Inviting Moldbug bring not only his own person but also his followers. It's understandable if your goal is to foster a diverse crowd to not invite a group of people who constantly argue against any kind of modern society.
Inviting Moldbug bring not only his own person but also his followers. It's understandable if your goal is to foster a diverse crowd to not invite a group of people who constantly argue against any kind of modern society.
Imagine if your sentence was reformulated like this instead.
> Inviting Harvey Milk bring not only his own person but also his followers. It's understandable if your goal is to foster a diverse crowd to not invite a group of people who [insert claim here] against any kind of modern society.
See the problem? :(
Tolerance is hard, I know, but something we need to foster nonetheless.
Even if we don't allow these people to conferences, we still share roads, grocery stores, national identity, tax revenues, employment opportunities, classrooms, etc, with them. Humanity sucks badly enough at cooperation already! Let's not ever actively discourage it!
I'm uncertain if I'm willing to consider the position with Moldbug intolerance, because of the paradox listed. This is not someone with a pro-gun or anti-tax or some other form of political speech that are culturally arguable without being an intolerant viewpoint against a group of people.
Still, that's just pointing out the difference. I feel like a bit of a fence sitter to be honest. That being said, I have left jobs because of a boss that had, what I considered, intolerant viewpoints of LGBT and non-white people.
edit: if there are others with notable real-world achievements, I will eagerly accept correction.
Neoreactionary ideas have been picked up and directly cited by cultural influencers like Ross Douthat, Ed West, and William Gibson, however. They see themselves as a right wing Frankfurt School - not noteworthy for their identities, but for their subtle cultural impact.
ah, the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory? http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism um, ok
Check out Eclipse of Reason, Escape from Freedom, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, and The Theory of Communicative Action when you get a chance. Primary sources and all.
- 2014/05/27: @ReactionaryTree I don’t identify as a neoreactionary. Although I talk to a lot of people who do. https://twitter.com/justinetunney/status/471281445013843968
- 2014/05/30: @tesseractiv I don't identify as a neoreactionary. I already had my movement. I don't want to join any others. https://twitter.com/justinetunney/status/472425936692854784
- 2014/06/28: @nullvoid9 I'm not a neoreactionary :'( I'm also friendly and will treat you with the same respect you give me. https://twitter.com/justinetunney/status/482757375854522368
- 2014/08/04: Who said I was a neoreactionary? I keep telling people I'm not, but no one believes me. http://ask.fm/JustineTunney/answer/116475763475
- 2015/01/15: @DurrutiOvercloc Well, most of the things. Like, I’m not pro-slavery. I’ve also never called myself a neoreactionary. https://twitter.com/justinetunney/status/555603973286400000
- 2015/03/11: @jhamby @justkelly_ok I'm not a neoreactionary. I've never been one. Also Shanley is a huge racist. https://twitter.com/justinetunney/status/575829516079263744
On the other hand you did start a petition to turn over government rule to Google, and believe the bottom 1/3 of the population should be live in servants to the top 1/3. What this has to do with neoreactionarism I have no idea, but apparently many people think it's associated.
P.S. I'm still not convinced that you're not a troll, but then again I'm not sure if this is not exactly the kind of $#@% that needs to be stirred up.
That's not fair at all. You make a value judgment by referring to (but not defining) 'real-world achievements' and follow it up with an ad hominem, instead of deconstructing the actual ideas involved.
It also makes perfect sense that following any political view radically different from the mainstream will lead to less 'real-world' success, as not only does compromising your politics for success potentially alienate you from your allies, but mainstream society will be actively and deliberately trying to prevent you from achieving that success (and apparently speaking at technical conferences).
For example, I would not have been successful in the Roman Empire, Communist Russia, or Nazi Germany unless I was willing to compromise my politics. I'm not exactly successful now because my politics don't precisely line up with the 'mainstream'. But that still says nothing about how ethical or tenable my political stance is.