The Auron MacIntyre Show - Neocameralism, Voice, and Exit ｜ 7⧸24⧸23

00:00:00.000 We hope you're enjoying your Air Canada flight.

00:00:02.320 Rocky's Vacation, here we come.

00:00:05.060 Whoa, is this economy?

00:00:07.180 Free beer, wine, and snacks.

00:00:09.620 Sweet! 0.95

00:00:10.720 Fast-free Wi-Fi means I can make dinner reservations before we land.

00:00:14.760 And with live TV, I'm not missing the game.

00:00:17.800 It's kind of like, I'm already on vacation.

00:00:20.980 Nice! 0.94

00:00:22.240 On behalf of Air Canada, nice travels.

00:00:25.260 Wi-Fi available to Airplane members on Equipped Flight.

00:00:27.340 Sponsored by Bell. Conditions apply.

00:00:28.580 See AirCanada.com.

00:00:30.000 Hey everybody, how's it going?

00:00:31.760 Thanks for joining me this afternoon.

00:00:33.360 I've got a great stream with a great guest that you're really going to enjoy.

00:00:38.280 So, we talk a lot about a type of political theory on this channel called Neoreactionary Theory.

00:00:44.500 And the godfather of that type of political theory is, of course, Curtis Yarvin.

00:00:49.060 Originally writing under his name, Menchus Moldbug, his pen name there.

00:00:53.880 And he's great at breaking down a lot of systems, but many people have noticed a problem.

00:00:57.720 They said, does this guy have any solutions?

00:01:00.000 Does he ever actually offer any way out?

00:01:02.280 Is there any way forward with this stuff?

00:01:04.580 Well, I want to go over a concept that I have hinted at many times, but I've never actually done a complete video or stream on, called neocameralism.

00:01:13.220 This is the concept that Curtis Yarvin brought up as his solution to the problem of governance.

00:01:18.640 So, joining me with me today to do that is The Prudentialist.

00:01:22.940 Thanks for coming on, man.

00:01:24.280 Thanks for having me on again, Oren.

00:01:25.540 Always a pleasure.

00:01:27.260 Absolutely.

00:01:27.780 So, we're going to be digging into this idea of neocameralism.

00:01:30.960 What is the solution?

00:01:32.360 What's it about?

00:01:33.120 What are its principles?

00:01:34.600 And do they hold up?

00:01:36.100 I mean, this was written well over a decade ago.

00:01:38.700 Does this still apply?

00:01:39.880 Is there still a way forward with this?

00:01:42.020 We'll dig into all that.

00:01:43.200 But before we do, guys, let's hear from our sponsors today.

00:01:46.780 Are you a college student who feels isolated as Cthulhu swims ever leftward?

00:01:51.220 The Intercollegiate Studies Institute is here to help.

00:01:54.140 ISI offers programs and opportunities for conservative students across the country.

00:01:58.900 ISI understands that conservatives and right-of-center students feel isolated on campus and that you're often fighting for your own reputation, dignity, and future.

00:02:07.380 Through ISI, you can learn about what Russell Kirk called permanent things, the philosophical and political teachings that shaped and made Western civilization great.

00:02:16.520 ISI also offers many opportunities to jumpstart your career.

00:02:20.240 For example, Nate Hockman, who's been a guest on this show multiple times, got his start at National Review through ISI.

00:02:26.460 And he's just one of many journalists that ISI has helped start their career.

00:02:30.400 If you're a graduate student, ISI offers funding opportunities to sponsor the next generation of college professors.

00:02:36.660 But most importantly, ISI offers college students a community of people that will help them grow.

00:02:43.220 If you're a college student, ISI can help you start a student organization or a student newspaper or meet other like-minded students at various conferences and events.

00:02:52.900 ISI is here to educate the next generation of great Americans.

00:02:56.740 To learn more, check out ISI.org.

00:02:59.740 That's ISI.org.

00:03:01.740 You can click the link down in the description to learn more.

00:03:04.520 All right, guys, so let's go ahead and jump into this.

00:03:09.400 So like I said, we're going to be exploring Curtis Yarvin's idea of neocameralism today.

00:03:15.120 Many people have pointed out that Curtis Yarvin is an excellent systems analyst.

00:03:19.380 He's very good at explaining why things happen, at diagramming how power flows and how our political system works.

00:03:26.660 But many people have been critical of his solutions.

00:03:29.640 And we want to jump into those solutions today and kind of take a look at them and say, how do these work?

00:03:35.340 Where do they come from?

00:03:36.360 What do they mean?

00:03:37.200 Are they still applicable?

00:03:38.300 Is there a way to salvage these kind of things?

00:03:40.400 We're going to jump into that today.

00:03:42.080 So the first thing I want to touch on is kind of the roots of neocameralism.

00:03:46.360 A lot of people might be aware, but some people may not, that Curtis Yarvin and many other neo-reaction thinkers tend to come from the libertarian sphere.

00:03:55.260 They were originally people who were libertarians.

00:03:57.860 And when they approach things, they do kind of have that mindset.

00:04:00.980 They've moved beyond libertarianism.

00:04:02.540 They still don't, you know, they don't really follow all of its tenets.

00:04:06.360 But there's still that DNA inside of these ideas.

00:04:09.980 Now, neocameralism is going to specifically come as a very libertarian-influenced idea because it's going to talk about, believe it or not, corporate ownership of countries, how countries can be run by corporations.

00:04:27.740 And this ties Curtis Yarvin to many other libertarian-style thinkers, people like Hans-Hermann Hoppe, who kind of outlined the ways in which kind of these societies might run.

00:04:43.120 Prudentialist, just kind of the outset, what do you think about the libertarian origins of this thought?

00:04:48.120 Does it make sense, the transition between libertarianism and the kind of, I guess, futuristic neo-feudalism he's going to talk about here?

00:04:58.320 Well, yeah, I think that you can definitely see the Hans-Hermann Hoppe influence on sort of this neocameralist idea that Yarvin puts out.

00:05:07.080 You see it especially when you think of like Hans-Hermann Hoppe's works about, you know, from aristocracy to monarchy to democracy,

00:05:13.100 that, you know, things were more productive in the sort of era of some sort of medieval feudalism where there was less likelihood to have more freedom,

00:05:20.700 where people could be not under the control of some Leviathan state.

00:05:24.440 You kind of see this being reinvented in a way or repackaged with sort of the Silicon Valley, you know, influence that Yarvin clearly has,

00:05:34.100 both as a systems analyst, but also as someone who sort of looks at things like a startup state.

00:05:38.460 And it shows where he starts talking about this sort of neo-feudal concept where we want to have a world where the sort of micro states can better organize themselves

00:05:48.480 and are focused on profit motive rather than sort of the traditional idea of a state ruling overall and having this concept of a nation state.

00:05:58.400 It returns to something smaller.

00:05:59.640 Yeah, I think there's a big focus on the competition, right, the competitive aspect.

00:06:05.480 So, for instance, you know, he talks about in his essay Patchwork about how the different warring states,

00:06:13.740 you know, kind of the political disunion of smaller city states and places like Greece or Italy created these,

00:06:20.380 you know, Renaissance type environments or these antiquity environments that were just kind of these cultural, political,

00:06:27.220 philosophical and scientific hotbeds because the constant kind of rubbing and competition of these small, independent,

00:06:38.160 you know, nation states allowed kind of the emergence of these superior cultures,

00:06:44.860 these big booms and leaps forward in kind of human civilization.

