A formalist manifesto — (a) the danger of picking a single axis of merit is that you'll wind up deciding the ideal daily intake is 2000 calories worth of squeeze margarine (b) yes, Violence is a big problem in the Old Country, but should Yarvin move elsewhere, he may discover that many elsewheres simultaneously have as much or more democracy while suffering from much less violence.

Technology, communism and the Brown Scare — I agree that the Old Country is a workers' paradise, but as far as I'm concerned, that's a side effect of monomaniacal attention to income while ignoring that of which it is a first derivative, namely wealth. And since I'm willing to be contrarian on the former Union (despite having part of my Tradition descended via White Emigration), I find it surprising that Yarvin's figure of merit presumably classifies bolshies and Stalin as "good" communists, while mensheviks and Gorby would be classified as "bad".

====

Finally, "The whole [Western government] thing will be lucky if it lasts another ten years" (The Case Against Democracy; 2007), from the standpoint of 15 years later, has not exactly aged well.

I am reminded of: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/48612/48612-h/48612-h.htm#Pa...

> In the geniuses Lenin and Trotzky, the Bolshevik movement found its leadership. Lenin had no use for democracy as it was known in America. To him it was a sham, a front for the great capitalist trusts, which—even though the capitalists themselves might not know it—were doomed to get bigger on a shrinking market, until international capitalist war, bankruptcy, and working-class revolution was the result. Lenin was as sure that this would happen as he was that the sun would rise the next morning. The only dispute was the matter of timing; a few Bolshevik pessimists thought that the capitalist world might last into the 1920's.