Chiming in to say, first of all, that I've love this blog. Reading these articles with my morning coffee has been a refreshing morning ritual. It's witty and incisive and so on.
Decided to chime in on this article in particular as it's far more on the practical end as opposed to the far-sighted political engineering side of things- This problem of speech is one I run into daily.
I'm a millennial, grown up during the old, wild days of the internet, and with artistic pretensions.
I've always had to engage in this sort of balancing act, between my desire for free and transgressive expression, with the growing practical necessity of staying out of the regime's crosshairs as society becomes more authoritarian.
It's clear, that on some level, the 'gauche' character of shitposting is something that can easily help reinforce power, and that serious, informative 'urbane' discussion is being choked out by the weeds of all these aforementioned '-speaks'. But at the same time, there's that Nietzsche quote about having chaos within you and dancing stars - What I loved about the olden days, was the ability to pivot between urbane discussion and irreverence, the high-brow and the-low brow, as different modes. In my private chats with close friends, we strike a comfortable balance between the two, but in public (we live in a society!), things tend either towards brainless limbic system reactionary chatter, or towards the regime's definition of 'polite intellectual discussion' -i.e. having a stick up your ass.
I'm typing this out quickly because I have other things to attend to today, so maybe I'm not thinking things all the way through, but basically, I want the order and stability that makes sane discussion possible, but I also don't want to have a stick up my ass forever.
Not wanting kittens to die, I gifted a friend a subscription, so that he could read it. Two-dimensional urbane chatter is fine, but sometimes a gentleman needs actual conversation. Let’s see how he likes it.
I just hope I don’t run out of friends before I run out of money. That’s no way to build a leitkultur.
"To be a dissident is to abandon, voluntarily or involuntarily, any intention of using power in the present regime—being relevant, making a difference, creating change, etc."
That's one of the reason I have subscribed here. To read such lines and think: Hey! I haven't said it that way, I even may not have thought it this way, but doesn't that feel so naturally right? In a way that I could have come up with this myself long ago?
I don't share Curtis' belief that the regime will necessarily fail, but I still agree with his Code of Dissident Speech—and more specifically, his focus on personal flourishing. Don't waste your life fighting for or against the regime.
Anyway, I don't think USG will fail for the same reason Industrial Society is so pernicious to the health of mankind: it is capable of "solving" the problems it creates by pushing drugs (legal or illicit) on the population, so that they cannot realistically push back. Can you imagine *industrial society* failing at this point? I can't.
Ask yourself, which is more likely in your lifetime? (a) USG fails at governing and is replaced by a monarchical "sovereign corporation" OR (b) USG fails at governing—and subsequently adopts the Brave New World solution of giving everyone free pot and oxy and Only Fans bucks to keep them from revolting? (To USG, the suicides of their previous clientele are a feature, not a bug.)
Like the Unibomber, my money is on (b)…which means that the Code of Dissident Speech is basically a no-op in our future history. It literally doesn't matter what dissident elites do (or don't do) in modern society today because *industrial society* is actually, fundamentally, what is driving things forward. (From my perspective, Wokeness is a symptom, not a cause, of our present discontent.)
It's fashionable in Silicon Valley to claim that "software is eating the world"—while Industrial Society laughs maniacally in the background.
So what is your thought about Solzhenitsyn? His writings were both intended to be truth and persuasive. He pointed out the hypocrisy and immorality of the regime. It seems to me that making fun of the regime, ridiculing them, is the most effective way of removing their patina of morality and making plain their naked power-lust. Though Solzhenitsyn did not live to see the regime change he precipitated, without him I would not be surprised if the USSR would be still in existence today. Not everyone needs to be a Solzhenitsyn, but it's very useful if someone is. Similarly, it is relatively easy to flourish in the USA today, but it was impossible to flourish in the USSR without being a member of the Party. Since the direction of the USA is to be slowly morphed into the USSR via the China Road, what good will "flourishing" do, when the means of flourishing will be slowly removed or constricted as the 20s continue?
“Permaculture is an approach to land management and philosophy that adopts arrangements observed in flourishing natural ecosystems. It includes a set of design principles derived using whole systems thinking. It uses these principles in fields such as regenerative agriculture, rewilding, and community resilience.”
Bit off topic but thought I'd share - Texas is allowing private cities to operate, one is being developed as we type and scheme. Wondering the ramifications of suddenly privately operated "Live, Work, Play" cities sprouting all over our glorious Slobovia and how it might tweak our framework if at at all. (https://images1.loopnet.com/d2/ppFwD5BvYVIf0l3BLcrgAq1q1FCgoTnmYNLl_R5Lk98/document.pdf)
CY should move his blog out of "politics: category on substack, no way to compete with noise. This blog is culture/philosophy/history/literature/technology. I recommend moving to culture, philosophy or history. Either of those.
Chiming in to say, first of all, that I've love this blog. Reading these articles with my morning coffee has been a refreshing morning ritual. It's witty and incisive and so on.
Decided to chime in on this article in particular as it's far more on the practical end as opposed to the far-sighted political engineering side of things- This problem of speech is one I run into daily.
I'm a millennial, grown up during the old, wild days of the internet, and with artistic pretensions.
