This post is going to be lengthy, what I am going to do is a commentary of Anatoly Karlin’s Soypill Manifesto…

The Soypill Manifesto is one of those rants that Karlin began posting after the Special Military Operation in Ukraine has launched in 2022. He has abruptly left Russia, and with it any pretense at being a Russian nationalist. One only wonders what motivates his transformation? He seems to condemn the rightoids, and makes some valid points but why? One could paraphrase the former Czech President, Zeman, and say that only an idiot doesn’t change his views. However, his pro-Globohomo rants have been up for several years and the first post that comes up when you google his ass is rational wiki saying he is a dailystormer browsing, eugenics promoting, climate change denying, alt right Vurdalak. Granted, the rational wiki does mention his transformation at the bottom. In fact, this is unfair, it should be at the top.

There is nothing wrong with being an edge lord. People like this shape history. Karlin begins his essay with trying to describe where he stands politically and intellectually.

However, so as far as I consistently defined myself, it was as an ideologically neutral Russian nationalist and a transhumanist. This is a slant that was extremely evident not just in my Russian language podcasts and commentary, but in my English language writing as well. For instance, this is what I wrote in my /r/russia AMA in May 2017 on a question about the contradictions between nationalism and transhumanism that ironically presages my eventual mutation into GloboHomo’s strongest soldier…

Karlin embraced Big Gay after becoming disillusioned, presumably, with Putinism. I can only question his motivations but in my opinion, his Russian anabasis ended the minute Russia came to loggerheads with the West. It is unclear, where Karlin was making his money but I think the money came from the West. Once, financial sanctions hit, staying in Russia and supporting Z became untenable. His Russian nationalism was ok when the times were good but the minute Russia was threatened, he fled.

Nationalism is a nineteenth century rallying cry and it pretty much had its last hurrah in the twentieth century. It rears its head sometimes somewhere, just like religious fundamentalism but it is largely over, and the countries of the World are largely over it. What will replace it will be the nationalism of civilizations, economic nationalism, and similar.

…here is what I wrote in 2021, at a time when I had developed a much better view of Putin and was under the impression he he had embraced the Russian nationalist agenda, in an article tellingly titled Nationalism is Implicitly Transhumanist…

How I understand Trashumanism is through the Nietzchean Superman, man is something to be surpassed. Nationalism is not something a superhuman would need. Believing Putin has embraced anything is misunderstanding Putin. Putin is a bus driver of a bus called Russia, and he would embrace nationalism, multiculturalism, transhumanism, feminism, lesbianism, or whatever if it wins him the support of the passengers. Maybe in recent years he felt Russia is heading to war, and whenever this happens, Russian leaders turn on the nationalism. It will be shut down when tensions are lowered, and they will need to return to business as usual.

The second part of this essay exhaustively addresses why I subsequently abandoned Putinism and even Russian nationalism as a lost cause. However, Spisarevski’s comment to the above article already provides a good hint; at the end of the day, due to the anti-intellectual nature of right-wing ideology, the notion that transhumanism is “transgenderism” and the “goal of Satanists and Gnostics” and related Duginist drivel was, in retrospect, always going to win out within nationalism’s internal marketplace of ideas.

In the future, a lot of right-wing activism will be opposition to transhumanism, and it will be equated with transgenderism and other bodily modifications. Nationalism belongs to the nineteenth century, where technological modification of humans did not exist. In fact, it could be argued the world was less polluted and gender dysphoria was also less prevalent. Nationalism belongs to a time of poets and tourist trips to the countryside by railroad.

There could be some adaptation of nationalism to the modern time. Local groups might resist usurpation by transnational capital, civilizational blocs based more on the commonality of language, or economic interests can appear and develop identities against other blocs. Humans are notoriously territorial, tribal, and individualistic. The question remains, who does your nationalism or conversely anti-nationalism benefit.

Karlin then continues with his list of ideologies and ideologues. He calls it 50 shades of right. In fact right really is everything that is not left. If you do not believe in equality, or are skeptical about liberal values, you might be a rightoid.

Woke skepticism, and opposition to Western imperialism – and the degree to which they translated into concomitants such as geopolitical Russophilia and anti-immigrationism.

Then Karlin goes on to talk about the hobbit nationalism, which I find hilariously genius.

I was and remain an extreme bioliberal, so conservative obsessions from abortion to stem cell research bans were always repulsive to me, made more so by the fact that these same people are also militantly anti-eugenics – e.g., oppose the abortion of Down’s babies – and reject IQ on blank slate grounds much like their Woke counterparts. I was never religious, though aspects of comparative religion and theology interest me at a philosophical and historical level. Overt religiosity in governance I always found repulsive, though as a Russian nationalist, I identified as “culturally Orthodox” on the grounds that it is part of implicit Russian identity (the Golda Meir approach: “I believe in the Jewish people, and the Jewish people believe in God.”).

If you don’t believe in God, and have no need for religion, why even define as Orthodox? I personally never describe myself as culturally Catholic, even though I observe dinner with family on Christmas eve, and give sweets to children on Easter. I actually would like a holiday on Three Kings, can we please have that?

…openly acknowledge the deleterious impact of Christian Orthodoxy on human capital formation (e.g. see Heiner Rindermann’s Cognitive Capitalism).

I personally know two Catholic families, where the patriarch is a STEM guy. They have multiple kids, and thus perpetuate their lineage. The smart asses elite human capital of the future will come from these homes. The biggest issue is getting smart people to reproduce in the current year.

Likewise, contra RationalWiki allegations to the contrary, I have also never taken much interest in right-winger obsessions with political conspiracy theories. Having very accurately predicted the results of the 2020 US Presidential elections – Biden 51.1%; Trump 47.1%, vs. results: Biden 51.3%; Trump 46.8% – I then also very explicitly argued that they were were fair and accurate to overwhelming rightoid rage (despite having endorsed Trump in 2020). Although I did “endorse” the Great Replacement theory, I make no apologies for being familiar with the actual demographic data and projections, and not shying away from their logical implications. (However, I now consider it a good thing and unironically endorse Far Right conspiracy theories about the Kalergi Plan as a positive model for the entire world).

When it comes to mass immigration and mixing of races, we have cultural clashes, ghettoization, our healthcare system is not prepared for exotic hereditary conditions. All of this of course can be eventually dissolved and solved in the melting pot but immigration is definitely not a net benefit in the short term. I also don’t think a mass immigration of low IQ baboons from Africa is any benefit in short or long term.

I did argue that the effects of AGW might be positive if kept within a non-extreme range, and still hold that view – at least to the extent that holding any view on the impacts of global warming remains worthwhile in the era of short AI timelines – but that is a legitimate if non-mainstream scientific opinion (e.g. Curt Stager’s Deep Future).

You know, official propaganda has stopped using the term “global warming”, and now almost exclusively employs “climate change”. You might hear shit like the hottest year on record but the key terms there are “on record”. The global recording of temperature is not that old to be honest, and we have just come out of the Little Ice Age. The global warming propaganda acts like the Industrial Revolution stopped the Little Ice Age and it would come back if only we pay more taxes. This is the reason for skepticism because while the planet doesn’t warm that fast, taxes are rising faster.

These observations likewise apply to most conservative-nationalist politics outside the US. I have always been contemptuous towards the small, parochial nationalisms represented by the late PiS in Poland or Meloni in Italy – Luke Croft calls them “hobbit hovel” nationalisms – which glorify religious obscurantism, technophobia, and sundry loserdom, while offering no coherent civilizational vision or even template for long-term sustainability in a world where the rules are made by American elites and you need economies of scale to resist GAE encroachment.

I would not say Russia does not have a clear vision of the future. The Russians are notoriously bad at making clear what they are up to but they do seem to have a coherent strategy on how to resist the GAE. (The Global American Empire I presume, or Global Anglo-Saxon Empire)

Incidentally, this is the main reason why I saw phenomena such as Ukrainian nationalism (svidomism) – let alone even more absurdist constructs, such as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania larp that is Belarusian nationalism (zmagarism) – to be without prospects, insofar as they were loaded against a nationalism that I did think was viable while being programmed to lose in the long-term on account of their host countries’ demographic and economic insignificance.

In their current iteration the Zmahars and Svidomites are nothing but pawns of Western governments and tools of control for local oligarchies. Ukrnazis in particular are TonTon Macoutes of the post-Maidan regime, used to terrorize the regime’s opponents. This is why I am a proponent of the liquidation, extermination, and assimilation of Ukrs and Belarus into Russia. Russia in my opinion presents a transnational, transethnic structure that unites, and its “other” is the West.

