Monday, July 6, 2020

Ch2: The Emptiness of Political Action, For and Against the Regime

In the first chapter of his "Gray Mirror" Curtis Yarvin "marketed" his idea of "detachment." Now he's going to "argue" it, in "#2: The Action Imperative."

Kant, he says. The Categorical Imperative: that "everyone should act as if their actions formed a universal rule whose results are best for everyone." Early game theory. But suppose Kant was wrong?

Well, not exactly wrong. 
By default, you should still give up on politics, power, and even persuasion—because there is no obvious and realistic Kantian action...
You’re done trying to change the world. You quit that job. It didn’t seem to be working, anyway.
So what Yarvin is saying is that there is no action in politics that could form a universal rule whose results are the best for everyone. If that is true, then what?

Detachment. That's what.

Suppose you want to change the world, and you come up with an idea to change the world and you start to implement it. But there's a problem. There is no check and balance to make sure that you will actually change the world for the better. You idea is unaccountable. That is Bug One.

In fact, the way that politics works, the only ideas to change the world that get implemented are ideas that flatter the ambition and vanity and increase the power of the regime. And they have to be exciting. Who ever heard of a successful political idea that wasn't exciting? That's Bug Two.

So, the only useful ways to change the world are ideas that don't "generate power."

But whatabout an idea that "involves resisting an evil regime?" Problem is that you will almost certainly end up failing and adding to the power of the regime. This is called, in software development, "thrashing," trying to solve a bug without a strategy for solving it.
Actually, once you feel yourself thrashing, the right thing to do is always to step away from the keyboard—then lift or surf or run or something. There’s at least half a chance you’ll solve the problem before you get back.
I agree. Whether it's software or ideas. The best thing is to step away. Sooner or later your unconscious will solve the problem.

And, as a dissident, what is the point of adding to the power of the regime?

OK, let's put the arguments down in black and white:
On side A, we assert that positive causes are (a) unaccountable—not selected to be capable of achieving their ultimate goals; (b) vain—selected to maximize expression of power, real or apparent.
On side B, we assert that negative causes are (a) doomed—almost never capable of achieving even their proximate goals; (b) frivolous—selected to maximize their sense of excitement. 
Do you see why "detachment" is the answer? 

No comments:

Post a Comment