00:06:49.760 And the idea here is kind of similar, right?

00:06:53.900 Rather than having these large Leviathan style nations, rather than having, you know,

00:07:00.260 giant empires of the United States or China or any of these other nations,

00:07:05.500 the idea is instead to break things down.

00:07:07.800 He calls in, you know, neocameralism, he also calls this a system of patchwork, right?

00:07:12.160 These different countries form a patchwork of different societies.

00:07:16.440 And in each one of these patches, you would have basically kind of a corporate CEO running the patch,

00:07:24.940 being the executive, the kind of neo-monarch of that patch.

00:07:31.500 And that would be run for kind of the profitability of the, you know, the kind of the joint stockholders,

00:07:39.860 those who have an investment in the patch, in the small nation state.

00:07:43.120 And the purpose here is really for Jarvin, I think, the elimination of democracy, right?

00:07:49.620 He sees democracy as this inhibition to human development.

00:07:55.480 He sees this as a big hindrance to kind of creating a productive society,

00:08:01.080 much again, like Hans-Hermann Hoppe did.

00:08:03.100 And that by removing this trend towards democracy and kind of allowing these visionary leaders,

00:08:12.500 these CEOs to drive things along kind of one line,

00:08:17.220 you create these, you know, tiny city states that would be very effective.

00:08:23.480 They wouldn't have to worry about the constant, you know, democratic churn,

00:08:28.280 the bureaucratic grind, and they would be able to do great things, you know, individually.

00:08:35.760 Yeah, no, that seems to be a pretty good outline for what we're trying to describe here.

00:08:41.140 To me, it really does illustrate that he wants to combine,

00:08:43.920 and he talks about this, the neocameralist form of government that he wants,

00:08:47.580 these sort of corporate or sovereign corporate entities with sort of a CEO monarchy.

00:08:52.360 He's talking about this as early as 2007, 2008.

00:08:54.740 You can sort of see the evolution of his thought even now into Grey Mirror,

00:08:58.540 that he looks at these, you know, smaller Italian states, pre-unification,

00:09:04.300 both during the medieval period and as well as into the late 19th century,

00:09:09.460 as well as sort of what, you know, was classically called the Concert of Europe between 1815 to 1914.

00:09:16.780 These sort of smaller states, like a German confederation,

00:09:19.780 you see the reference to Frederick the Great quite often here in his work.

00:09:23.740 So that's sort of the framework that he wants to apply with a 21st century cryptographic form of command and control,

00:09:32.260 where you're obviously signing on to, you know, user license agreement stuff to sign on and live in these little territories.

00:09:40.700 And if you don't like it, you can go somewhere else,

00:09:42.920 because there might be a place that is more fitting to your specific kind of needs as a consumer,

00:09:47.940 not just someone like a citizen that we have now,

00:09:51.020 where we have a limited sway on our governments because of democracy and bureaucracy.

00:09:56.440 And instead, you'd have the opportunity to just say,

00:09:58.860 well, this isn't working out, these guys are for, and they're willing to take me, so see ya.

00:10:04.300 Yeah, and that's a really key difference here that you just brought up, right?

00:10:07.880 In America, we think of, you know, voice as the big thing, right?

00:10:13.320 We have a voice, we have a say in government, we have an input into how things are going to be run,

00:10:19.720 and if we can collectively gather our voices together, we can change the direction of government.

00:10:26.000 Now, obviously, we know there's a lot of problems with that model.

00:10:28.960 If you need to check in on the problem with that model, I did a stream with Last Things on kind of Nick Land's problem with democracy,

00:10:37.420 kind of laying out why that doesn't necessarily work the way that many people think it does.

00:10:41.620 But either way, that is kind of the American solution, and the solution for many nations is the idea of voice.

00:10:48.760 But instead of voice, Yarvin focuses on exit, right?

00:10:53.540 The idea is all exit, no voice.

00:10:56.040 So the country is going to run the way it's going to run because the CEO is running it in the interests of the shareholders.

00:11:04.720 So that is going to be the overriding kind of, you know, single vision of how this is going to run.

00:11:11.520 You are not going to have a voice in this.

00:11:13.140 You do not have a democratic process.

00:11:15.060 There is no voiding.

00:11:16.420 There is no input for you.

00:11:19.060 However, what you do have is the opportunity to exit at any time.

00:11:23.360 No one is stopping you from leaving one patch and going to the other.

00:11:27.660 And the hope is that because each patch is relatively small, it's not a large empire, you could easily, you know, move from one to another.

00:11:35.840 And because they'll be in constant competition for each other, they'll want good human capital, right?

00:11:42.080 You'll, as a CEO running a patch, you're going to want the best, the brightest, the most productive.

00:11:48.620 And so you're going to want to create a society that caters to those people.

00:11:53.760 And so if anyone can leave your patch and go to another patch at any time, then that means you have to create an environment that attracts people who are going to be, you know, helping with your patch.

00:12:06.600 And so the idea is like this constant ability to exit and this constant option of competition creates almost the most free market possible for kind of how people would align themselves in any given nation state.

00:12:21.400 Yeah, absolutely.

00:12:23.400 And the concept, of course, is that this is sort of a global system.

00:12:28.040 And because you have this strict market-oriented competition, you want to ensure that you're a profitable entity, that you can have people, you know, being the productive consumer base and patron base for your sort of startup business-esque society.

00:12:46.320 And that that's one way to maintain sort of this mutual competition between states and that having some kind of cryptographic control.

00:12:57.180 And he's talking about this in 2008, but, you know, ideas sort of evolved now with the blockchain and crypto that you could have the ability to control how government works in a way that not one person can just usurp it and take over.

00:13:10.640 Outside of the power outside of the one that's deemed to be sovereign alongside the likelihood of decreasing war.

00:13:17.400 And he goes throughout this, both is neocameralism as an escalator of masarchy.

00:13:23.340 And then, of course, the four chapters on patchwork, his sort of idea for a world peace.

00:13:28.080 But, you know, he doesn't tell you how we would transition towards this, but it is sort of this theorized proposal for an alternative to the sort of democratic bureaucracy that we live under now.

00:13:40.640 Yeah, and I think a lot of people are going to look at this as very pie in the sky, and they're going to be right about that.

00:13:47.020 I don't think that this is a realistic solution kind of to where we're at now.

00:13:52.880 But I do think it's an interesting and important thought experiment because it lets us look at kind of the limits of some of this type of thinking, right?

00:14:02.240 Like, he's going to take many of these libertarian solutions to their absolute maximum.

00:14:06.780 And then we can kind of look at that and say, what parts of this work?

00:14:10.480 What part of this parts are legitimate?

00:14:12.400 What parts kind of fail, right?

00:14:14.500 And where can we find kind of different ways forward?

00:14:18.680 So one thing that you talked about here was kind of the technological aspect of this solution, right?

00:14:24.820 He talks about kind of this cryptographic government, and that's been updated with kind of how that he's because it's been decades basically since he wrote this.

00:14:35.740 And now in gray mirror, he's kind of fleshed this out in a more serious or I shouldn't say more serious.