I note that some of the smarter and more worldly Ukrainian nationalists such as Oleksiy Arestovych are gradually coming round to this same realization, recently writing that the net effect of the Euromaidan was to “chain us to a half-dead body in its terminal stages” in response to a poll showing that two thirds of young Americans consider Whites to be oppressors. But guess what, bucko? You should have been thinking about that in 2021, as I was, not at the end of 2023. And gone “all in” on Z then!! But I suppose you shouldn’t feel so bad because this game was never either yours as a Ukrainian nationalist, nor mine as a Russian one, to win. Our common programmed destiny as nationalists from Eastern Europe is to end up jailed, dead, or in London.

😆

I don’t think Karlin fought any battles.

In this sense, my major realization since February 2022 is that Putinism at the end of the day is also a “hobbit hovel” nationalism, and that the attempt to build the Atomic Space Empire was doomed from the start. 

***

Finally, if there is one common denominator of the Rightoid International from the Nazi frogs to Latin American populists, it is COVID denial and anti-vaxxerism.

COVID was nasty but I regret getting vaxxed with Pfizer. I got two jabs so I could come to work and not endure tests because somehow magically being vaxxed prevented you from carrying COVID. And then I went to the Canaries 🇮🇨, where I needed a vaccine passport. But I did not get vaxxed beyond what the state, the EU, my employer required. And it is this forced vaccination that made people angry and in part accounts for the current right resurgence.

The next year I got two brutal episodes of COVID and it took me like a month to recover from each. I had trouble sleeping. But a blood test has shown I have developed antibodies and I did not have COVID since. Vaccination is OK with me, in the past I even got the yellow fever jab. Some diseases were all but eradicated because of vaccination. On the other hand, I believe that information on side effects is being suppressed.

I acknowledge that Moldbug’s (Curtis Yarvin) recap of HBD theory to his Silicon Valley audience was very culturally significant, and played an important role in the appearance of what Richard Hanania christened the Tech Right. But on trying to actually read it I found Moldbug’s foundational work Unqualified Reservations to be “an eclectic mix of insight and gibberish.” The analysis of the American Revolution was interesting to me, in the sense that the pro-British historiographic perspective was new to me. Conversely, the denialist section on global warming was just awful, and cringeworthy to anyone with a sufficiently good understanding of the science. I liked Nick Land’s much more concise Xenosystems blog with its edgier accelerationist accent, although let’s be honest, The Dark Enlightenment – the main NRx manifesto – was barely readable. 

Heidegger is unreadable, Jung is unreadable, Nietzsche is unreadable. Until they are not. The way to read philosophy is through text analysis. You have to find out what the author was talking about, what is the main thought inside? There are commentary books out there that explain this in a normal language. Nick Land’s writing is still pretty easy to read. Moldberg’s “climate denial” by the way is an interesting read but hard to follow. Karlin’s preachy attitude of “science is settled” is what pisses people off. The latter will have to foot the bill for whatever idiocy the political class, which also believes the science is settled, comes up with. You are probably not going to stop whatever the warming of the planet is on, and Little Ice Age ain’t coming back for another 300 years.

Michael Anissimov used to be a big name in the movement before he retreated into White Nationalist obscurity. However, although I found some of his blog posts to be occasionally incisive, I was unimpressed by his main work A Critique of Democracy. It was replete with the logical leaps and strong ahistoricity of the sort that is pervasive in today’s tradlarp, which extols the low taxes and ample leisure time that supposedly benevolent monarchs bequeathed upon the peasantry in the preindustrial world. It’s as if these people have never heard of state capacity and GDP surpluses.

The medieval peasant in Europe lived on a communal farm in an extended family, the patriarch was a tenant of the lord. And from this shit life, he was uprooted, taken to the city to work long hours (9-5 did not exist back then) in a factory and live in a cramped up slum, eating slop out of a tin pot. I heard this story on many occasions, most of all in school and university. There is nothing wrong with lower taxes and shorter work weeks my friends, nothing. I can’t wait for my contract to end next year. I will work shorter hours, sleep more, make less money but also pay less taxes.

The blogger spandrell was a vastly better historian, and came up with at least two important concepts. The first idea was that of cities as IQ shredders, which is an excellent if not too profound visualization of dysgenics. The second idea was Bioleninism, which is the theory that leftist ideologies gain power by creating coalitions of freaks and degenerates as a means of gaining power before the new elites start repressing them again to consolidate their rule. (This has some intersection with my ideas about the Soviet Freezer). However, although Bioleninism is not without its nuggets of truth, what it struggles with is how to explain the empirical observation that the most stupid and lumpenprole elements of society tend to vote rightoid all around the world.

Lumpenproletariat was abandoned by the left. At certain point, the left realized they cannot court this group. The lumpens are either too stupid or too selfish to buy into the class struggle. I would say big finance helped this process a lot. The latter was afraid of the lumpen masses storming the palace, and so they gave the left a new focus, freaks.

Freak politics, faggots, man hating feminists, immigrants and negros as a substitute for the working class makes the big finance very happy also in another way. It causes demoralization and atomization of the masses. Childless cat ladies buy the most boxed wine and eat the most anti-depressants. The bankers love this world of maladaptive, lonely, angry consoomers. If you don’t like it, your ass is a rightoid.

That said, credit must be given to Neo-Reaction as the only intellectual right-wing movement that attempted any serious analysis (even if its most single most impressive “accomplishment” was its own exhaustiverefutation by Scott Alexander). Apart from “redpilling” the tech bros, it also generated some genuinely novel ideas, with Nick Land’s “patchwork” possibly being the most significant. This constituted an early vision of Network States, and the ideological template for Moldbug’s Urbit project – a platform for radically decentralized computing offering persistent pseudonymous identity.

Guys, right wing politics were never very intellectual because they are based on time tested fundaments like religion, and free market economics. They don’t have the need to invent a new ideology. For a leftist ideas are much more important, his whole worldview is based on ideology written by some rotten nerd like Marx. I would not say the left is more intellectual as it is pseudo intellectual.

The Alt Right could be viewed as the populist evolution of NRx and its elopement with White Nationalism. I will not deny that I was at one point rather sympathetic to it, even though I was never enamored of its more “traditionalist” aspects; hence, my aforementioned preference for “Alt Centrism”, “Alt Leftism“, or “Radical Centrism”. 

The Alt Right was most of all a revolt against mainstream right, which is seen as not addressing the pressing issues of the day. Karlin’s constructions such as Alt Left are redundant.

First, it was anti-Woke, at a time when conservatives either didn’t realize it was even happening, or didn’t know how to respond even when they did. Not that I was interested in associating with the discredited dregs of Dubya World anyway. I much preferred the humor and trolling of the Twitter Frogs like Bronze Age Pervert, Hakan, menaquinone4 and the other now semi-mythical giants of that long-gone age. And their aesthetic power and contributions to meme culture cannot be exaggerated. They entered the wider political lexicon, and despite a predilection for unscientific fads, the movement has almost certainly had a net positive effect on the health and fitness of its acolytes.

Bronze Age Pervert is Jewish and I don’t think he would last in Alt Right circles.

Third, it was as a movement also far friendlier to Russia and Russians in a period when mainstream liberal rhetoric on Russia and ethnic Russians was rapidly worsening, and which would have been regarded as racist if applied to any other race. This phenomenon of Democratic Russophobia reached a frankly racialist fever pitch during the Russiagate era, and remains an apt illustration that liberals are hardly immune to bigoted thinking. This also happened at a time when the Kremlin narrative portraying Russia as a besieged fortress whose sovereignty and development prospects were being maliciously undermined by Westerners was, though not uncontroversial, also not entirely incredible.

Guys, the Western siege of Russia is not a conspiracy invented by Putin. Neocons are mostly “Russian” Jews, whose great grandparents fled Moldova and Ukraine because the goyim were too angry. They have a biological hatred of Russia, and as long as they control American foreign policy, there will not be any reconciliation between US and Russia.

Despite all the above, the fact remains that I never self-identified as Alt Right, and my tangible associations with the movement were fleeting. I never wrote for their publications, and I never got money from them myself. Consequently, it’s highly dubious bordering on slander to classify me within that cluster. The main arguments cited to that effect largely revolve around rumored associations between me and Richard Spencer, plus a highly superficial comparative narrative to how we have both cynically attempted to whitewash our “former” White Nationalist beliefs (the Woke take) or “cucked out” and went from “based” to “cringe” (the rightoid take). So I will cover my views on and history with Spencer in a bit more detail.

