I'm not sure Curtis has earned the right to go this hard at weekend grillin' America
The difference between him and the weekend grillers is that he has a bunch of really well thought out justifications for *why* he's politically disengaged and non-confrontational, while the grillers just don't care and are perfectly content to enjoy a cold one with the boys
But if you judge Curtis by his actions instead of his words, you find he has a bunch of hot dog buns on reserve in the freezer just in case the supermarket isn't stocked next week
There many of those "interviews' now. All of them the same. One or two timid nerds, unable to save Yarvin from his verbosity, his unbearable verbal ticks or his girlie giggling, unable to compel Yarvin to have a coherent thought for longer than a paragraph. Unable to ask any questions that shows that they even read one of his post. Why does he even go on these interviews and why this is so pathetic? I get it, the grift...
I had an amazing (to me) conversation with a friend where she made that very clear. We were discussing the electoral college and how it at least attempts to give some power to the rural districts vs. the cities. Her view was that the cities, as they depend on the country for food, will necessarily take care of the country interests. Therefore, it’s not necessary to worry about the popular vote making their votes not count for anything. The cities know best!
Yarvin actually went on many, many "nobody" podcasts. He is persona non grata on real podcasts with reach (Rogan, etc.). Perhaps the reason is that he fumigates with antisemites and nazis and they fumigate around him (Niccolo Soldo. etc.).
Someone has a collection, but they all pretty much the same, mutual giggling, mutual verbal ticks, no serious questions or even attempts to partition the aimless verbosity.
I just wanted to point out that your comments about The First Battle of Bull Run (or First Manassas, thank you very much) are founded in some reality, but ultimately while a march to Washington may well have worked, it was, even in the best case scenario not a sure thing and likely would have failed.
It was widely feared in the Union, among the public and leadership, until a fucking hot air ballon recon mission revealed they had no intentions to. However the battle, while a decisive victory was not a rout. with only ~2,800 casualties for the North, the Union army was still over 30,000 strong. The high casualty counts that were so characteristic of the war were not present.
One could imagine an aggressive invasion by the South, routing the demoralized Army of the Potomac or simply passing around them to siege Washington, but this seems unlikely. Like most sieges in the war it would have surely been a bloody and extended affair, and it likely would have been defended viciously, either by the Army of the Potomac, local militias (for example the Wide Awakes) or both. Maybe the Union commanders knew something we don't, and they were vulnerable but I'm not convinced.
Barring the unlikely premature surrender of the Union, it almost certainly would have failed in my opinion. Your point that this idea was foreign to them, is valid, by the time they realized this and attempted to execute the strategy later they were severely outmanned.
Knowing that CY's leather jacket smells like cat piss in those pictures really helps to round out his dungeons and dragons in real life persona. I especially like the one where he is sitting on two poorly stacked crates of what I can only assume is either club mate or mountain dew code red (patrician's choice).
I listened to the Good Ol' Boys podcast and really enjoyed it. Left me wanting more. Any good discord servers or other groups that offer semi-live interaction and discussion on related topics?
Hey man, saw your email about your appearance in NYC. Would love a chance to meet up, buy you a beer. Saw your suggestion to send an email but can't find one yet. Hope to get in contact!
Why do you never have anything to say about sex(-roles), Curtis? There was one passing reference to men marrying each other and pretending to be women in this interview, and homoism and trannyism are only byproducts of feminism, an issue that you've never addressed as far as I can recall. It's extremely strange that you never discuss sex.
It seems to me that any serious political thinker has to explore this topic -- today, I mean, when it isn't simply taken for granted, as it always was up until about 1975, that the idea of female participation in public and commercial affairs emerges only in jokes.