I've always had to engage in this sort of balancing act, between my desire for free and transgressive expression, with the growing practical necessity of staying out of the regime's crosshairs as society becomes more authoritarian.
It's clear, that on some level, the 'gauche' character of shitposting is something that can easily help reinforce power, and that serious, informative 'urbane' discussion is being choked out by the weeds of all these aforementioned '-speaks'. But at the same time, there's that Nietzsche quote about having chaos within you and dancing stars - What I loved about the olden days, was the ability to pivot between urbane discussion and irreverence, the high-brow and the-low brow, as different modes. In my private chats with close friends, we strike a comfortable balance between the two, but in public (we live in a society!), things tend either towards brainless limbic system reactionary chatter, or towards the regime's definition of 'polite intellectual discussion' -i.e. having a stick up your ass.
I'm typing this out quickly because I have other things to attend to today, so maybe I'm not thinking things all the way through, but basically, I want the order and stability that makes sane discussion possible, but I also don't want to have a stick up my ass forever.
If anyone is interested in being friends let me know. Good friends make life easier.
Most exciting about this post is the implication that Curtis actually reads the comments.
Verily! Tis a great and noble ideal which our verbose Polaris hath quoth! Evermore!
Not wanting kittens to die, I gifted a friend a subscription, so that he could read it. Two-dimensional urbane chatter is fine, but sometimes a gentleman needs actual conversation. Let’s see how he likes it.
I just hope I don’t run out of friends before I run out of money. That’s no way to build a leitkultur.
"To be a dissident is to abandon, voluntarily or involuntarily, any intention of using power in the present regime—being relevant, making a difference, creating change, etc."
That's one of the reason I have subscribed here. To read such lines and think: Hey! I haven't said it that way, I even may not have thought it this way, but doesn't that feel so naturally right? In a way that I could have come up with this myself long ago?
Thanks, Curtis. You have a friend here.
I don't share Curtis' belief that the regime will necessarily fail, but I still agree with his Code of Dissident Speech—and more specifically, his focus on personal flourishing. Don't waste your life fighting for or against the regime.
Anyway, I don't think USG will fail for the same reason Industrial Society is so pernicious to the health of mankind: it is capable of "solving" the problems it creates by pushing drugs (legal or illicit) on the population, so that they cannot realistically push back. Can you imagine *industrial society* failing at this point? I can't.
Ask yourself, which is more likely in your lifetime? (a) USG fails at governing and is replaced by a monarchical "sovereign corporation" OR (b) USG fails at governing—and subsequently adopts the Brave New World solution of giving everyone free pot and oxy and Only Fans bucks to keep them from revolting? (To USG, the suicides of their previous clientele are a feature, not a bug.)
Like the Unibomber, my money is on (b)…which means that the Code of Dissident Speech is basically a no-op in our future history. It literally doesn't matter what dissident elites do (or don't do) in modern society today because *industrial society* is actually, fundamentally, what is driving things forward. (From my perspective, Wokeness is a symptom, not a cause, of our present discontent.)
It's fashionable in Silicon Valley to claim that "software is eating the world"—while Industrial Society laughs maniacally in the background.
I caved to the grift. Ok Yarvin, dance clown!
“help you flourish and grow excellent.”
Bill S. Preston, Esq. and Ted “Theodore” Logan really will save us
The first part of this article marks, I believe, your ascension from writer into *sage*.
So what is your thought about Solzhenitsyn? His writings were both intended to be truth and persuasive. He pointed out the hypocrisy and immorality of the regime. It seems to me that making fun of the regime, ridiculing them, is the most effective way of removing their patina of morality and making plain their naked power-lust. Though Solzhenitsyn did not live to see the regime change he precipitated, without him I would not be surprised if the USSR would be still in existence today. Not everyone needs to be a Solzhenitsyn, but it's very useful if someone is. Similarly, it is relatively easy to flourish in the USA today, but it was impossible to flourish in the USSR without being a member of the Party. Since the direction of the USA is to be slowly morphed into the USSR via the China Road, what good will "flourishing" do, when the means of flourishing will be slowly removed or constricted as the 20s continue?
“If it’s not PC, it’s not urbane”
Does that mean you will no longer be using “retarded” or “gay” (as in this post)?
Permaculture :
“Permaculture is an approach to land management and philosophy that adopts arrangements observed in flourishing natural ecosystems. It includes a set of design principles derived using whole systems thinking. It uses these principles in fields such as regenerative agriculture, rewilding, and community resilience.”
Our intrepid host was discussed yesterday (Feb 22) on the Lex Fridman podcast (with Eric Weinstein): https://youtu.be/ifX_JnBfxTY?t=5335
Bit off topic but thought I'd share - Texas is allowing private cities to operate, one is being developed as we type and scheme. Wondering the ramifications of suddenly privately operated "Live, Work, Play" cities sprouting all over our glorious Slobovia and how it might tweak our framework if at at all. (https://images1.loopnet.com/d2/ppFwD5BvYVIf0l3BLcrgAq1q1FCgoTnmYNLl_R5Lk98/document.pdf)
CY should move his blog out of "politics: category on substack, no way to compete with noise. This blog is culture/philosophy/history/literature/technology. I recommend moving to culture, philosophy or history. Either of those.