***

My RationalWiki biographer Oliver D. Smith tried to create the impression that I was some kind of close Richard Spencer confidante and attended multiple “Neo-Nazi conferences” with him, which was reprinted by an Irish student newspaper in a hit piece against another person and cited by extremism researcher/grifter John P. Jackson. However, the banal reality is that I only ever met Spencer once when he came to organize a “Safe Space in Berkeley” and subsequently accepted his invitation to an Alt Right meetup in San Francisco immediately afterwards.

I have personally met people much more based than Spencer. I have become a bit of a recluse since then.

Conversely, nor were the Alt Righters interested in my transhumanist proposalson how technologies such as IQ augmentation, automation, and radical life extension could advance White interests by helping them remain retain majorities in Europe. (Yes, I do in retrospect realize the profound autism of evangelizing this amongst the fashy-haircut people). I was also not thrilled with the Duginist undercurrents in Richard Spencer’s milieu. Dugin was an anti-HBD blank slatist on top of his other issues, which was rather cardinally incompatible with my own worldview – and I would think Spencer’s too? – and my concurrent attempts to mainstream HBD/IQ insights amongst Russian nationalists and uplift their discourse beyond Galkovskian crypto-colonies and antiquarian raciology (but more on that later). This led to Twitter spats with Spencer’s wife and Dugin translator Nina Kouprianova. As for Spencer himself, I steadily realized that despite some talent for public speaking, PR, and aesthetics, he had no very original or interesting ideas of his own.

OK

…there were rumors of extreme dysfunction within the Alt Right. This included allegations that Spencer was misusing William Regnery II’s money to fund his chronic drunkenness, cheating on his wife, and sleeping with the girlfriends of his orbiters and writers while not even paying them for their articles. For what it is worth, I was told that these allegations were accurate in text by the Alt Right writer known as Rolo in May 2018, who had previously written as Vincent Law for AltRight.com and The Russia Insider. Quite amusing in light of cuckoldry memes being a hallmark of that community.

Spencer is an absolute gigachad, besides the fuehrer banging the wives of his underlings is not uncommon. Women are sluts, remember that. I have lost any good opinion of women.

In fairness, this was of little surprise in the context of a movement that seems to attract all sorts of weirdos and psychopaths, and where references like the “Night of the Wrong Wives”, the “Homosexual Groomer”, and the “Case of the Missing Wife” all refer to recognizable thought leaders within the “community”.

Far right was always full of homosexuals.

After divorcing his Duginist wife, Richard Spencer performed a 180, going from “Hail Our People” and the famous mental breakdown to supporting Biden and calling for state repressions and harassment against the “Traitor’s Coalition” i.e. his former comrades. He has also gone from ascribing the Holodomor to “drought” – something that, for the record, I never engaged in myself, because I like facts – to outspoken support not just for Ukraine, which is reasonable, but for the most maximalist Ukrainian war aims, including the reclamation of genuinely pro-Russian Crimea and the Donbass. However, I suspect even Ukrainian nationalists would be be wise to be wary of celebrating this Damascene conversion in light of Spencer’s vision essentially reducing to “utilizing” both them and Russians as disposable biomass to fulfill his dreams of a “transition to a united empire.” Judging by the NATO-wave aesthetics merging Euro-Atlantic themes with Nazi imagery around him and his new orbiters such as @EuropaAdAstra and @EuropeanPan, the identitarian component of this “empire” is not hard to guess. White Nationalism in new wrappings.

NATO supremacy for white supremacy. 😆Genius!

Otherwise, the Alt Right as a broad coalition was put out of its misery post-Charlottesville, and their main characters have moved on. Some went into Establishment conservatism, helping create a kind of Alt Right-MAGA synthesis. Some have truly gone their own way in a manner that defies easy categorization, most notably Richard Hoste’s mutation into Richard Hanania (though Hoste was last active there well before the halcyon days of the Alt Right, I never ran across him there, and his “unmasking” was news to me). Some have gone into vaguely lefty White Nationalism (Erik Striker/National Justice Party and the Traditional Workers’ Party comes to mind). Still others degenerated further into groyperdom and related sects.

The establishment actually fears a movement like Alt Right.

I deny ever being a White Nationalist, let alone a Neo-Nazi or a White Supremacist. Although in the mid- to late 2010s I agreed that there was a war on White identity in the US and much of Western Europe, I couldn’t care less about a White ethnostate; I was a Russian nationalist, not a White Nationalist, and those two worldviews were never very well aligned to put it mildly. Such allegations are refuted not by my own mixed background (25% Dagestani, 3% Jewish), but also by essentially the entire body of my online commentary at that time (e.g. my Sinophilia and advocacy of strong economic and diplomatic relations between Russia and China – positions that I am now significantly less enthusiastic about). Nor did I ever actively associate with their leading ideologues or movements.

Neonazism has long been filled with Jews, homosexuals, and feds. I actually believe Czech Neonazis were sent to Ukraine. I have heard Czech in the videos from Odessa on May 2 2014.

That said, I will acknowledge that at that time I was not hostile to Western White Nationalists, since in my view (1) White Nationalists tended not to hate Russia as much as Western neoliberals – if only because they seemed to view Russia as some kind of Based PutlerReich; and (2) Western neoliberals were themselves perfectly cool with Nazis in Russia/the Ukraine, jihadists in Syria, etc., so long as they remained useful geopolitical patsies.

This is the old trick of the British, use the most fucked up elements of the society to destroy your enemies. Western Neonazis were all stirred towards supporting Ukraine against Putler. There might have been some elements that liked Putin because the enemy of ZOG is my friend. But Putin jailed all the Naonazis, so these people were a marginal minority.

I would argue that this remains true to the present day! Despite an apparent lessening of taboos against advocating identitarian White interests – a development that I suspect is mostly driven by Elon Musk as well as public tiredness with Woke overreach – you will still generally run into problems promoting or endorsing, say, Jared Taylor – an intellectual and soft-spoken advocate of White interests who has yet to be reinstated on X (even as vicious anti-Semites like Kanye West get chance after new chance). Conversely, you would experience no such issues endorsing the openly Neo-Nazi – no, seriously, he failed this most basic of tests by refusing to condemn Hitler in an interview with Russian libertarian Mikhail Svetov – Denis Nikitin (“White Rex”), the leader of the far-right Russian Volunteer Corps that is fighting for Ukraine. A connected development is the… whitewashing of Neo-Nazi/White Nationalist involvement in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, which were extensively covered in the pre-war era in the Western MSM, but have now been memory holed. And note that I am not even necessarily condemning this, since Ukraine is a victim of military aggression, and it is surely better to “utilize” Far Right thugs than mobilized Ukrainians to the extent that Khorne demands that the blood flows. But nonetheless.

This simping for Ukraine ain’t cool. Fuck Ukraine.

Groypers are the devolved “chuds” of the old Alt Right with the frog or anime girl avatars who have “transitioned” from race realism and dubious but at least not entirely stupid exegeses on the “Jewish Question” (at the end of the day Kevin MacDonald is a cited academic who got engagement from other academics like Nathan Cofnas) to their current degenerated state of unabashed race hatred, unhinged COVID denialism, harassment brigades, and tradlarp in reality which mostly boils down to extreme misogyny that is most often born of personal frustrations.

Groypers are Alt Right remnants, its orphans. Jewish Question, and White Sharia (basically return of patriarchy) were the fundamentals of the Alt Right…

Their geopolitical views differ. One wing, probably the more numerous one as it includes their two leading luminaries, Andrew Anglin and Nick Fuentes, are “what is falling must be pushed” maximalists who openly proclaim their allegiance to all of America’s geopolitical foes from Russia and China down to the Taliban and the Houthis. The other wing is strongly pro-Azov, genocidally Sinophobic, and champions other pro-American positions in psychotically maximalist ways. I view this cluster as a successor to the anti-Soviet Far Right tradition that also encompasses Operation Gladio and the Final Phase memesphere, and I am reasonably sure that it is extensively infiltrated and manipulated by Western intelligence services. 

Feds my dear, these movements are full of feds. Karlin goes on to talk about the Intellectual Dark Web, which I have little idea about. He then moves on to the manosphere. Manosphere, anti-feminism, PUA is only right-wing because the left has usurped the female voice and views men as the problem.

My acquaintance with this space was always tangential and my involvement, zero. Now to be sure I benefited from reading the game “literature” and I think that many young men who rolled a low Charisma stat on the character creation screen would benefit from acquainting themselves with Neil Strauss (Style), Mystery, lRoss Jeffries, and all the NLP/persuasion stuff.