00:14:40.480 It's still a little fantastical, but in a way that's more updated with our current technology, understanding that basically you could set up a scenario where kind of each one of these people is hidden but accountable.

00:14:55.920 It could take a little longer.

00:14:57.280 We'd have to like read a whole essay to really get into this.

00:14:59.460 But basically the idea is like each of the shareholders could be anonymous but could be held accountable through the technology available, that they could be tied to things like weapons control, that these things could be turned over to the CEO or denied to the CEO, much in the way that a lot of people kind of want to use smart guns, right, where you have to use the fingerprint and you have to biometrically affirm that you're the one who's allowed to operate this thing.

00:15:25.520 You would tie these same things to the monarch, the CEO, that kind of stuff, and so that you could kind of still create basically this kind of accountability through the corporate structure process and through the technological advancements that wouldn't be there than necessarily through just kind of the democratic process.

00:15:50.680 What's better than a well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue?

00:15:53.880 A well-marbled ribeye sizzling on the barbecue that was carefully selected by an Instacart shopper and delivered to your door.

00:16:01.160 A well-marbled ribeye you ordered without even leaving the kiddie pool.

00:16:05.620 Whatever groceries your summer calls for, Instacart has you covered.

00:16:09.780 Download the Instacart app and enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders.

00:16:14.640 Service fees, exclusions, and terms apply.

00:16:17.340 Instacart. Groceries that over-deliver.

00:16:19.820 Yeah, and this is where he calls this crypto governance or something along those lines.

00:16:25.600 You want things to be anonymized to ensure that, and he also talks about this in Gray Mirror as well, that at any point in time, you wouldn't know who the other key holders are as to ensure that you're not being influenced by other people in some form of conspiracy or in sort of an ideologically consistent way to govern,

00:16:45.660 because you never know if they might vote against you or may vote you out based upon your own record.

00:16:50.860 And he argues that this is a way to also link it to the military, to ensure that you need your patrons and subscribers to back this up in a way that if you wanted to declare war,

00:17:01.600 it'd have to be seen as a viable way to do so, and so on and so forth, alongside other decisions that may be made to be more competitive against your other sort of sovereign corporative entities.

00:17:14.860 Whether, you know, he prescribes the idea that, like, San Francisco at the time that had, like, 750,000 people living in it, right?

00:17:22.980 Like, they would spend millions of dollars beautifying the place, making sure that, you know, it was a good place to have a business set up.

00:17:29.760 That way you're making sure that they're not being taxed to death for maximum laugh or curve extraction and to be sort of the ideal world that you want to live in.

00:17:38.820 Very sort of utopian minded, but in a way that seems, at least in his view, technologically feasible based upon the libertarian thinking that he had,

00:17:48.100 ranging from Hans Herma Hoppe, mix it with a little bit of Sir Robert Filmer's divine right of kings.

00:17:54.260 And this is where he sort of sees the conclusion.

00:17:57.600 Yeah, you can definitely see Hoppe's influence here, you know, in Democracy, the God that Failed, Hoppe kind of lays out this idea of kind of these contractual communities.

00:18:07.620 And a big part of this for Hoppe is, you know, a lot of people, when they think about libertarians, they think about just live and let live libertarians, right?

00:18:17.380 Like, whatever you want to do is fine.

00:18:19.720 The government doesn't get involved in those kind of things.

00:18:22.280 That's not actually kind of how Hoppe sees his construction of this.

00:18:27.960 You have to abide, you know, by very strict contracts moving into this.

00:18:33.960 Hoppe is very supportive of kind of the right of association and the right to say no to certain people, to demand certain things of people.

00:18:43.580 He's very big on kind of drawing those lines and allowing the community to kind of put those restrictions on itself.

00:18:50.720 And really, Yarvin takes that a step further, right?

00:18:53.900 He, instead of saying the community will bind all of this stuff into kind of a agreed upon social contract, he says, I'm going to go a step further.

00:19:02.360 And I'm just going to kind of basically create a monarch who will have wide power, will have a large amount of power to, you know, he's not libertarian in this sense.

00:19:13.000 The government will be able to take big moves, you know, have wide sweeping powers.

00:19:17.960 However, it will still be bound through this kind of corporate structure of accountability backed up by that technological safeguard.

00:19:26.840 And again, really essentially, there's this entrance and exit restriction.

00:19:31.620 You know, there's a restriction on entrance, but there's no restriction on exit.

00:19:35.820 You can leave whenever you want.

00:19:37.220 So you might have to meet some very serious requirements.

00:19:40.720 If you're running like the ideal patch, you don't just want anyone in there.

00:19:44.100 Like free immigration into your patch is a problem because if you're constructing this really profitable patch and then a bunch of people are like, hey, that's a really nice place to live.

00:19:52.900 I'm just going to move in there and not care about like what makes it profitable.

00:19:56.900 Well, they're just going to destroy your patch.

00:19:58.680 So you do have to have a lot of gatekeeping about who can move into your patch, but anyone can move out at any time to kind of move on to the next one where they think they'll do better.

00:20:08.460 Yeah. And you mentioned we've been using the words exit and voice is alongside these entities.

00:20:14.240 And I think it's important that we, you know, cite where he's getting this from.

00:20:18.000 He's getting this from the German political economist and philosopher, Alberto Hirschman, who had wrote a book, I think, in the 1970s called Exit, Voice and Loyalty.

00:20:27.760 And that exit and voice are ways to measure the decline of businesses and organizations.

00:20:33.980 And that we see this particularly within democratic governments that, you know, the more vocal and the worse that things tend to get.

00:20:40.360 This is a way to measure decline.

00:20:43.180 Exit can also be seen as this of people who are leaving an organization, either as consumers or shareholders.

00:20:48.900 It is a sign that things are not going particularly well for you.

00:20:53.040 And in this instance, they want those things to happen. 0.99

00:20:55.400 But if you want to have exit, you need to appreciate it and approve it in a way that they're not leaving because your company sucks. 0.90

00:21:02.200 But that opportunity is available to them.

00:21:04.360 You want low exit and low voice in respects to being an effective sort of business that people would want to invest in and live in and enjoy it.

00:21:14.140 And to sort of date this, he compares it as to like how certain organizations have license agreements inside the video game Second Life.

00:21:23.060 But this thought kind of just echoes that there is sort of this philosophical tradition that goes back through the centuries that he's pulling all these different threads from to illustrate that this would be his model for how things work.

00:21:35.300 So would like Singapore be the closest thing we have to like a model for this kind of government that we see today?

00:21:44.660 It would probably be the closest thing.

00:21:47.260 And I mean, he references throughout his works, Singapore as an example, alongside its leadership.

00:21:54.120 And to me, it seems like the closest thing that we might have.

00:21:59.180 I mean, if if you could turn the confederated states of Micronesia into every little state being Singapore, every single little island, then maybe that'd be the closest thing that we have.

00:22:10.780 But there is not a sort of in real world one to one example.

00:22:16.020 But that is the closest thing to work off of.

00:22:18.680 Yeah. So I guess we can kind of use that as as maybe a little jumping off point.

00:22:22.660 So I think we're going to get to plenty of problems.

00:22:26.220 But let's let's start with maybe some of the possible upsides.

00:22:29.240 Right. Like what would be some of the advantages of this framework?

