Maybe I’m over applying a historic pattern here, but I tend to see the vitalists as an echo of the proto fascist and neo-imperial right from the early twentieth century. And just like we have MAHA and IQ and race essentialists (Quinn Slobonian covers this well), they had their sanitoria, their miracle cures, their theosophists, and other fringe thinkers too. What to make of this?
Maybe when things get tight and reform is seriously and widely pursued, especially to the point where it shows up in realignment elections and populist movements, it brings out the cranks and the weirdos. Add in the internet and social media and a service economy where underemployment is the norm, and you get even more of these people.
When do they go away? They never disappear entirely because people are weird, but I would argue that in the late 40s - early 60s as things normed out, things depolarized, and general thriving took hold via the New Deal Order we saw less crankery. Same during the peak of the Neolib Order before things got played out in the Gerstle/Streeck/Deneen sense - it wasn’t all bad! Until it curdled.
How do we respond? I’d argue for a Walker Percy style tolerance, a Love in the Ruins type approach that gently tolerates them and tries to help where possible, escapes when necessary, and slowly brings them around with patience and grace. Lots of nuts out there, on the left and the right, but we’ve been here before and things seem to be on the upswing from my vantage point.
Many thanks by the way for The Once and Future Worker and American Compass. You’re part of the turnaround IMO.
You can do better than this obtuse essay. First, the U.S. can compete in world markets, as long as another country’s comparative advantage is not the result of exploiting the environment, exploitating or using slave labor, currency devaluation and having a state controlled banking system making loans that can never be repaid. Second, you are right on regulation; compare innovation in Europe with the U.S. or California with the Sunbelt.
many of ur critiques are valid but i dont think its fair to dismiss all his ideas as just rebranded libertarianism. for examole the racism is not just for shock value, at least he has the courage to openly ask questions about who is competent for knowledge jobs. If he were the only one who felt that way h1-bs from india wouldnt be SVs top issue
If he’s so boring how come his post has 10 times the interaction yours? Perhaps you are envious of the attention he gets on a topic you are supposedly more of an expert on?
May I suggest that your energy is better redirected towards convincing BAP of your arguments so that his influence can be used to amplify your impact. He already thinks somewhat highly of you, and it would behoove your to use that to your advantage rather than lash out at him in this unseemly manner.
White Americans are now only about 55% of the US population and will soon be a minority within another decade or so (if current trends continue they will be a tiny minority by end of century). Meanwhile, anti-white discrimination and rhetoric have become so common it's almost as unsurprising as oxygen. A few younger white men online -- who obviously have the most to lose from this paradigm -- start to notice this and complain about it and suddenly "they're obsessed with race." I'll admit that BAP is not a figure I particularly care for one way or the other but a piece like this sadly puts Oren in the same establishment (National Review, etc.) class he claims to oppose.
Yes. Yes you can. Growing up is realizing that Paul Ryan was right about most things. You act like Paul Ryanism is like Soviet communism, an obvious failure of an economic system. But where's the failure? America is the richest country in the world because it has "market fundamentalism," it would be richer if it had more.
Maybe the real issue is that you think Paul Ryanism is pathologically uncool. You get more clicks and admiring stories in the MSM by telling people the Democrats are right about economics, get to feel like you're a unique, groundbreaking thinker rather than another boring man-in-a-suit conservative.
I take solace in the fact that average Republicans aren't interested in this stuff. They don't like foreign trade because they don't like foreigners and love Donald Trump. But tell them about "market fundamentalism" and they go to sleep in an instant.
Depends on what you mean by national populism. If you mean like Javier Millei, sure. If you mean fetishizing manual labor and talking about "fake email jobs," that won't fly electorally, there just aren't that many white people who didn't go to college in America.
Thinking that finance is the "least fake" part of the US' fake economy is perverted, indeed.
The US's economy is fake. All other countries make things and give them to us for free in return for nothing for some reason.
'Mr. Pervert'
Funny. And perfect.
This irrelevant gibberish was enough to cause me to unsubscribe...