I never liked the PUAs, in my opinion they are nothing but shysters that do some parasitic feeding on the carcass of relationships. The premise is they study what women respond to, and they give it to them. I never liked this dynamic. I could never run emotional manipulation, I don’t like being something I am not. I am not a particularly attractive man but I managed to get laid by just existing and hanging out. I pity the guys that have to run emotional manipulation, peacocking, money maxxing, and cat fishing on women just to get laid. The dating scene is brutal, I’d rather play video games at home.

Also, once you get the girl, what else can you do with her besides sex? Most women you will meet are not wife material. They are definitely not out there to build anything with you.

However, even in this space, I notice a steady degradation in intellectualism – from the original PUAs like Style, who were smart, funny, introspective, and not even all that political; through Roissy/Chateau Heartiste and Roosh V, who mixed up some genuinely useful advice coupled with political brain worms and the misogyny that often comes from sleeping with many women; to the “culture” in which Zero HP Lovecraft is regarded as a prominent intellectualand its public face is glorified pimp, scammer, and Elon Musk Spaces regular Andrew Tate, who was charged with running a prostitution ring and openly boasted of exploiting his own orbiters/paypigs.

Andrew Tate is a parasite on the carcass of the manosphere. The charges against him now seem to be mute but he did write messages to the paypigs from the accounts of the camgirls, this is super cringe.

After explaining that he is not a rightoid and mentioning the editor of rational wiki several times, Katlin got to the Soypill Manifesto. Starts with the Jewish Question.

My views on Jews as defined by the ADL were marginally anti-Semitic as of 2018, though (I think) more or less grounded in realism (e.g., “Jews have too much power in the business world” – well OK, look at the Forbes 400). Granted, these views were not extreme by international standards, nor by the standards of the Dissident Right milieu. I was always skeptical towards the Culture of Critique arguments – as Nathan Cofnas notes, there is no evidence for Jews being relatively underrepresented in right-wing movements that were not themselves inherently anti-Semitic – and I even pushed back on Kevin McDonald’s claim that the Russian opposition was a “nearly all” Jewish movement. More importantly, any anti-Semitism was necessarily modulated by my IQ realism – all else equal, one would expect Jews to be more successful/influential/etc., if average IQ was to have predictive validity, as it does. (I recently wrote a short thread on this).

OK

However, I did support Israel, not because I caredabout Israeli Jews or Palestinians – I was always sufficiently honest to admit that no, I did not care for the squabbles of tribes that were not my own – but because I, like many nationalists from Eastern Europe, saw Israel as a good template to copy for its perceived national cohesion, brutal decisiveness, and mobilization capacity. And was seething and enraged that Israel could be a “Jewish State” whereas “Russia for Russians” was considered to be hateful and extremist by not just Russian liberals and Westerners – who could at least be said to be consistent – but by many Jewswho were otherwise themselves unapologetic Zionist maximalists.

Supporting Israel because it is an ethnic nationalist champion seems kinda stupid. International politics works on hypocrisy. If Israel’s ethnic nationalism was long overlooked (not so much now) does not mean your own ethnic nationalism would be tolerated in Russia, or wherever in Europe. Russia of late has clamped down on immigration from Central Asia despite the fact that it has labour shortages, perhaps to shore up nationalist support in the times of war but in peacetime, Russia for Russians is detrimental.

One example would be Julia Ioffe, who was an AIPAC nationalist at university who loved Israel’s wall but opposed Trump’s wall, and identified as “je suis refugee” in Europe while hurling hyperbolic accusations of anti-Semitism against Putin. However, I am happy to see now that she is an outspoken advocate for Palestinian rights, which underlines the fact that we can all grow beyond our youthful tribalisms.

I personally have learned not to give a fuck about the Israel-Palestine conflict. They can fight each other until the end of times for all I care. The Jews are settlers that stole the land, and the Palestinian Arabs don’t want any compromise with them. It is a fight to the death, ☠️ I am neutral.

On that note, since I now reject nationalism in favor of Open Borders universalism, I consider all identitarianisms to be ghoulish and psychopathic, and disavow all championing of such views I did in the past. I now entirely unironically endorse the viewpoint of the Jewish Museum and Center of Tolerance in Moscow that the only path to prosperity is through tolerance.

I do agree that tolerance is the way. But we need equal measure for everyone. I am an immigration skeptic. I believe that fewer humans means more oxygen. More space for animals. Less carbon footprint, and similar shit. On the other hand, depopulation means civilizational decline. Hence, territorialization is necessary. Immigration controls are necessary. Not so much motivated by nationalism but rather sustainability.

That implies rejection of all cannibalistic tribal and identitarian visions, including but not limited to the Russian nationalist vision of the “Russian National State” (RNG), America First/MAGA, Brexit, White Nationalism, Islamism, and the various European identitarianisms. For analogous reasons, I also strongly reject Zionism and its demented rhetoric (Greater Israel, destroy Amalek, etc.).

I personally never liked Sputnik & Pogrom’s Russian National State. It always sounded stupid to me,, and I am not surprised Russia closed that rag. But I supported Brexit. Because fuck the EU. We can live without it and the sooner it breaks up and fails, the better.

As regards Jews themselves, as someone no longer beset by identitarian obsessions, my positions are now entirely philo-Semitic. Amusingly, this is entirely independent of JQ considerations! That is, even if Kevin MacDonald is correct that Jews played a central and irreplaceable role in dissolving conservative and traditionalist Western values, it would only be a greater credit to the Jews who have constituted the vanguard of Elite Human Capital (EHC) throughout history from Baruch Spinoza to Eliezer Yudkowsky.

OK

Karlin moves from the JQ to Feminism…

Since my earliest days in blogging, I identified as pro-equity feminism and anti-gender feminism (as per Christina Hoff Sommers). I rejected gender feminism not even so much because I thought it was bad for men, but because I thought it is bad for women in much the same way that MRA ideology is bad for men. Gender feminism is more about victimization and “owning” men – in practice, mostly low status and powerless men at that – than self-improvement or any productive, testable ideas about reorganizing society to be better and more equitable. Ironically, women in countries where there is more gender feminism – as opposed to the equity feminism that was strongly championed under the socialist regimes as one of their few positive legacies – tend to underperform relative to men, which is unsurprising since like all identitarianisms it is an ideology of loserdom…

In my opinion, Karlin misunderstands MRA and equates it with Feminism. MRA was largely insignificant. The discourse has been taken over by male separatism, MGTOW. The problem is this society is highly gynocentric and any man can get fucked by the machine, be he high status or low status.

Also see this story I featured on this blog.

Most men are actually low status. Most women out there are trash, not worth dating, not worth marrying, not worth having children with. They are blown out THOTs. Life with modern women can be dangerous to men, I know guys that were attacked or drank themselves to death from stress. Women are extremely entitled today. The woman you choose to spend your time with is the most important decision you will make. Besides, I have saved heaps of money by checking out.

I am no longer even interested in countersignaling gender feminists who, despite their epistemic limitations, ultimately constitute a progressive historical force.

My opinion is that gender feminism has done a number on Western society and will be its undoing ultimately. Karlin is more optimistic because AI and shit…

Regarding the more “out there” political positions, I should emphasize that I never entertained the neo-reactionary obsession with the all-male Männerbund as the ideal organizing principle of political life. (Incidentally, it’s amusing that it is precisely the “power institutions” section of the Russian government, the all-male siloviki, that have been proven by the war to also be its single most dysfunctional one).

But imagine if the siloviki were run by women. 😆

And very obviously I was never involved in the febrile fantasies about “thot patrols” and “women in cages” memed by Andrew Anglin and the groyper crowd. Incidentally, these views have found a remarkable degree of traction amongst some very large right-wing accounts, where the victory of the Taliban in Afghanistan was met with reactions ranging from amusement to enthusiastic glee. For the record, I was always been anti-Taliban and labeled them an “unambiguously vile entity.”

America spent fucking 20 years in Afghanistan only to leave that country in shame to the Taliban. Now, as this is in the context of feminism. It is said the Muslims once upon a time read a lot of Plato and allowed their women a degree of freedom, and it has led to the attitude they have today. Mind you, during the Islamic golden age, the Muslim world was far ahead technologically and socially from the West. But then good times brought weak men, weak men caused hard times.

I support Nordic family policies, and have done so for a long time, and will in all likelihood continue doing so for as long as the state remains the prime organizer of human relations. I always supported abortion rights and always adhered to bioliberal maximalism/voluntary eugenics, indeed having mooted the idea of artificial wombs early on in my blogging in 2008. Although I supported natalism primarily for reasons that I now consider illegitimate – nationalism, and increasing national power, on the principle that population equals power – I only ever did so on the basis of incentives and voluntarism. Indeed, I repeatedly pointed out the practical superiority of the Nordic model based on equitable and heavily subsidized child-rearing over conservative demands to demonize single motherhood or keep women out of education/the workforce.