00:22:33.780 So the first thing, obviously, the thing he's most focused on and some people might, you know, find this controversial depending on how they feel about it, but it eliminates democracy.

00:22:42.640 Right. And by eliminating democracy, it eliminates a lot of the social incentives for division.

00:22:50.680 Right. You remove a lot of the the because power is unified into one entity and the entity is without question because there is low voice.

00:23:01.660 That means there is clear and decisive leadership.

00:23:04.220 Whatever the vision is for the patch, you can reach it consistently.

00:23:09.240 There's not a lot of infighting.

00:23:10.740 There's not a lot of need to divide the community to secure power for yourself because there is no opportunity to secure power for yourself.

00:23:17.740 There is no free power like there is no power out there floating unattached to something.

00:23:23.040 All of the power is very clearly and visibly kind of centered exactly where it's supposed to be.

00:23:29.500 Also, there's a high degree of accountability.

00:23:31.980 Right. Because the power is formal.

00:23:34.920 We know exactly who's in charge.

00:23:36.820 We know exactly who to blame if things go wrong or who to praise if things go right.

00:23:42.600 And the corporate board can remove the CEO if mistakes are being made.

00:23:47.920 People can exit if they don't like what's going on.

00:23:52.260 And so there is a there's a high probability of kind of very clear and formal accountability being laid kind of at the feet of these people.

00:24:01.520 And then obviously you also have what if you're going kind of along with Moldbug's thesis that this creates a high degree of competitive competitiveness.

00:24:10.900 You have this situation where you're seeing a lot of motivation to create the best patch to to be the the best corporation nation state because the competition is so high, which increases the kind of quality of life of everyone, because there's there's no way to kind of escape the fact that if you run a bad patch, people are going to leave.

00:24:33.180 If you're going to get replaced, you always have an incentive to kind of be on top of your game.

00:24:37.940 Are there any kind of other obvious upsides that you might see that I didn't mention there to kind of the possible patchwork idea?

00:24:46.580 Well, I think that alongside sort of bypassing democracy, Yarvin also makes it kind of clear when talking about neocameralism and patchwork that you sort of just bypass a lot of the structural problems that sort of have existed with separation of powers, because even inside our own government.

00:25:05.620 Right. We have these three branches. Right. We have these three branches. But even then we can sell that the idea of them being sort of co-equal has not really played out in the way that we've talked about.

00:25:15.260 He expresses this as well when he sort of lambasts James Madison and Federalist No. 10 about political factions, political parties and one portion of the government ruling over the other.

00:25:25.040 You know, returning to the smaller and more confederated forms of these business sovereign entities would be a way to sort of bypass one totalizing confederating form of government that overrules the rest.

00:25:42.120 You know, for him, it would be like if Otto von Bismarck had never unified all of the Germanic states and all the Germanic microstates existed as they were.

00:25:51.560 You're not being under the rule of one sovereign authority. If you don't like the sovereign, say, outside of Hamburg, you know, you can go to Stuttgart or whatever and you'll be perfectly fine.

00:26:00.060 And that's sort of an obvious way to bypass it. Right. Like we have federalism on paper in the United States.

00:26:06.660 But, you know, when the Supreme Court and the executive branch can take away rights that are enumerated in the Constitution to the states, what's kind of the point?

00:26:14.420 And so Yarvin is trying to see past some of the obvious faults in our government that may not have been seen by the original founders in the 1780s.

00:26:25.280 Sure. And so I think those are kind of good first arguments.

00:26:30.440 There are other advantages that could come, but some of them are kind of based on his assumptions, you know, that go forward.

00:26:37.640 Does everything actually play out the way that he wants? I mean, does this could have the advantage of world peace? Right.

00:26:42.800 Everybody just kind of, you know, falls into this a multipolar stasis where they're heavily disincentivized to really enter into any kind of military action.

00:26:52.700 And that's a possibility. But I think I think that's that's assuming a lot.

00:26:56.600 So I guess that said, we can dive into some of its weaknesses.

00:27:02.460 So I think the first weakness that many people might kind of think about is, you know, how do we know that?

00:27:11.040 And you kind of brought this up before we started streaming. How do we know that the corporation stays a corporation?

00:27:18.400 What's the incentive for this government to continue to act in this way?

00:27:23.740 If there's a better form, a better way to kind of secure its sovereignty or to expand its power or its gains, those kind of things, its territorial monopoly.

00:27:34.600 Why would they continue to abide by this particular structure?

00:27:40.560 Yeah, and this is sort of the big thing that I was when I looking back on sort of these you are posts and reading them before we went on the air and when we talked about doing the show.

00:27:49.820 One of the things that sort of gets mentioned in chapter one, as well as in the neocameralist bit, is about how the subscriber or the person who engages in these sort of states with soft corpse directors,

00:28:07.580 is that all these sort of cryptographic keys are meant to stop, you know, vertical integration or one state sort of buying out the other states because he doesn't like the idea of a permanent global gugocracy, right?

00:28:21.120 Like, well, we just sell everything to like the Google state. We're good to go.

00:28:24.880 Although I think BlackRock's doing a better job than Google is right now.

00:28:27.840 But, you know, that sort of form of stability is the thing I was concerned about, because when you look at nation states as they exist today,

00:28:37.940 you know, no nation state voluntarily gives up sovereignty in respects to its competitors unless it's by force or that he sees some sort of comparative advantage in reducing sovereignty for another benefit.

00:28:50.640 I mean, you can see this with, on paper, at least, I don't think that the world's best examples, but like the European Union, sort of the Schengen agreement that, hey, there's going to be some rules made outside of Brussels.

00:29:00.400 You're going to agree to this. We're going to play along with these benefits.

00:29:04.120 Nations naturally tend to pursue empire.

00:29:07.020 And that's something that I don't know would go away in this sort of neocameralist or patchwork state.

00:29:12.560 If I have the means where my board or these anonymized figures recognize that our competition is killing us out there because they have access to a river or rare earth mineral resources on their territory, what's to stop them from going to war and seeking hegemony?

00:29:27.240 So the idea of maintaining some kind of stable military peace, I don't see likely.

00:29:33.520 And when he talks about sort of alongside cryptographic weapons, these other concepts of mutually assured instruction, you know, not every Singapore out there is going to have your, you know, mcnukes, right?

00:29:44.100 If we're going to play off of Han Sermahop a bit here. 0.58

00:29:46.120 So to me, it's more of a concern of, well, how do you transition to this?

00:29:49.640 Or even if it were to exist, how is it that, say, you know, the state operated enterprise of the People's Republic of China, because everything inside China is a state owned enterprise, doesn't just wallop you with that respect.

00:30:03.400 So the international relations school of realism comes to mind as a rather large concern.

00:30:09.980 And then the second one, and I think this is the more important one for what we've seen is sort of hindsight, is that for Yarvin, this idea of neocameralism, these patchwork states, is that they're kept in competition by profit motive and sort of business competition between these sovereign corporation entities where everything's ran like a joint stock company.

00:30:31.140 Well, I think what we've definitely been able to notice, especially since 2008, is that a lot of corporations are willing to burn an ungodly amount of money in order to achieve a message.

00:30:43.680 I mean, Disney has burned millions of dollars in movies that are not particularly good.

00:30:49.180 They're overly progressive.

00:30:51.000 They don't, you know, give any respect to the source material.