Comments section: increasingly stupid
Young audience: secured
I'm not sure Curtis has earned the right to go this hard at weekend grillin' America
The difference between him and the weekend grillers is that he has a bunch of really well thought out justifications for *why* he's politically disengaged and non-confrontational, while the grillers just don't care and are perfectly content to enjoy a cold one with the boys
But if you judge Curtis by his actions instead of his words, you find he has a bunch of hot dog buns on reserve in the freezer just in case the supermarket isn't stocked next week
Good Ol Boys - reaction:
There many of those "interviews' now. All of them the same. One or two timid nerds, unable to save Yarvin from his verbosity, his unbearable verbal ticks or his girlie giggling, unable to compel Yarvin to have a coherent thought for longer than a paragraph. Unable to ask any questions that shows that they even read one of his post. Why does he even go on these interviews and why this is so pathetic? I get it, the grift...
Truly disappointing and aesthetically ugly.
> That's certainly how libs feel about cons!
I had an amazing (to me) conversation with a friend where she made that very clear. We were discussing the electoral college and how it at least attempts to give some power to the rural districts vs. the cities. Her view was that the cities, as they depend on the country for food, will necessarily take care of the country interests. Therefore, it’s not necessary to worry about the popular vote making their votes not count for anything. The cities know best!
Yarvin actually went on many, many "nobody" podcasts. He is persona non grata on real podcasts with reach (Rogan, etc.). Perhaps the reason is that he fumigates with antisemites and nazis and they fumigate around him (Niccolo Soldo. etc.).
Someone has a collection, but they all pretty much the same, mutual giggling, mutual verbal ticks, no serious questions or even attempts to partition the aimless verbosity.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9f87RjrabeV3DjW-p16uQCYOPz7ujEDs
I just wanted to point out that your comments about The First Battle of Bull Run (or First Manassas, thank you very much) are founded in some reality, but ultimately while a march to Washington may well have worked, it was, even in the best case scenario not a sure thing and likely would have failed.
It was widely feared in the Union, among the public and leadership, until a fucking hot air ballon recon mission revealed they had no intentions to. However the battle, while a decisive victory was not a rout. with only ~2,800 casualties for the North, the Union army was still over 30,000 strong. The high casualty counts that were so characteristic of the war were not present.
One could imagine an aggressive invasion by the South, routing the demoralized Army of the Potomac or simply passing around them to siege Washington, but this seems unlikely. Like most sieges in the war it would have surely been a bloody and extended affair, and it likely would have been defended viciously, either by the Army of the Potomac, local militias (for example the Wide Awakes) or both. Maybe the Union commanders knew something we don't, and they were vulnerable but I'm not convinced.
Barring the unlikely premature surrender of the Union, it almost certainly would have failed in my opinion. Your point that this idea was foreign to them, is valid, by the time they realized this and attempted to execute the strategy later they were severely outmanned.
Knowing that CY's leather jacket smells like cat piss in those pictures really helps to round out his dungeons and dragons in real life persona. I especially like the one where he is sitting on two poorly stacked crates of what I can only assume is either club mate or mountain dew code red (patrician's choice).
Dig the "Bitchin' Biden" (Trans-am Biden) impression Yarvin is doing in that first pic
https://niccolo.substack.com/p/the-agrigento-interviews-curtis-moldbug
This alone justifies my subscription fee, thanks for updates.
I listened to the Good Ol' Boys podcast and really enjoyed it. Left me wanting more. Any good discord servers or other groups that offer semi-live interaction and discussion on related topics?
Hey man, saw your email about your appearance in NYC. Would love a chance to meet up, buy you a beer. Saw your suggestion to send an email but can't find one yet. Hope to get in contact!
Best regards
Thank you
Curtis,
Big ups for posting these. Keep layin' on the audio and the tenner's yours. We love you man.
Is there anyway I can download the podcast?
Why do you never have anything to say about sex(-roles), Curtis? There was one passing reference to men marrying each other and pretending to be women in this interview, and homoism and trannyism are only byproducts of feminism, an issue that you've never addressed as far as I can recall. It's extremely strange that you never discuss sex.
It seems to me that any serious political thinker has to explore this topic -- today, I mean, when it isn't simply taken for granted, as it always was up until about 1975, that the idea of female participation in public and commercial affairs emerges only in jokes.