OK, fair enough. Also look up income tax in Nordic countries. Nordic birth rates are also pretty low.

My current outlook is that natalism no longer makes sense, at least at the individual level, in the age of short AI timelines and imminent access to embryo selection for IQ.

If populations were smaller, smarter, well connected, there would be less need for farmland, less need for cities. Nature could take over where humans have left, animals could thrive. There are commies out there that think artificial womb could undo family and thus private property. But such a society hinges on technology but what if the machine stops? And there are some that believe without enough people the machine would stop.

Obviously I am not expecting any prizes for maintaining sane, normal views on women in a milieu in which rather extreme misogyny is rampant. Ideas about doing away with female emancipation, employment and education rights, and even banning contraception are far from marginal within the Alt Right, major subsegments of which view the Taliban or Caesar’s Legion from Fallout: New Vegas as legitimate models of social organization. (Pro tip to libs: You don’t have to go on about The Handmaid’s Tale. Those are the two main actual inspirations – remember, these people don’t actually read all much). It is also a space where defending women from anonymous online harassment is derogatively called “white knighting” in a parody of the original meaning of the term.

Men usually have “sane views” on women because they do not get any bitches or have never been burned. This is why bitches hate nice guys. Because the women know the true nature of women. Men on the other hand have a biological programming to see the good in women. Women don’t care about your misogyny if you are hot or rich, matter of fact it signals that you get women, and women like a guy other girls like. Some women purposely seek out married men. Crazy isn’t it?

Now, Taliban signals that Handmaid’s Tale is possible. This is the teleological end of feminism. Bet you no Afghan woman would call the Taliban boys gay, or call them incels. There is also a pattern of male feminists getting arrested for domestic violence, which is a reminder that you don’t live in Afghanistan and Taliban style burka clad harems are a fantasy of teenage dorks online.

This extreme misogyny must surely go someway to explaining why women tend to be allergic to Far Right movements. These people have very low empathy and theory of mind, and find it hard to fathom why women who they do not consider to be even fully human are repulsed by them. (Much like radical anti-Semites wonder why Jews aren’t flocking to them). And observing this progressively more deranged psychopathy since the late 2010s played a significant independent factor in my disillusionment with the right-wing ideology, and I say that as someone who understands sex differences and the psychology of women rather well.

Some say women elected Hitler. Here in Europe, so called Far Right go out of their way to show a female candidate. Women would gravitate to whatever they see as popular. There is also a pattern of women voting with the men in their household. Also, the Far Right is not served by having in its ranks screeching childless cat ladies having a meltdown over Donald Trump and abortion. Also, if you think Jews are the problem, why would you want to have Jews in your organization? Although, Jews have been quite common among Neonazis historically. 😆

For instance, the aforementioned leader of the Neonazi Russian Volunteer Corps of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Denis Nikitin (real name Denis Kapustin, who produces the clothing brand White Rex) is said to have moved to Germany with his mother through a program for Jewish immigrants in 2001. 😆 One can also mention Frank Collin, born Max Simon Cohn.

All of these groups, online misogynists and Neonazis are so marginal, it is actually on the spectrum to even seriously discuss them. Karlin continues discussing LGBT. Now, he was always pro-gay, which I always found cringe.

Although I was pro-LGBT, which included supporting gay marriage in the late 2000s when it was still a slightly thorny issue even in the progressive countries, I became less well-disposed to it from the mid-2010s. My issue with didn’t have much to do with preserving “traditional values” – there isn’t much traditional about eugenics or cryonics – but my perception of it as a geopolitical vector of American imperialism, with the sudden and strangely militant American pivot from Dubya era “family values” rhetoric to the late Obama era insistence that “gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights” complete with the rainbow flag becoming something like the secondary American flag at its embassies abroad giving off very weird vibes.

The duality of America is why nobody will treat Murican cultural output seriously. Mark these words.

In any case, it seemed weird to get very upset about a law that banned the propagandization of homosexuality to children (a copy of a 1980s British law, which is relatively recent in historical terms, so who were they to get so flustered about it? and wasn’t it entirely criminalized in most of the Muslim world anyway?). It was anti-free speech, sure, but then again, it wasn’t as if Russia was ever a free speech paragon. Moreover, not only was it becoming tightly coupled to something that could be viewed as American cultural imperialism, but from the mid-2010s it also came as a “package deal” along with a host of other non-desirable cultural imports such as BLM and Wokeness. And besides, weren’t the Western countries canceling people for citing FBI crime stats and arresting people for misgendering? Wasn’t that the alternative? Don’t the SJWs require authoritarian pushback to prevent them from inundating civilization with runaway Wokeness?

***

Yes, bad things were happening in the West. However, an important caveat that I overlooked is that the Anglosphere has strong political and cultural institutions, such as rule of law and the principle of fair play, that prevent those processes from assuming runaway dynamics. Meanwhile, late Putinism’s LGBT obsession has gone into overdrive, assuming increasingly absurd and grotesque forms even as any vestigial institutional checks and balances fade away to nothing. Hence we now have the spectacle of Putin smirking and parlaying juvenile jokes about Parent One and Parent Two on Russian state TV to cynically distract the biomass from his failures at war. This has now escalated into the criminalization of “LGBT” as an “extremist organization” despite the fact that it has no coherent institutional or judicial existence. 

Karlin thinks there is no coherent institutional structure to LGBT. This is wrong, here in Czechia, I know exactly which organizations are behind Pride marches and other outward pro-homo campaigns. These organizations have sponsors, and without this there would not be any of this joy. Russia declaring LGBT extremist is a based move in my opinion.

You will also notice another thing. Karlin chastises Russia for not crushing Ukraine like a bug, in 3 days you know. I have written in 2019 that Ukraine will be a harder nut to crack, (granted, I was an optimist, I thought Ukraine would implement Minsk) and Russia’s initial performance in the war was underwhelming. But Russia is on the roll, and Russia will kill them all.

Happily, I suspect Russian homophobia is a mostly elite-created and hence “shallow” phenomenon that Russian elites themselves neither believe in nor particularly care about, and that the post-Putin democratic transition will be rapidly followed by mass “sissification”.

It all depends on who takes control of Russia following Putin. If it is the banker class, they might be tempted to sissify the men, and introduce rainbow anal festivals…

I will admit that I view, and still do, both G and T with some degree of personal revulsion. This is psychologically standard – I just have the honesty to admit it. However, such considerations have never determined whether my attitudes towards anything since appeal to disgust is a logical fallacy. Consequently, in the absence of religious or (now) political considerations, I now strongly support support LGBTQ+ maximalism, including gay marriage. Psychometric studies suggest that homosexuals are considerably smarter and more accomplished than normie heterosexuals, whereas outspoken homophobes are much duller than both.

G is literally HIV and Monkey Pox, I am suspended for this on Twitter. I do not regret it. Homosexuals 🏳️‍🌈 are not smart enough to not be a literal biohazard ☣️ Homosexuals are freaks of nature. You need to particularly degenerate to accept this lifestyle. If you are born this way, I am sorry, you came out wrong. The population of anal cowboys is really small, and therefore who cares if they are smarter? I bet you there are enough smart straight people out there.

Gay marriage in my opinion is there to troll traditional religion. Leftists don’t only want gay marriage, they want gay marriage in Churches. And the Churches can either resist it, and be prosecuted, or they can break with biblical principles. There were cases of LGBT activists trying to sue people for not making a gay wedding cake in the US.

Now T is OK with me. As long as you pay for your transition, and stay away from the kids. I apply the same measure to G, can’t legislate against men taking up the ass. It will happen. Just stay away from the kids. A lot of child molesters use G and T as a cover.

The above looks like something from Warhammer, Slaanesh…

More speculatively, public acceptance of LGBTQ+ rights accelerates the Biosingularity insofar as it suppresses natural disgust reflexes that might otherwise slow it down and harm net global welfare. This is important, because the Biosingularity is innately much safer than developing silicon-based superintelligence, but it also has a “yuck” factor that sterile silicon does not. Therefore, there might even be an existential risks case for pushing LGBTQ+ maximalism insofar as it inures normies to body horror. The biosingularitarian future will in any case have more interesting ethical conundrums such as sexual relations between radically rejuvenated humans or between humans and consenting uplifted animals.