00:30:54.280 They are an insult to the cultures in which they came from. 1.00

00:30:57.000 And consumers are obviously saying no to this.

00:30:59.820 And that's a form of voice alongside exit.

00:31:03.080 So even though those companies can survive, you know, people protesting or one, you know, guy going into a grocery store and dumping Anshower Bush beer into the middle of the aisle.

00:31:14.040 So it raises the interesting question of, OK, well, you have exit and you have voice.

00:31:19.300 But what is to stop a sovereign corporate entity from pursuing more totalitarian control through ideological means or administrative means like we've seen with our government or other, quote unquote, woke corporations from doing that instead of, you know, just relying on on business?

00:31:37.720 Yeah, I think that is a little naive of him to assume that, like the soft power infiltration of this will kind of go away just because the democratic aspect is gone.

00:31:51.880 I think that's kind of what he's banking on is that that that that that need to kind of expand in that way disappears simply because democracy goes away, which I don't I don't think tracks as well.

00:32:03.540 He has in some ways addressed bits of this problem with kind of what essentially becomes an additional layer of sovereignty on top of this.

00:32:13.360 So in gray mirror, he kind of made these really vague posts about kind of how you need to control the air and you need to control the sea and you need to control space.

00:32:22.380 And so, you know, if there was basically like this gigantic, like, you know, laser network of satellites that was kind of locked in by this again, like the cryptographic government, then basically you could you could basically have like another layer of sovereignty, like a like a global sovereign that does nothing but say this is how everybody has to play by the rules.

00:32:48.100 And if you don't apply by the rules, you're going to get hit by a space laser.

00:32:51.880 And so like the idea is basically like you create this this network here and it feels like we're just, you know, it feels like we're creating God to another God to explain the existence of why God doesn't have to exist.

00:33:05.400 You know what I mean? Like when atheists do this where they're like, OK, well, you know, this isn't real. 0.98

00:33:09.900 We don't want to solve this problem. So there's another thing.

00:33:12.400 You know, it's we're actually in a simulation. It's it's not God. It's a simulation.

00:33:16.520 It feels like he's doing the same thing with government. It's it's not a real unified sovereign.

00:33:22.200 It's you know, it's another layer above that makes everybody play by the rules, but isn't the actual thing.

00:33:27.660 And it feels a lot like that where, OK, well, we're going to get our we're going to get our tiny little patch states.

00:33:33.480 But the only way we can keep them all in line is by creating a one world government that exists above the patch states and like enforces the continued compliance with kind of the corporate structure and and everybody playing by those rules.

00:33:48.280 And so I'm not sure where he's going to take that next.

00:33:51.680 If he's I asked him when he was on the show before kind of what happened to patchwork, if we're going to see it again, because he's kind of walked away from this in a lot of ways, which we'll talk about in a second.

00:34:02.220 But but he said it's going to come back. He said that it's still there.

00:34:06.560 But I think there's there's one more feeling that I want to talk about before we talk about him walking away from it.

00:34:11.380 And that is the exit focus, right? His focus here is exit.

00:34:16.640 You know, no voice, all exit. You can't you can't demand things from the government, but you can leave.

00:34:23.500 And I think that's a huge problem, because I think, like you said, what you want is loyalty, right?

00:34:28.660 Like the third option here. And the problem is this is Yarvin is still stuck in this very modern idea of kind of completely deracinated cultures and peoples, right?

00:34:40.960 Like the community isn't what matters. The culture isn't what matters.

00:34:45.880 You know, the church isn't what matters. The only thing that matters is kind of the efficiency of the machine.

00:34:51.440 And so he's still stuck in this kind of managerial solution.

00:34:54.960 He's not looking at spiritual solutions. He's not looking at communal solutions.

00:34:59.300 He's not looking at even Marshall solutions. The only solutions are merchant based.

00:35:03.720 They're all technology efficiency, properly operating bureaucracies like this is this is what the solution is.

00:35:10.960 And if you don't like it, we just move you to somewhere else where where it's going to be better.

00:35:15.100 But like people staying in one place is what builds culture. It's what builds community.

00:35:20.180 It's what builds a spirit of people being able to work together and improve things.

00:35:25.060 And he's he's just treating everybody as kind of this individual deracinated mercenary instead of understanding that like there's a huge human cost to having this interchangeable style of kind of living, you know, like in America.

00:35:38.480 It's always, hey, you got to go move across the country to like, you know, leave your family and never have connections to anything you love and your culture and everything in order to make an opportunity.

00:35:47.420 And it's like, actually, you know, that that destroys communities that destroys organic organization that destroys all of this stuff.

00:35:54.340 And so I think in in a kind of a weird way, he is ignoring the core of the problem to kind of continue down the more modernist understanding of like what a human being is and how to solve that issue.

00:36:07.880 Yeah, the other thing, of course, resumes back the question over tyranny, like if we're going to have sort of a CEO, Leviathan, the question really doesn't then become so what do you do to remove him?

00:36:23.180 He's talked about this before that there's a board of directors that keeps him holding accountable.

00:36:27.540 But if they're all residents of this sort of sovereign corporation, its patchwork realm, I mean, in his own words, he says, residents of a patchwork realm have no security or privacy against the realm.

00:36:37.860 There is no possible conflict in the matter, not being malignant.

00:36:40.320 The government is not a threat to its residents.

00:36:42.260 And since it is sovereign, they are not a threat to it, the absence of conflict.

00:36:45.380 And then he says that they all are there are even temporary visitors to the realm carry an ID card with an RFID response.

00:36:51.600 Everyone's genotyped, iris scan, public transportation.

00:36:55.120 You know, we're going to turn everything into London with its CCTV and sort of NSA levels of being able to spy and or surveil everyone.

00:37:03.260 So even if something were to go wrong, then there's still an opportunity for literal control and command to stay over in the state, which, again, if you don't want any voice, you don't want any participation, they can leave.

00:37:14.420 Well, what's to stop you from bypassing, say, profit motive and say, you know, having these people enslaved?

00:37:20.740 His answer, of course, is to say, well, that's not profitable and people would probably not want to be there anyways.

00:37:27.280 But again, to me, if you have everything controlled, surveilled, people can just get up and leave.

00:37:34.520 There's no culture that can be formulated.

00:37:36.680 There's no reason for me to stay.

00:37:38.160 There's no semblance of loyalty.

00:37:40.340 I don't have a loyalty to my president right now, that's for sure.

00:37:45.240 But I don't have, like, loyalty, for instance, if Elon Musk were to start Patchwork X, you know, outside of, like, Austin, Texas.

00:37:52.840 Like, and I, you know, I don't see myself being loyal to that, being like, yep, I'm willing to die for Elon Musk.

00:37:57.520 I'm willing to die for random soft corp, you know, joint stock company CEO king.

00:38:03.100 There isn't a, and it goes back to the sort of the issue about, like, faith or materialism and religion is that there isn't this sort of unifying aspect of what brings people together.

00:38:15.500 People don't believe in anything, and they're sort of this deracinated, deculturated, de-territorialized people.

00:38:21.880 What's the point?

00:38:22.740 Because, sure, you know, Yarvin can square the peg into the round hole when it comes to being an atheist that believes in the divine right of kings, but the average person that you're going to rule over needs something to believe in, or those that are your rivals who have a better political formula or better yet, a belief system, I see being more of a prominent threat here.