Maybe I’m over applying a historic pattern here, but I tend to see the vitalists as an echo of the proto fascist and neo-imperial right from the early twentieth century. And just like we have MAHA and IQ and race essentialists (Quinn Slobonian covers this well), they had their sanitoria, their miracle cures, their theosophists, and other fringe thinkers too. What to make of this?
Maybe when things get tight and reform is seriously and widely pursued, especially to the point where it shows up in realignment elections and populist movements, it brings out the cranks and the weirdos. Add in the internet and social media and a service economy where underemployment is the norm, and you get even more of these people.
When do they go away? They never disappear entirely because people are weird, but I would argue that in the late 40s - early 60s as things normed out, things depolarized, and general thriving took hold via the New Deal Order we saw less crankery. Same during the peak of the Neolib Order before things got played out in the Gerstle/Streeck/Deneen sense - it wasn’t all bad! Until it curdled.
How do we respond? I’d argue for a Walker Percy style tolerance, a Love in the Ruins type approach that gently tolerates them and tries to help where possible, escapes when necessary, and slowly brings them around with patience and grace. Lots of nuts out there, on the left and the right, but we’ve been here before and things seem to be on the upswing from my vantage point.
Many thanks by the way for The Once and Future Worker and American Compass. You’re part of the turnaround IMO.
You can do better than this obtuse essay. First, the U.S. can compete in world markets, as long as another country’s comparative advantage is not the result of exploiting the environment, exploitating or using slave labor, currency devaluation and having a state controlled banking system making loans that can never be repaid. Second, you are right on regulation; compare innovation in Europe with the U.S. or California with the Sunbelt.
Exactly right. See my sub stack on Nick Land and his Dark Enlightenment. https://johnwwright77.substack.com/publish/posts/detail/160731576?referrer=%2Fpublish%2Fposts%2Fpublished
many of ur critiques are valid but i dont think its fair to dismiss all his ideas as just rebranded libertarianism. for examole the racism is not just for shock value, at least he has the courage to openly ask questions about who is competent for knowledge jobs. If he were the only one who felt that way h1-bs from india wouldnt be SVs top issue
If he’s so boring how come his post has 10 times the interaction yours? Perhaps you are envious of the attention he gets on a topic you are supposedly more of an expert on?
May I suggest that your energy is better redirected towards convincing BAP of your arguments so that his influence can be used to amplify your impact. He already thinks somewhat highly of you, and it would behoove your to use that to your advantage rather than lash out at him in this unseemly manner.
White Americans are now only about 55% of the US population and will soon be a minority within another decade or so (if current trends continue they will be a tiny minority by end of century). Meanwhile, anti-white discrimination and rhetoric have become so common it's almost as unsurprising as oxygen. A few younger white men online -- who obviously have the most to lose from this paradigm -- start to notice this and complain about it and suddenly "they're obsessed with race." I'll admit that BAP is not a figure I particularly care for one way or the other but a piece like this sadly puts Oren in the same establishment (National Review, etc.) class he claims to oppose.
“Honey, time for your ‘do-nothing conservatives attack on BAP’. No this one is different from the ‘pajama boy nietzschean article’.”
"Can we interest you in Paul Ryan"
Yes. Yes you can. Growing up is realizing that Paul Ryan was right about most things. You act like Paul Ryanism is like Soviet communism, an obvious failure of an economic system. But where's the failure? America is the richest country in the world because it has "market fundamentalism," it would be richer if it had more.
Maybe the real issue is that you think Paul Ryanism is pathologically uncool. You get more clicks and admiring stories in the MSM by telling people the Democrats are right about economics, get to feel like you're a unique, groundbreaking thinker rather than another boring man-in-a-suit conservative.
I take solace in the fact that average Republicans aren't interested in this stuff. They don't like foreign trade because they don't like foreigners and love Donald Trump. But tell them about "market fundamentalism" and they go to sleep in an instant.
Can we have race realist, national populism, please? I'm jocking, but not much...
Depends on what you mean by national populism. If you mean like Javier Millei, sure. If you mean fetishizing manual labor and talking about "fake email jobs," that won't fly electorally, there just aren't that many white people who didn't go to college in America.
Milei (one "l") is not national nor populist.
Is it because he's not low class enough?