Basically, Karlin thinks that if animals were made to talk and give consent to sex, it would be OK to fuck them. 😆

Karlin continues…

…what I do take responsibility for is that I was not below “weaponizing” HBD/IQ research in service of political aims, such as anti-immigration or signaling against BLM, that I now recognize to have been evil and regressive. Although I never explicitly advocated White Nationalist goals or talking points myself, it’s undeniable that so far as politics is concerned, there is a great deal of overlap between the two.

Every BLM protester needs a Kyle Rittenhouse. Karlin is welcome to join next time black baboons begin to burn down the city. Honestly, supporting BLM is a luxury belief. I would like to see Karlin if it was his shop.

Now it would be very bad if the Biosingularity was to become associated with scientific racism, so I am tempted to do away with it entirely on the basis that it’s politically controversial, and divisive of the broad coalition that’s required to actualize nooceleration. In this context, I will mention Scott Alexander – a paladin of Elite Human Capital if there ever was one, and an HBD realist himself (it is common knowledge in the community and the “proofs” are there, but were made publicly available through unethical means, so I will not specify or link to them) – name-censored “HBD” on his old blog, presumably on account of his dictum that all comments had to be either true and kind, kind and necessary, or true and necessary. HBD is often true, but rarely necessary, and never (?) kind.

Nick Land is unreadable my friends.

This is why it is associated with the red pill in Internet culture. Taking the red pill isn’t supposed to be pleasant! It drives many mad. It is an infohazard, and mayhap, paternalism would dictate that you, the cynical Grand Inquisitor, or the atheist priest in San Manuel Bueno, Mártir, are duty-bound to conceal from the peasants.

Karlin rambles on a bit until he proposes some ethical rules to HBD:

However, in recognition of its attendant infohazards, I will voluntarily commit to some guidelines on any future HBD-adjacent posts both here and at Nooceleration:

***

(1) No weaponization of HBD-derived talking points in service of socially regressive or illiberal political agendas. Most obviously, this concerns arguments against immigration, which I engaged in several years ago, and which I now disavow. That only made sense in so far as HBD was married to nationalism. However, considering human welfare at the global level, it is entirely congruent and conductive to Open Borders and UBI, on the Rawlsian principle that no living human should be doomed to a drastically inferior quality of life relative to what is possible even at the world’s current technological level if she or he lost out on both the genetic and birthright lottery, and subsequently belong to the least privileged members of our eight billion strong species. (Yes, I am aware that Rawls himself was against Open Borders. That is irrelevant. Even the EHC giants of yesteryear on whose shoulders we stand could not see past every moral myopia of their day, and we owe it to them to actively extend their universalizing legacy). This also applies to groups such as Antifa, BLM, radical feminists, and the Palestinian rights movement. Although their epistemics leave much to be desired, I now understand that it is regressive to counter-signal movements that are for the most part earnestly committed to liberation and social justice, at least insofar as they themselves do not make common cause with reactionary forces such as Black Nationalists, anti-Semites, or Islamists.

***

2) Calling out instances of political weaponization of HBD research where appropriate. For instance, it is highly amusing that many respectable, “Dems are the real racists” conservatives, having spent years calling out IQists on the basis that we are all equal before God and similar drivel, have oh so serendipitously discovered the problems of cousin marriage amongst Palestinians. There is also the tendency amongst some people familiar with HBD to apply the theory in overly simplistic and politicized ways, which all else aside, often results in failed predictions. For instance, they have been trying to convince us for 30 years and running that South Africa is going to collapse any day now. This hasn’t panned out to date. Indeed, in terms of things like stock market capitalization or Nature Index score, South Africa performs at about the level of a country of ~5M White people. This is pretty much in line with what you might expect from “smart fractions” theory! Moreover, if a 90% Black population failed to destroy its innovation-generating institutions to date, then the onus is on White Nationalists and immigration restrictionists to explain how drastically smaller percentages of lower human capital immigrants under any feasible Open Borders scenario is supposed to “destroy” the developed countries.

Karlin further explains his anxiety about the HBD discourse being weaponized by rightoids.

However, of late I have come to the conclusion that nation-states are not a viable or desirable construct, that identitarian collectives deserve no moral authority or agency, and that Open Borders are the logical and necessary catalyst for the eventual dissolution of coercive, monopolistic nation-states and their replacement with network states. I believe that these decentralized and geographically distributed network states will be much better than the current nation-states model at promoting human flourishing and associational freedoms, while being much more effective at mitigating existential risks such as nuclear war and AI.

***

That said, I do not apologize for my prior opposition to mass immigration. Although in hindsight it was an unethical and anti-freedom position to advocate, it was hardly an “out there” or an extremist one by the standards of the contemporary age even in the most progressive countries today (heck, Wilders just recently won in the Dutch elections, and Open Borders remains a fringe position outside libertarianism). Obviously, I allow that the impact of immigration might conceivably be negative as pertains to small individual countries or regions that get a particularly bad roll of the dice in the immigrants they get. However, I maintain that the massively increased mobility of labor and rates of knowhow/”best practice” transfer that Open Borders would imply – a process which will logically also include opening up the developing world and their housing markets to foreigners – is clearly a massive net boon at the global level. It is essentially a process in which the United States does not so much “invite the world” but that the entire world becomes the United States.

Mobility of labour is not mass immigration. Mass immigration is where you get Moroccans, Turks, or Uzbeks, negros from Africa in abundant numbers. Specialists already have that mobility, we have LinkedIn and shit. Borders exist even at the level of cities. Cities can make it impossible for certain people to live there, and they readily do so around the World. Czechia is a city state with a nature reserve. Karlin continued with discussing Multipolarity and international relations.

The root of my animus against American/Western hegemony never consisted of either the usual Leftist critiques centering around “colonialism” (indeed the US played a relatively progressive role in that respect, despite the Monroe doctrine and all the coups) or loosely related late Soviet tropes such as the “Golden Billion” (some populations are smarter and got to mass literacy earlier, and that’s mostly all there is to it), nor was I much entertained by or interested in rightoid rants to the effect that the West was a super-spreader of “degeneracy” (my apologetics for Putinism were never based on the reactionary traditionalism that has fostered a new wave of foreign grifters from Jackson Hinkle to “Coach Redpill” but in the delusion that Putinism had found some Golden Mean in avoiding both that and Wokeness).

Putinism is what transpired when elites in Russia became disillusioned with cozying up to the West. Putin’s main point, throughout his rule was that West accept Russia on equal terms. But the West said “Fuck you!” Hinkle is literally a Communist!🤣 The late Gonzalo Lira made an interesting video about the Ukraine conflict, and then he was fucked over by the SBU.

reasons:

(1) Western Supremacism as a concept – the aesthetics and rhetoric of its champions, the neocons and conservatives who blabber about Judeo-Christian values and American exceptionalism are all pretty revolting to non-Westerners in general, and as I never considered myself to be one, despite holding citizenships on “both sides of the divide” so to speak and spending the vast majority of my life in the West. It is worth noting that, living in the UK and then the US at that time, my first conscious perceptions of politics came from 9/11, the War on Terror, the PATRIOT Act, Freedom Fries, WMDs in Iraq, the abortion and stem cell debates, evangelical preachers with their regular homosexual escapades, Satanist panics, “they hate us for our freedom”, and all those other amusing aspects of Dubya World that discredited religious conservatism for me as they did to many other millennials. However, more broadly, the history of US interventions, double standards, extraordinary renditions, and pretensions to judicial extra-territoriality while simultaneously denying non-Americans and especially non-Westerners any of the actual rights of American citizens is a form of imperial feudalism that I was never and am not interested in supporting, regardless of whether it comes in the form of a Republican iron fist or covered by a Democratic velvet glove.

LMAO at anyone, who uses the term Judeo-Christian. Mainstream conservatives are normally totally clueless about the World, and create constructions such as the above to justify funding from Israel. Indeed, the drift to atheism and leftism by Americans of my generation was very much motivated by opposition to Dubya era religious troglodytes. Here in Czechia, echos of this shit only furthered the collapse of religiosity. It was really a last hoorah for Christian fanaticism here in the West. Much of this exists only in the form of Deus Vult memes.

(2) The vulnerability of peripheral countries to novel and deconstructive ideas originating in the core. This idea was energetically championed by Eurasianist philosopher Nikolay Trubetzkoy a century ago, back when Eurasianism was a genuine intellectual movement instead of the pseudo-traditionalist death cult it is today. In Trubetzkoy’s day, this “novel but deconstructive” idea was Marxism-Leninism. What started as an intellectual exercise in Western Europe imposed unprecedented suffering and ruin when transposed to the Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, and elsewhere in the Third World, where its ideologues forced it on “their” people in service of breakneck “modernization” taken to the level of religion. Without the stabilizing effects of the much vaster and more diverse civil societies and economic complexity that had developed over centuries in the West, this “forced modernization” came at a horrendous cost. It was also ultimately much less effective or sustainable than the Russian Empire would have performed if left to develop under normal capitalist conditions. Adding insult to injury, the whole thing collapsed when its own elites decided they preferred jeans to Zhigulis.