00:38:46.440 And, I mean, even then, right, like, we can look at really poorly run places in the world like South Africa.

00:38:53.820 South Africa since 1994 has slowly degraded into rolling blackouts and poor quality of life, lengthy times for government services, the roads are ran poorly, but the white South Africans that are in there who are targeted for racial crime, violence, murder, etc., they still stay there because that's where they exist. 0.99

00:39:13.860 That is their homeland. That is their culture. And it's been that way longer, you know, with the Huguenots and the Explorers that have been there.

00:39:19.740 That's the only place on Earth where Afrikaner has spoken. Why would they leave? 1.00

00:39:24.120 And that becomes the same question about, you know, trying to set up these sort of federal or, you know, sovereign entities is, well, what would be the point in staying if I have no culture?

00:39:33.860 We see this all the time in America where, you know, mom and dad live in the middle of nowhere, their kid goes off to California, and they no longer have any relationship because they've been totally changed by California culture, and then they have awkward fights over the dinner table at Christmas and Thanksgiving, and a family is broken.

00:39:50.820 So it really does illustrate, I think, some of the cultural bonds and weaknesses of this project that I think comes with most, if not all, materialist lenses of looking at politics, because you do need something deeper to anchor you to it.

00:40:03.860 Yeah, I always have been kind of caught by that Carl Schmitt passage about the monstrous nature of asking a man to die for an economic zone.

00:40:15.760 That's kind of exactly what you'd be doing here, you know, and it is very difficult, you know, it's kind of assuming that, well, because of this competition, there will always be good times and, you know, everything will always kind of get solved through this.

00:40:30.740 But that's just not how real life works.

00:40:34.060 And in those moments of difficulty, what brings people together, what binds them together for the good, instead of just having them all immediately, you know, jump out the escape hatch, you know, all heroic moments are really, or I shouldn't say all heroic moments, but many heroic moments are those where people denied exit, you know, where they stood firm and the human spirit overcomes,

00:40:57.400 or are often moments where people turn away from that option.

00:41:00.900 And so I think there's a real bit of that missing there, like you said, because of kind of the materialist nature of this.

00:41:07.100 All right. So as we've said, Yarvin doesn't talk a lot about this anymore, though.

00:41:11.840 It sounds like he might still be, you know, turning it over in his mind.

00:41:15.980 He might still be thinking about how to retool this.

00:41:18.700 One person who's really sad about, you know, Yarvin not continuing to pursue this is Nick Land.

00:41:24.680 Nick Land is obviously another near reactionary philosopher, somebody who's intimately tied to Yarvin's work, who's, you know, stuff you and I have done episodes on and I've done with other people kind of explaining much of his work.

00:41:37.600 What's Nick Land's problem with Yarvin kind of abandoning this?

00:41:40.960 If it's so obviously flawed, why does he see this as an issue?

00:41:44.500 So Nick Land, of course, I know that Curtis doesn't read a lot of criticisms or responses to his work.

00:41:51.240 I don't know if he's read anything of Nick Land since the last time he said he hasn't read anything of him.

00:41:55.780 But in The Dark Enlightenment, Nick Land talks about exit sort of being this core fundamental trait of sort of the Anglo-American identity.

00:42:04.280 I mean, you saw this when sort of these Puritans and Anabaptists and Quakers decided to leave and go, you know, across the sea and sort of for this desire of religious exit. 0.98

00:42:14.620 They're not Anglicans. They're not Catholics. We might as well just go somewhere else. 0.98

00:42:17.560 You saw this, of course, with the concept of the Hartford Convention in the 1800s or later yet when the South actually did secede from the Union.

00:42:26.720 And we see this, of course, with things like white flight, right? 0.99

00:42:29.180 People naturally want to avoid bad areas and want to start fresh elsewhere.

00:42:34.060 We see this even to this day when blue state, you know, people leave for Texas or Florida.

00:42:39.220 We saw this during COVID. We still see this today with progressive policy.

00:42:42.360 And so he notices that exit is sort of this really key aspect of how Americans especially try to resolve their problems.

00:42:52.720 And by sort of abandoning this concept or abandoning this project, you're sort of ignoring this key.

00:42:59.880 I don't want to say it's a purely identitarian issue, but you're abandoning something that is an important variable to consider when looking at politics on the right today.

00:43:10.420 And then the other reason why is because exit is a key form of accelerationism.

00:43:15.300 If I can get up and leave en masse, I'm accelerating the collapse of a state per the Hirschhauer concept of exit and voice being these ways to gauge the decline and quality of a government or an organization.

00:43:28.080 So clearly, as rich people fled during COVID out of New York or California, you know, those states had significant tax revenue problems to a point where, you know, governors in New Jersey and New York were like trying to find ways to incentivize the wealthy to come back to New York City because so much of their government budgets were ran off of these revenues and taxes off the wealthy.

00:43:51.680 By so by trying to get not focus on this issue or not talk about it as much, you know, land kind of use this as a method where, well, these are important things to look at on how we can either accelerate and get to this sort of like we are techno capitalist utopia or, you know, sort of bring about the collapse of really crappy leftist governments.

00:44:12.120 Right. Absolutely. Yeah. So he sees this and, you know, he talks about this a number of times in the Dark Enlightenment about kind of just the the the need to flee.

00:44:23.500 Right. Like fleeing the zombie apocalypse is the only option. There's no negotiation with it.

00:44:28.200 And so he's kind of sees this as kind of the last refuge of escaping the democratic virus of kind of escaping what is kind of consuming much of the Western world.

00:44:38.300 And so, you know, stepping away from this project is a bit of a problem for him.

00:44:44.020 But I do think there is just an acknowledgement, you know, that there is, I think, at the heart of this, the they want to avoid conflict.

00:44:55.420 Right. The desire to create a situation in which no existential questions ever really have to be answered because there's always another way out.

00:45:05.860 There's always another place to flee. There's always another place to go.

00:45:10.980 You know, there's there's this never has to come to a head.

00:45:13.880 And this, of course, again, puts me to the mind of Carl Schmitt and kind of the idea of liberalism being the escape from kind of the clash of existential questions and identities.

00:45:24.580 Right. Like if we can just engineer the world correctly, if we can just engineer states correctly, then we never have to come to kind of those hard questions and the attempts to resolve them.

00:45:37.940 We can always just find a new and different way to kind of bail ourselves out, find some kind of neutral management position, find some way to kind of to push that friend enemy distinction into the corner.

00:45:49.960 But again, I think you eventually run into the same problem, which is these are eternal aspects of the human condition and they will reemerge.

00:45:58.520 And perhaps in any more even more horrific ways if you deny their existence.

00:46:04.040 Yeah, I mean, to me, it just feels like it is the Silicon Valley's attempt at some kind of secular millionism, right, that we can build some kind of way to bypass the issues of man.

00:46:16.660 And what and of course, the bypass sort of the Christian ideas of like sin or that we are just naturally fallen beings and things like this.

00:46:25.000 I mean, he mentions this with with Patriarcha, where it's just like Robert Filmer gives you a Calvinist answer for why crap just happens and you have to accept it.

00:46:33.460 Whereas, you know, he's trying to build a way where, well, when crap happens, you can just get up and go.

