nor are they large enough to simply buy outright the institutions. They are tithes.

Tuition and taxes (for the public university system and public school system) are what allow the academy to exist primarily. That is where they get the bulk of their funding.

Again, the people at top levels of the government are all elite educated. Most of the functionaries that operate the police state are educated to various degrees, and after Snowden I'm quite certain they're not letting in any GED cases and quickly firing anyone with any significant demerit. Abstract concepts do not have real material power. Guns and the direct relations of actors to each other have power.
Let me ask, what do you think happens when the money is no longer any good, and financialized capital is exposed as the fraud that it is? Capital is not some spooky concept that commands us, it is people doing deliberate things with their hoards of wealth, over and over again, because they can. The ruling class is quite aware of the nature of power since they, well, rule. Few in the ruling class are truly so retarded to believe in ancap ideology or the bullshit Milton Friedman sells; they know that money is just a means to power, and that money itself is a quite illusory thing, whether it's fiat or backed by some precious metal we're told is supposed to be intrinsically valuable even though it really isn't. The ruling class is not ideologically married to capitalism out of necessity and is quite capable of adapting to the new normal, should it be necessary.

I don't know how you can operate a modern national security state without a strong, centralized state, a large bureaucracy, and the Academy inserted in every sphere of life. That's why they force everyone at gunpoint to go to school, unless they have already been written off and marked as uneducable (and that status has permanent legal effects that are already written into the legal code, and in practice such a person is a social pariah and untouchable). The greater the need for internal security, the greater the role the Academy must play, because it is the only institution that can do the most important part - shape and mold thought itself and control the ideas people have in a way that mass propaganda alone cannot.

Your misunderstanding is believing the Academy has anything to with learning. The methods used in schools for poor kids aren't just ineffective, they're intentionally destructive and set out to confuse the child to make a simple concept like addition, subtraction, or reading appear complex and jumbled. This is especially apparent in how reading is taught. You could literally just hand the kids basic instructional material to learn to read, then booklets to learn arithmetic and further language development, and you'd do better than the entire grade school curriculum in the majority of cases. The unorthodox cases could be handed with simple tutoring until those children learn basic literacy and arithmetic and that would cover about 90-95% of the student population. Of the remainder, some percent are just truly uneducable for a variety of reasons, and the rest could still be handled in a far better way than what happens now (basically, if you are in that group that is designated problematic, the school just marks you down and throws you literally into the trash bin, you're life-unworthy-of-life).

From an early stage, the American education system was entirely about social control, and making sure the multitudes of Americans know their social rank and where they are to be assigned in life. That goes beyond the mere goal of making good capitalist workers, you're moving to a more exact form of social control and hierarchy, where the hierarchy is etched explicitly into the ruling ideology. Liberal capitalism maintains the fiction, in a vague sense, that all men are created equal, but the Academy explicitly cannot allow that; according to the Academy, you are an A student, a B student, an F student, and so on, and you are practically given a whole ideology to go along with that grouping. If you think that people can escape this grouping, you haven't been paying attention, or you're just blatantly lying, because I've never been allowed for a second to forget my social rank, and in my case the status is legally marked and my freedom to exist specifically, legally reduced.

The ultimate goal, which becomes more and more apparent every generation, is to make any sort of communication between the academically sorted classes impossible. That's why the wokeness and police-state measures on campuses, it gets the college educated in a totally different mindset and renders them basically incapable of speaking to the educated in any meaningful capacity.

If you have an institution with that much reach, that much control, you can't say they're just at the whim of capital. Again, they have considerable control over the men with guns, allies in the corporations that are more than happy to accept a different hierarchical system as long as they're given a few extra privileges. Trying to reduce everything to a fucking mode of production is silly and reductionist. That's not how poltical power works in practice. Slips of paper denoting money or bullion do not have magical powers, Jesus.

Give me one example of "The Academy" (ie, the people and institutions that run the American university system) deviating from the interests of the bourgeois class (as a class, not the singular interests of certain bourgeois individuals) in the past 100 years.

Why would they have deviating interests? For the most part, they share the same general interests for now as far as government policy, because their common enemy is the masses of poor who keep demanding things like poor relief and retirement and health care. Class collaboration is pretty useful for building something like the national security state, so at least in major policy, they need each other to continue operating. The capitalist system needs the Academy in order to be remotely functional as an atomic-age national security state, and the Academy prefers capitalism to remain the prevailing mode of production because it is useful enough. The disagreements come in subtler areas among the lower orders of the Academy that are constantly grasping for more power in the system (and thus pass laws to enforce credentialism, something the capitalists don't really want because it increases the price of labor in the area they need it most), and certain parts of the bourgeoisie that want to do ancap shit (like, say, the Kochs). Generally, though, the Academy quite likes the neoliberal reforms, because it has put their class in a much stronger position and allowed them to run a very profitable scheme to extract money from the millions seeking access to the Academy's status. Things like NAFTA are great boons to the Academy because it pushes down the lower orders of uneducated labor and pushes them into dependence on the Academy's education credentials to escape the war against them. If I'm the Academy, why would I rail against capitalism now in a major way?

I doubt it would come to an irreconcilable class war between the capitalists and the Academy, considering members of the Academy are sitting on the boards of most of the big capitalist players, and they sit on those boards precisely because of their educational pedigree. The Academy, due to its nature as an organized and strongly interconnected set of institutions, will always have the upper hand in negotiations, until the major companies are just subsidiaries of the Academy's power and a useful guise to maintain economic control until an alternative can be worked out. The kind of economic system the Academy would like to implement simply doesn't include the poor workers at all, not even as peons to be exploited by capital. What life the uneducated would live in an economic system dictated entirely by the Academy is unbearable to think about, most likely involving permanent slavery, being used in medical and social experiments forever, and breeding programs to prolong the misery of those deemed unfit (that is, there would be a permanent underclass of people deemed mental defectives, because such a class is necessary for the Academy to exist as it does; the threat of being demoted to that hated class creates the pressure necessary to make their preferred economic model work, which is why retards are allowed to be in public schools just so they can be mocked and degraded and made into an example.) At present, such a system would not be possible or at least would be incredibly expensive, but everything I have seen throughout my life has demonstrated that this is the only direction we could go in. Capitalism as a relevant system is simply dying, the global financial system is sitting on a house of cards and either the neoliberal era has to give way to something like feudalism, or some alternative method to exploit labor needs to be developed. Understanding that there is no future for capital, that their nominal money is no longer any good, the owners of the means of production have a choice; get in with the Academy and its bigass police state and agree to terms, or sit outside and, well, sit outside, where they will simply be gobbled up by the much larger economy at the Academy's disposal.

that's a symptom, not a cause.
there are plenty of colleges that are very unlike Ivy Leagues, leaning both left and right