Soviet Union was an economic experiment that was kept alive by repression of the opposition. After Stalin, the USSR should have allowed free enterprise much like China did since the seventies. In fact, there was something like that in late eighties in Czechoslovakia but then Gorbachev cucked out. Contrary what you might believe, the people in Czechia still long for the certitude of Commie rule, they just wanted the consumer goods they saw the Westerners enjoy. Soviet Union for a long time practiced Marxist-Leninist conservatism with poor management. Eurasianism of today is basically Duginism.

So what has changed in the past two years?

***

Most obviously, the primary alternate challenges to Pax Americana, GAE, Western Globalism, the Island Empire, call it whatever you want, have all face-planted in the most epic fashion in what Richard Hanania labeled the Year of Fukuyama. I will expound on why that basic thesis is correct in future essays, but in short, the idea that there is any intellectually viable socio-political model that is somewhat distinct from liberal democracy has collapsed. Reactionary Islamism was never a contender. Putinism hoisted itself on its own petard in 2022 and took Russian nationalism with it. The cultural draw of China, always modest, has collapsed (from falling numbers of Mandarin learners in US universities to Italy pulling out of OBOR). Though China remains a viable challenger in hard national power terms light of its formidable population and human capital advantages, its rise is looking increasingly shaky – GDP growth is slowing down well shy of convergence, it is losing the AI and space race to the US, and only its grim hard power continues to gain against the US and its alliance system.

Guys, China was able to develop so fast because it is undemocratic. Totalitarianism has its problem, excesses of the government tend to magnify but it gets shit done. See Stalin if you are not convinced. Democratic West cannot even build a nuclear power plant unlike China or Putin’s Russia because of democracy. I also don’t get where the belief that China is losing the AI or space race comes from. China might not have Space X but it has companies developing reusable rockets. Same with semiconductors and AI. If they are lagging behind now, they will catch up later, and will produce shit faster than the Westerners. Also Karlin again seems to conflate two concepts. Liberal democracy and GAE. Russia is a liberal democracy, just not that of the Western type. It does not allow faggot marches.

Moreover, the very concept of multipolarity has largely invalidated itself. BRICS, itself the invention of a Goldman Sachs analyst, has been expanded into meaninglessness; any grouping that contains China and India, let alone Saudi Arabia and Iran, just isn’t that credible as a geopolitical bloc. Furthermore, for all the bromides against US hegemony and Global South solidarity and the like, the reality is that during the Ukraine War, it was the US that leveraged “multipolarity” in the classic sense of the word to supply Ukraine with munitions from Pakistan to South Korea while barely even touching its own gargantuan Cold War stockpiles. Meanwhile, China’s main contribution to its strategic partner’s desultory war effort has been to take advantage of its lack of options to gouge it on oil and gas prices.

Shit, this level of ignorance is astounding. Karlin is the one that said Russia will lose because the West can produce more ammo. Now they are procuring that ammo in Pakistan. By the way, I heard they engineered a coup in Pakistan to allow this. Also, it is not true China does not support Russia militarily. At least if you believe politicians here in the EU that accuse China of supplying Russia with what is needed. All the FPV drones Russia uses come from China, China and Russia are developing drones together.

China does not owe Russia a favorable price for its gas. Russia also does not allow Chinese companies into its Arctic business. It is business, nothing personal. Russia’s trade with China has risen by like 50% since the start of the SMO. Also crap like China is driving a hard bargain with Russia over gas is the kind of crap that has been plastered all over British press, which is hostile to Russia, China, and the BRICS, and which is controlled by British secret services. Why is Karlin even promoting this?

It is completely irrelevant, who first invented the concept of the BRICS. Multipolarity for instance was first formulated by Evgeny Primakov. What the BRICS is is an attempt to decouple from the West. It is an attempt to build their own payment network that would use local currencies, or perhaps a cryptocurrency. It is an attempt to create international banking, stock exchanges, commodities trade independent of the West. It is an attempt to build communication systems autonomous from any Western influence. People like to point out animosities between Saudi and Iran, of India and China but not so long ago Russia and Iran did not see eye to eye, China and Russia also had its issues. Bottom line is these differences do not matter in the grand scheme of things.

Sad as this is for those who dreamed of a genuinely multipolar world that successfully coordinated against American hegemony, it is perhaps ultimately not surprising in light of multipolarity’s rotten epistemic foundations, if one accepts @devarbol‘s interpretation of multipolarity as the degenerated final stage of Soviet anti-imperialism but now shorn of any intellectual component beyond kneejerk defenses of “sovereignty” that as often as not is just code word for the “sovereign rights” of developing world grifter elites to rationalize “patriotic corruption” and protect influential lobbies, while paying lip service to “tradition” that is almost inevitably some colonial European artifact or modern American conservative import as opposed to being actually autochthonous (the amusing final stage of this being Orthodox cross toting frog avatars from Serbia and Latin America calling me a Satanist cuck and hailing Based Putler for moving to ban abortion in Russia).

Patriotic corruption as opposed to non-patriotic corruption. That is the latter is looting your own country and depositing that money in accounts in the West. Any Russian you meet in Europe or Murica has likely done that, especially if he is wealthy. What I love about Putin is he made this activity difficult, mostly indirectly by angering the West.

Does this mean I have “sold out” and am now an American nationalist, neocon, Western supremacist? Certainly many of my former rightoid and multipolar fans seem to believe exactly that and make unedifying comparisons with other notable “apostates” from the Dissident Right. I disagree with these assessments since I view them as a caricature created by people who are unimaginative, inattentive to what I actually write, and reside in a tribal binary where you either for the United States or against it, and all the things it is essentialized as – globalism, liberalism, the “LGBT agenda”, etc. – by association.

It is not so much that the other countries are against the US. But the US has been encroaching on their territory, weaponizing the dollar, promoting homosexuality. Like honestly, why should anyone tolerate this?

However, the supreme irony is that the values and positions I hold today are objectively far more radical than they were two years ago; whereas a “Pax Americana” could well coexist with the “Russian World”, neither has a future in an Open Borders world of network states. And I would argue it is crisply distinct from Richard Hanania’s normiecon championing of the American imperial project with Zionism as its junior adjunct, let alone former Duginist Richard Spencer’s visions of utilizing Russia as a Nietzschean foil to foster and coalesce a White Nationalist empire.

This is autism. In the future, there will be large civilizational blocks, united by shared interests, common language, and common interests. The one with more chips and bigger dick will win the contest. Humans are naturally tribal. Modern communication only expanded the reach of a tribe.

However, this does not mean I was ever anti-American, nor that I am anti-American today. To the extent that I have opinions on the United States per se, I have always been a consistent admirer of its GDP-maxxing institutions, deep capital markets, and technological dynamism. In my Russian nationalist days, I wanted to copy many aspects of its society and culture, from the First Amendment and gun rights to HBD discourse (but minus the Wokeness of course) – incidentally, isn’t it interesting that the only worthwhile ideas even in “right-wing” discourse came from the United States? – and indeed even initially interpreted the Ukraine War as a Russian attempt to “become an America” in population/economies of scale terms.

***

Nor am I even resentful about the US checking Russia’s nationalist ambitions, and not just because I now reject nationalism per se, but because a political system incompetent and dysfunctional enough to lose to a corrupt and dysfunctional state with just a fifth of its population and 7% of its GDP never deserved to win in the first place.

Again Karlin is crying that Russia did not crush Ukraine like a bug. Ukraine might have been corrupt and dysfunctional but its armed forces have gone through quite a reform since 2014. Ukraine has been arming itself for war with Russia. Meanwhile, Russia was building resilience to withstand Western sanctions. One of the reasons why Russia did not intervene fully in 2014 was the threat of sanctions. Ukraine was poised to strike when Russia intervened and essentially stopped it, and my belief is Russia will crush Ukraine and will kill them all.

Especially in light of the fact that American aid to Ukraine was actually rather small – a minor percentage of its gargantuan Cold War era stocks – and delayed until summer 2022. That is because the US itself expected Russia to win quickly – or why else did it move its Embassy from Kiev to Lviv in February 2022? In any case, this is indicative of a regime that is pathologically dysfunctional, and one that should be dismantled for the benefit not just of Ukrainians but of Russians themselves.