00:46:37.980 And I think it still runs into the hard economic concerns of both business entities that are purely focused on profit motive as a way to compete with others.

00:46:48.120 Like, do would they have an answer on how to keep people from being there or from just getting up and leaving when a recession happens?

00:46:55.360 You know, if we're still operating on this sort of boom and bust cycle of business, are we going to be able to maintain our sovereignty of a particular territory or corporate entity when the bad times happen or say there's a run on a bank or something like that?

00:47:10.620 These things are not fleshed out fully.

00:47:13.160 And I do hope that he returns back to the idea, maybe to perhaps answer some of these questions.

00:47:18.840 But to me, it does seem like you've run into the limits that we fundamentally cannot have infinite growth from a finite number of resources.

00:47:28.720 Are these going to be, you know, are these little micro states like, you know, Singapore, are we going to run into the problem of Spantle's the IQ shredder?

00:47:36.720 Are we going to just have low birth rates everywhere that you go when eventually we're going to see a real demographic problem?

00:47:43.160 And this compounds the problem of the competency crisis, as Palladium magazine was just writing about not too long ago that, you know, or is FedCorp going to have an HR resource department where, you know, we're going to ensure that there's diversity, equity and inclusion?

00:47:58.560 And are we going to make sure that the trains run on time or the airplanes don't fly out of the sky?

00:48:03.100 These are things that are sort of taken for granted.

00:48:06.180 And again, while this is all theoretical, it's all very new.

00:48:09.140 You know, this has never been tried before.

00:48:11.360 These are real concerns for when you're trying to propose an alternative when you're talking about things like peaceful regime change or an alternative to the current mechanisms of government that we have, which are clearly not working.

00:48:24.880 You would want to offer something that is better than, hey, imagine strip mall, but a country, you know, you want something that offers more incentive than that.

00:48:33.480 Absolutely. All right. Well, I think we've covered this in pretty good detail, guys.

00:48:38.440 Like I said, it's it's an idea that in many ways has kind of been passed by as people have kind of seen the numbers, number of problems with it.

00:48:46.000 But it does, you know, for many people who have asked, is there any solution offered by these people?

00:48:50.860 You know, this is one of them. And I think it does, if nothing else, create a really interesting thought experiment.

00:48:57.640 One of the things I like about Yarvin is a thinker is even when he's wrong, he's wrong in interesting ways.

00:49:02.140 And so by exploring things that even, you know, where we think, oh, that doesn't work or that's going to fall apart, those kind of things, we can still find important truths, important, you know, realizations, important things that we need to incorporate when we're thinking about this stuff.

00:49:17.580 And I wanted to make sure that we cover this because this is a core idea of kind of part of neo reactionary philosophy.

00:49:24.800 And I know many people have not read all this stuff. They're not familiar with all the stuff.

00:49:28.680 They haven't gone back and kind of done all the legwork on this.

00:49:31.220 So it's nice to have kind of some of these explainer videos in these streams that kind of pull these concepts together and allow you to explore them before maybe you go reading them on your own.

00:49:40.200 And I know I did a lot of that. Guys like Charlemagne, guys like Clossington and Amnesis, they were creating, you know, videos that I watched before I read Moldbug.

00:49:51.140 So when I did, I kind of understood better what I was reading.

00:49:54.580 I find those very important and helpful. And I think that's one of the reasons I try to make them for people as well.

00:50:00.760 All right, Prudentialists, we're going to swing over to the questions of the people.

00:50:03.780 But before we do, where do people find your excellent work?

00:50:06.840 Oh, sure. Well, once again, thank you for having me on, Oren.

00:50:08.900 You can find me at findmyfriends.net slash Prudentialist.

00:50:11.980 I mainly cover history, culture and international relations.

00:50:15.920 And you can find me on YouTube, Twitter, Telegram and all of those wonderful links that you can find down below at the description.

00:50:22.320 And that's what I am. And that's what I do.

00:50:25.160 Excellent. All right, guys, let's go over here to our questions real quick.

00:50:28.360 We only have a couple. JS here. Thank you very much, sir.

00:50:32.100 Can Mecha Bentham be the monarch, please?

00:50:34.900 If you manage to assemble Mecha Bentham, let me know.

00:50:39.200 He does have to fight Mecha Godzilla.

00:50:41.140 Those are just the rules.

00:50:42.680 But should he, you know, win the challenge, the trial by combat, then obviously he would ascend to the throne.

00:50:49.500 Again, you know, I don't make the rules.

00:50:51.480 This is just this is just the way that we assemble patchwork.

00:50:54.820 I think they preserved his head.

00:50:57.100 So, I mean, you're one step closer to the Jeremy Bentham sort of head in a jar like Richard Nixon.

00:51:04.260 I was going to say, yeah, we can get you can get the Futurama Nixon bringing him back.

00:51:09.840 You know, again, I do require the battle to the death, though.

00:51:13.580 There's other Mechas, too, right?

00:51:15.060 There's like Mecha Godzilla and there's another Mecha.

00:51:17.780 Trying to think of all the kaiju.

00:51:19.000 Anyway, but yeah, no, we definitely want to see that showdown.

00:51:22.460 So, Pernobian Chomsky for $9.99.

00:51:25.120 Thank you very much, sir.

00:51:26.600 Read Prude's piece on Kukagard.

00:51:28.580 Absolutely.

00:51:29.220 Everyone should check out the Prudentialist's sub stack.

00:51:32.240 He just had an excellent piece.

00:51:34.180 Was very interesting.

00:51:35.280 Oren, have you considered doing some streams on Kukagard?

00:51:38.780 He's writing is dense but edifying.

00:51:41.260 So, I am, I have what I'd call like a survey level knowledge of Kukagard.

00:51:46.480 I read him in college and I have read him in bits and pieces throughout my life, but I have never really drilled down on Kukagard.

00:51:57.520 And so, I would say at this point, while I do find his thought interesting, I am not well read.

00:52:04.140 Some of the things you'll run into, guys, like one of the things you'll notice is like I keep being in this scenario where I need to read more, but every time I need to read more, I also realize that what I should really be doing is rereading everything I've already read.

00:52:17.140 Because there's so much there, guys like Spangler, guys like Thomas Carlyle, like these are people, you know, whose books I need to read many, many times to get them.

00:52:28.600 I don't just read complicated books once.

00:52:30.920 And so, like, I know, for instance, like I need to read Heidegger, but Heidegger is such a commitment to grasp properly.

00:52:37.480 I know I'm going to need to read it like three times and I still need to go back and read Oswald Spangler another time, you know, to like to bring all that stuff forward.

00:52:44.400 And so, like, I want to understand more of Kierkegaard's thought, but I don't know.

00:52:49.420 Pridigilis, since you just did a video, I don't know how deeply read you are, Kierkegaard, but where should people start?

00:52:55.440 Well, I would recommend, of course, the Two Ages of Literary Review.

00:52:59.920 That's the work that I was building off of to write that recent essay called Kierkegaard and the Gay Paperclip.

00:53:06.340 Kind of takes a look at the concept of the leveling, which I recommend people look into.

00:53:10.060 The attack upon Christendom is also a really good piece to consider.

00:53:14.920 Now, this is 19th century work.

00:53:16.920 This is stuff to sort of look at when people are looking at the Reformation and Christianity falling now in the wake of this sort of enlightenment, pure reason skepticism.

