Bernd
2025-07-04 04:49:17 ⋅ 1w
No. 344095
What do you think about neoreaction (NRx)?
I haven't seen any neoreactionaries in LatAm who promote market liberalization, financing, and the liberalization of the tech industry. Only defenders of conservatism, that is, classical conservatives. Are there any in your country?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
https://legrandcontinent.eu/es/2025/06/28/atlas-del-pensamiento-neorreaccionario-una-primera-bibliografia-razonada/
Also:
I'd like a future where AI is like an oracle or a genie, where you can cure diseases and extend lifespans. Also, where we can enhance cognitive abilities and expand consciousness.
Bernd
2025-07-04 05:13:32 ⋅ 6d
No. 344096
I can't wait to be a neo reactionary defending big agro interests and immigrant fueled soy farming while indians now build apple phones with precision manufacturing.
Bernd
2025-07-04 06:07:00 ⋅ 6d
No. 344107
>>344096
That's the irony and supposedly contradictory aspect of the neo-reaction. While it defends techno-nationalism, its industrialization is global (globalism). In reality, this is a logical consequence, because for Elon to create his Teslas (promising the creation of robo-cars, i.e., the top of the market) in the US, he has to extract lithium from Peru and Argentina, buy chips from Taiwan, etc.
What differentiates the neo-reaction from the old reaction is that the staunch defense against globalism is lost, at least in essence. And since the Tradition of Modernity cannot be saved, it must be reformulated (a Christian homosexual is preferable to a woke homosexual).
Example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_conservatism
Also:
This also saves the traditional view of law: the freedom of the individual based on their personhood, not their sexuality.
Bernd
2025-07-04 09:34:26 ⋅ 6d
No. 344111
too many difficult words very hard
Bernd
2025-07-04 15:04:52 ⋅ 6d
No. 344114
What are some of the advantages of this ideology and tye way of life it promotes
Bernd
2025-07-08 03:14:12 ⋅ 3d
No. 344367
>>344111
>too many difficult words very hard
Yes, I understand. If one looks at the hard-core thinkers of the movement, one finds terminology that is as technical as it is cryptic (sometimes deliberately cryptic to provoke self-marginalization). There are also those who merge essay writing with fiction, that is, they argue using fictional analogies (like Descartes speaking of the evil genius or Alcubierre theorizing about quasi-luminous journeys).
But there are certain generalizations:
>Capitalism does not succumb to its contradictions (disruption, extreme impoverishment, structural inequality), but rather feeds on them (it generates development and innovation, the welfare state, and social justice by reaction).
>Capitalism must be pushed to its limits by developing the technology of the means of production.
>Technoscience generates new transhumanist or posthumanist potentials through biotechnology and cybernetics.
>Economic changes bring with them cultural changes and vice versa (public policies and private ideological projects - political agendas - lead to technoscience, favoring some lines of research over others).
>>344114
>What are some of the advantages of this ideology and tye way of life it promotes
Neoreaction dialectically transcends the cultural war between progressives and classical conservatives. It is hyper-individualistic, but understands that Tradition cannot survive Modernity without being modified. In this, it surpasses classical conservatives, who, in a sense, are like hobbits fighting an invincible Sauron. It does not advocate anti-globalist nationalism, but rather relative national sovereignty (globalization is an irreversible phenomenon), so what must be produced at home will be produced at home. But what must be brought in from outside will be brought in from outside (it exchanges patriotic defense for realpolitik).
At the same time, it devastates the identity issue; the foundations of transhumanism change the paradigm. It's not about gender or sexual life (this is a thing of the past. Just as the identity struggle eclipsed the class struggle, the transhumanist-posthumanist struggle is on its way to eclipsing the identity struggle), but about vital modifications and physical and mental improvement (for example, cryopreserving your sperm to have children after death; following exercises, diets, and taking supplements and medications that extend life; the possibility of driving the development of CRISPR to modify genes that produce or accelerate aging or various diseases).
The wealthy classes will be the first to reap the benefits, but it's debatable whether there can be no intervention. In the accelerationist world, the socioeconomic dispute will be between the free market (private initiative) or dirigisme (public-private initiative). Neo-Keynes vs. Neo-Hayek.
So its benefit lies in its syntactical capacity. What's the point of clinging to ideologies that are dying because they can't adapt to the global economy or the technological disruption of the means of production?
https://youtu.be/bgaN6YI37sg
Bernd
2025-07-09 17:05:18 ⋅ 1d
No. 344469
>>344095
>Are there any in your country?
Not exactly but since Orbán and co. takes us back to feudalism, sure, why not.
Bernd
2025-07-10 10:52:11 ⋅ 18h
No. 344501
>>344469
>Not exactly but since Orbán and co. takes us back to feudalism, sure, why not
I'd say the opposite. And how ironic, Bernd! Just a few days ago, I was reading about post-liberalism and came across Orbán's name as a current example of a post-liberal government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postliberalism
>But (attention)
Post-liberalism is just as reactionary as socialism. From the accelerationist perspective in general (including NRx). Why? Because: It doesn't extend capital to its fullest extent, but rather seeks to "salvage" its contradictions through communitarian methods (economic inequality with state intervention and social movements—the welfare state and unions—and social division with a sense of belonging and identity and a sense of duty—patriotism, religion, and morality).
But for accelerationists, these are either resources assimilated by capitalism or they are obstacles in the way of a never-ending cycle.
Bernd
2025-07-10 17:41:06 ⋅ 11h
No. 344510
>>344501
>I'd say the opposite
Opposite of which part?