I am not sure where this underestimate of Ukraine came from. I was very worried about any Russian intervention since at least 2019. Blaming Putinism for this is not fair. Russia will win this fight. Russia will kill them all.

Nonetheless, my rejection of American imperialism/Western supremacism does not imply neutrality in the geopolitical realm, be it principled/”Bolshevik” (“fuck all nation-states”) or cynical/individualist (“ubi panis ibi patria“) in nature. (Though I appreciate those outlooks to a far greater degree now, and the latter position is how I myself intend to interact with all state institutions going forward). Apart from the observation that liberal democracies are not just “nicer”, but also more functional, there is also the reality that the visions of Open Borders and decentralized world government that I now propose as solutions to both geopolitics and broader existential risks isn’t something that can be just imposed on skeptical populations. It will be something that will need to pass through a process of discourse, debate, consensus, and implementation. And the problem is that authoritarian states will put a veto on any “dissolution” proposals that undermine their “sovereignty” (read: The interests of the ruling elites), even if it would otherwise benefit their constituent population; nor, by definition, would they even permit a free and fair debate on the topic.

Liberal democracy is an eighteenth century relic surviving today. There might be more superior systems like direct democracy. This is now possible with blockchain technology. Liberal democracy creates those ruling elites too. Where I live, there are people you don’t criticize if you want to keep your job. Even in the conditions of a direct democracy, the wealthy individuals will buy influence, and will steer public opinion. You can’t win against the elites. And don’t assume so called democratic states would relinquish sovereignty. Nobody is going to give up power and privilege voluntarily.

At the end of the day, problematic as US imperialism and judicial extraterritoriality might be, the defining discursive symbol of America is the First Amendment whereas that of China is the Great Firewall. While American natsec people discuss banning TikTok, China already blocks all the major Western MSM outlets and social media. The US haplessly tries to impose OFAC controls on Ethereum blocks and even extradites and prosecutes foreign developers such as Alexey Pertsev for the crime of building privacy tools, but China has criminalized the very act of cryptocurrency transactions and all the top DeFi and Web3 protocols are blocked. Xi Jinping has de facto declared war on the as yet inchoate trustless global digital state.

I am actually surprised the US did not go after crypto the minute BTC dropped on the scene? They certainly did bust other sound money alternatives before. Granted, the creator of BTC made sure this would be difficult, the other cryptocurrencies were far less secretive about its development team and far less decentralized. Many people were scammed out of their money like this. I guess BTC broke the ice.

Furthermore, so long as powerful authoritarian states continue to present a credible military threat to liberal democracy – and they do so by the very fact of their existence – any wide-ranging experiments in radically decentralized governance will remain out of reach because the populations of the democratic states will naturally be loth to run risky experiments in decentralization that potentially compromise their ability to militarily resist aggression from the authoritarian states. Consequently, in so far as authoritarian regimes stymie and delay the transition to the Open Borders world order built around network states that I define as superglobalism, their very existence implies elevated existential risks insofar as the current world order of competing nation-states is less well equipped to deal with them. Therefore, undermining and hastening the dismantling of the authoritarian regimes may be considered to be a moral imperative beyond even the welfare gains in the form of human rights and governance (if not short-term growth) that democratic transitions tend to unleash. For the United States itself can only be dismantled once the world is made safe for superglobalism.

There is never going to be superglobalism because of tribalism. Even in liberal democracy you have to function within a system, which will have a degree of nationalism to it. It is not libshit democratic against authoritarian in the World, ain’t nobody got time for that. It is various oligarchies against each other. Also, Karlin assumes everywhere is Murica, like in Europe. This is far from the truth. In Europe, we don’t have the First Amendment or the Second Amendment. The EU is notoriously undemocratic but Karlin is against Brexit. Actually, liberalism and democracy are only good if the lumpenproletariat votes the way I, and elite human want.

Consequently, in geopolitical confrontations between liberal democratic and rightoid authoritarian polities – in the absence of any strongly mitigating circumstances – I will now commit to always privilege the former in proportion to its degree of alignment with Elite Human Capital teleology. I define this as the idea that if there is some big gap between our current world and a future ethically improved world that is sufficiently obvious to smart present observers – for instance, a world with much smarter people, or one without factory farming – then it would be most ethical to devote one’s moral efforts to accelerating the closure of this gap. As a rule, this involves privileging states, religions, and networks that load on liberalism, tolerance, openness, viewpoint diversity, and intellectualism – e.g. Blue America, Sweden, Taiwan, Effective Altruism, immortalism, the network states like Zuzalu, Próspera, and Praxis – and rejecting those that champion conservatism, reaction, close-mindedness, identitarianism, and fanaticism – e.g. the CPC and the kremlins, Islamism, and the Rightoid International.

***

However, as a condition of EHC alignment, the obligation that progressive countries and networks take up is to orient their foreign policies not towards narrow goals like increasing their relative national power, engaging in collective punishment or vengeance, or even cost-inefficient attempts at democratic nation-building per se (idealistic as US intentions in Afghanistan may have been, the $1 trillion bill even had it not ended in disaster was hard to justify). Instead, they must optimally use their economic and cultural preponderance to tilt ever more of the world’s population and economic product towards EHC alignment within the globalist system. These will carry a mostly economic and soft power character – the color revolutions with which the US is already well experienced (loading on democratic peace theory), and a resilient commitment to globalization (Golden Arches theory). I would also add that in retrospect the vigorous US commitment to proselytizing LGBT rights under the Obama administration – sudden and cynical as it might have appeared at the time – was in retrospect completely validated, in the sense that the Rainbow represents an even purer distillation of allegiance to the globalist liberal order than free elections or a fast food chain. (On a side note, have any two countries that permit LGBT pride parades ever gone to war with each other? Can I patent Rainbow Peace Theory?).

Faggot march countries do not fight each other. For now because faggot march is a cultural product of the US. US allies don’t have the need to fight each other.

Another low-hanging fruit is repurposing immigration policy to brain drain and undermine authoritarianism. Apart from this being the default outcome under Open Borders, it is also the one obvious, non-violent, risk-free, and economically beneficial (win-win) way to undermine the ruling regimes in countries such as Russia, Iran, and China. In those countries, many of the smartest youngsters chafe under the rule of senile reactionary boomers. They would jump at the chance to emigrate if travel and work restrictions were to be removed, though ideally it would also be something that is actively incentivized. Certainly this strikes me as a far more rational course of action than putting up barriers and inconveniences to Russian emigrants – and mostly just to humor spiteful East European Russophobes at that. (Russophobia is also a regressive identitarianism, and incompatible with EHC). This is what “draining the swamp” would actually look like. The numbers of undocumented Chinese immigrants to the US appears to have soared in the past few years. The Economist recently wrote about how of these Chinese have to make a dangerous trek through the Darién Gap to get to the US. It should instead be begging these enterprising individuals who are smart enough to see that China is going nowhere good under Xi Jinping to come to America and invite in many more.

This is wishful thinking, US and Europe can only take and accommodate a limited number of people. Many of these immigrants will not find employment and will actually make way back to China and Russia. This all hinges on growth of Western economies. Also life in Murican capitalism is not for everyone. Gerontocracy is apparent in the West too, boomers and Gen X are not very keen of relinquishing power. Longevity is helping them stay in their place. You really don’t win anything by moving to the West. I realized that I suffer from deep culture shocks when moving anywhere else than my literal neck of the woods.

The final thing I want to underline is my near unqualified support for the major international and multilateral institutions such as the UN, World Bank, OECD, IMF, WEF, WHO, ILO, WTO, and many (not all) of the regional cooperation and integration blocs. And I would like to take a moment to recognize their mostly hard-working bureaucrats, who do what they can to build out a template for the World Government to come and provision us with global comparative data even as they are forced to weather attacks from parochial nativists, populist firebrands, conspiracist trolls, and sundry rightoids. I believe many of these institutions will have an important role to play as bridges in the transition from nation-states to network states, and that it would be wise to co-opt them as icebreakers to superglobalism.

Why not BRICS, SCO, EEC, ASEAN, the African Union, the EU? Entities like WEF, or World Bank are Western controlled institutions that do not serve the global majority.

***

Bottom line. Note the characters mentioned above. The Neonazi “Nikitin”, hebephile libertarian Svetov, and Karlin are all now out of Russia, and are shitting on Russia and Putin. Russia literally got rid of this diarrhea, the SMO was the Great Detox. With them went other creeps, and degenerates. They now protest in big European cities together with uprooted Ukrainians. 😆 A bunch of smelly turds that Russia will not miss.