00:53:27.940 He's very critical of people like Edmund Burke or Alexis de Tocqueville in comparison.

00:53:32.360 I think that if you want an interesting counterbalance to the existential crises of Europe in the 19th century, I think that you should read Nietzsche alongside Kierkegaard and Dostoyevsky.

00:53:45.920 But I would definitely say the Two Ages of Literary Review and Attack upon Christendom are great places to start if you want to get into Kierkegaard.

00:53:52.280 Excellent. So there you go.

00:53:54.100 I don't know if we'll be doing a stream anytime soon, but if I if I do, I know who to go to for for that.

00:54:00.440 All right. So Donnie DeWitt for 99.9.

00:54:04.080 Would y'all agree to a concept of exit that allowed extreme freedom of association and exit,

00:54:10.640 along as every entity agreed on core principles such as Christ?

00:54:15.560 So I'm not I guess I'll take that in pieces.

00:54:18.660 So the the you know, both Hoppe and I believe Moldbug are obviously pretty, pretty strong on freedom of association.

00:54:26.540 That's one of the more controversial parts about Hoppe, of course, especially in the libertarian community.

00:54:32.000 But he's very clear that like that is a key part of this, that people can assemble the communities as they would like under these contracts.

00:54:40.400 And that is including, you know, exclusionary, you know, devices of all kinds.

00:54:47.180 And so I think that that's a pretty strong portion of kind of patchwork and both patchwork and kind of the contractual communities of Hoppe.

00:54:58.240 Yeah. Oh, the kind of as long as everyone entity agreed on core principles such as Christ.

00:55:05.020 I mean, you know, Christ is king.

00:55:07.100 So I think everybody should agree with those principles in general, but I'm not sure what that has to do with this in particular.

00:55:14.020 I'm not sure how that that general unity.

00:55:17.680 I mean, both of these people, I think, due to their kind of freedom of association would say if communities want to not agree to those principles, that would be part of their freedom of association.

00:55:27.620 If you wanted to form an Islamic or an atheist or whatever community, you would kind of have that.

00:55:32.760 But I don't know, Prudentialist, how do you see that question?

00:55:35.220 Do you have anything to add there?

00:55:36.680 I mean, I'm an incredibly big pro freedom of association guy.

00:55:40.160 I wish it existed in my country, wish it was back in some form or context, you know, if everyone agreed to it, I mean, in some form of covenant, sort of like what Yarvin describes, where it's based upon, you know, total allegiance or total belief and faith in Christ.

00:55:55.480 I mean, this would be, I guess, in a world where like, you know, there was sort of this patchwork world, but it was the various churches or denominations like, yeah, you'd find me over at the, the Orthodox sort of patchwork church state, wherever that might exist.

00:56:12.580 But, uh, I mean, on, on paper, that sounds like a lovely idea, but I think that that also would be a fun thought experiment on how you, you mix that with, uh, the various Christian denominations and churches and their views on political theology and how they should govern in the world.

00:56:29.700 But, uh, I mean, I would definitely be in support of something like that.

00:56:33.480 I mean, I, all right, so I think I might've lost credentials there for a second.

00:56:42.000 Hopefully he'll jump back in.

00:56:43.260 Uh, but Thuggo here for $5 in some native American communities, banishment was the ultimate punishment. 0.70

00:56:51.180 Is this a similar concept?

00:56:53.100 Well, actually, uh, that was the ultimate punishment in many, uh, ancient communities, not just native American communities.

00:56:59.440 Of course, uh, banishment was a very serious penalty in places like, uh, you know, uh, the Italian city states or the, uh, the Greek city states.

00:57:09.940 Uh, the big thing about this, of course, was that banishment, you know, um, the, the, the city state was kind of the natural, uh, size that most, uh, civilizations could kind of grow to at that point.

00:57:22.760 And so banishment from your city state was very serious because, uh, people tended to take kind of their ethnos far more seriously.

00:57:30.660 In many ways, they would often tie it kind of directly to their national identity that, that those were the same thing.

00:57:37.400 And so, uh, being banished from those kind of completely cut you off from any possibility of political tie, any possibility of social tie.

00:57:46.380 If you were banished, uh, you were banished from your hometown and you couldn't just easily immigrate into another city state because that city state defined kind of its existence by its ethnos.

00:57:58.700 And because you were not part of that, you joining, maybe, maybe you might get the opportunity to live in that city, but you would never be a part of it in the way that like people are a part of say America.

00:58:09.480 Now, in many ways, people think of that, where you just kind of get a piece of paper and you're a citizen.

00:58:13.720 That was not a thing in most ancient communities.

00:58:16.460 And so banishment was very serious because it wasn't just, Oh, you can't live here anymore.

00:58:20.880 It's that you'll never be like a native part of any culture again, because that, that's not kind of, they didn't have this liberal idea of kind of just moving in between that kind of your, your national allegiance, your cultural allegiance would just be kind of mercenary and you can move between it.

00:58:36.900 So in some ways, yeah, I mean, this does bring that back because if you are banished from your patch, it is, you know, then you are forced to move to a worse patch, right?

00:58:48.160 So if you are not abiding by kind of that community, uh, then you would have to move to another community that is not as ideal.

00:58:54.740 And it would by definition be worse.

00:58:56.460 And that community might not want you.

00:58:58.200 They might ask for your references, you know, like, like a business.

00:59:00.920 Hey, if your last job fired you, why should we let you in?

00:59:03.800 Right.

00:59:04.000 Same thing.

00:59:04.740 If your last patch threw you out, why should we let you in?

00:59:07.440 However, it does lose some of that identity kind of, uh, kind of aspect of punishment, right?

00:59:15.140 Of banishment because banishment was kind of primarily a, a, uh, a punishment because it was a loss of identity and community.

00:59:24.080 And because these patches are entirely mercenary, they wouldn't have the same idea of identity and community.

00:59:30.840 And so therefore, you know, you, you wouldn't quite have the same, it would be still be a punishment, but it would be a punishment that is of a slightly different kind.

00:59:38.380 It would be more materialistic and less kind of spiritual and cultural, uh, which again, as we've noted is, is something that is a recurring theme throughout many of, uh, Yarvin's kind of, uh, assessments, assumptions, and solutions.

00:59:51.720 All right, guys, well, I'm going to go ahead and wrap this up.

00:59:55.040 It looks like we did lose the Prudentialist here, but of course, uh, he is great.

00:59:59.480 You should check out all of his work.

01:00:01.200 Hopefully, you know, his internet will, will return to him soon.

01:00:04.160 Uh, but I really appreciate him coming by.

01:00:06.560 Make sure that you check out everything that he's doing.

01:00:09.720 And also, of course, if it's your first time here, please make sure that you go ahead and subscribe to this YouTube channel.

01:00:15.040 If you'd like to get these broadcasts as podcasts, make sure that you go ahead and subscribe to the Oren McIntyre show on your favorite podcast platform.

01:00:23.380 When you do that, please make sure that you leave a reading or review that really helps a rating or review that really helps with all of that algorithm magic.

01:00:31.540 All right, guys, thank you once again so much for coming by.

01:00:34.840 And as always, I'll talk to you next time.

The Auron MacIntyre Show - July 24, 2023

Neocameralism, Voice, and Exit ｜ 7⧸24⧸23

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript