Foseti says: nonsense, Moldbug lays out the class distinctions better.
I think that Moldbug has mostly just laid out the details better than half-sigma, but they are suggesting the same thing. The Tea Party is an awakening of class consciousness among the folks doing "real work", or as Moldbug calls them, the Vaisya.
Essentially the claim from both Moldbug and Half-Sigma is that Palin may be the ONLY politician in recent memory who is NOT of either the corporate aristocracy or from the collegiate clerisy. Rather, she is a smart, effective member of the working classes, who is leading a rebellion.
Redoing a distinction:
- The formalists, conservatives, and reactionaries tend to believe that the aristocracy is fit to lead, because god knows the intelligensia is not.
- The modern liberal/progressive tends to believe that the intelligensia is fit to lead, because god knows the aristocracy was a disaster.
- The libertarian agrees with both. Neither the intelligensia nor the aristocracy are fit to lead. Both screw things up 97 times out of 100. Devolve authority.
Posts
5 comments:
A couple points of concern:
Moldbug and Half Sigma aren't suggesting the same thing. The proles rising up is a very different type of action than the OV's rising up. Marx was simply wrong about who would rise up in a capitalism society. It's time to stop giving him a pass.
I think it goes to far to say that Formalists want the aristocracy to run things. At a minimum we'd just like it made absolutely clear that the intelligensia are running things now. That would allow us to hold them responsible.
One does not so much "want the aristocracy to lead" as acknowledge that whoever is leading is the actual aristocracy, regardless of what they call themselves.
If we acknowledged that the New York Times and the faculty of Harvard are the rulers of this country we all have to live in, we might be more successful at calling them to account for their misgovernment, and eventually replacing them with institutions whose incentives are more aligned with the sort of government that we want.
Foseti's correct that the current Tea Party movement is not made up of a Marxian proletariat.
But Half Sigma's correct that a very Marxian immiseration of the masses is at work as the driving - nay, even scientific - force. Look at take home income over the last 30 years, as Government takes more and more of a bite (especially local and state government).
Marx described what would drive the Revolution, and it wasn't resentment.
Foseti-
Half Sigma said proles, but he means Vaishya's. Moldbug also has used the word prole in place of vaishya.
Ironically, without Palin to serve as the Tea Aristocracy the movement would be a hopeless waste of time.
It may still be a hopeless waste of time, but at least with a leader it has a chance.
Post a Comment