3 ms·

It’s uncomfortable for the Thiel-funded new right movement that their dream state is essentially realized in present-day Russia, and they’re not able to explain

by pavlov 5y ago

It’s uncomfortable for the Thiel-funded new right movement that their dream state is essentially realized in present-day Russia, and they’re not able to explain how their ideas would lead to a different outcome. Protectionist policies, focus on national identity, celebration of traditional values and gender roles; a “national CEO” whose transformative powers transcend the slow, frustrating democratic machinery. This describes both Putinism and the American right’s goals. It’s not a coincidence that they were increasingly cozy with Russia until Putin rolled into Ukraine. Putinists love to make the claim that Ukraine isn’t a real nation (and Steve Bannon went on record to agree). It’s worth noting that the same arguments would apply to Canada. If the Thiel-funded right succeeds, they’ll eventually need a war to fuel the nationalist fire. Why not a reunification of the North American colonies? Canada is obviously controlled by decadent forces that need to be purged, just like Ukraine… Trump wanted to buy Greenland. Good old territorial expansion is part of this value system.

zozbot234 5y ago
It's interesting because present-day Russia easily combines every disadvantage of the neo-Reactionary dream state, and none of its advantages. Vladimir Putin still has to fight for his legitimacy (in a way that plausibly distorts his policy choices) because he has not leveraged his mass public support by proclaiming himself an actual Tsar. (Of course he could also settle for a far more conventional role as legitimate President of a democratic nation state, but many observers would argue that he seems to be aiming at something different. Which is why this is a sensible question to begin with.)
- pavlov 5y ago
  > “present-day Russia easily combines every disadvantage of the neo-Reactionary dream state, and none of its advantages” It’s because the advantages are either theoretical and illusionary, or only enjoyable by an extremely narrow oligarchy. It’s like asking why North Korea seems to have all the disadvantages of Stalinism but none of the advantages.
mike4ty4 5y ago
An important question that needs asking is what happens if we run into a situation where that "slowness" of democracy gets more people killed and only a well-paced solution with some cadence to it could do the job (not "super fast", but like say a major change with a 1 year debate period and 10 year implementation period sustained steady progress)? Not arguing for a dictatorship, but out-of-the-box innovative thinking to invent a much more novel/radical political system.
- Angostura 5y ago
  I think we saw the answer to that in February/March 2021. Apart from the USA where the situation was politicised by a rather special president, most advanced democracies moved remarkably quickly to institute unprecedented emergency measures in theface of the pandemic. Democratic processes were temporarily simplified with the executive taking more power for a short time.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
tablespoon 5y ago
> Putinists love to make the claim that Ukraine isn’t a real nation (and Steve Bannon went on record to agree). It’s worth noting that the same arguments would apply to Canada. If the Thiel-funded right succeeds, they’ll eventually need a war to fuel the nationalist fire. Why not a reunification of the North American colonies? Canada is obviously controlled by decadent forces that need to be purged, just like Ukraine… As an American, that just makes no emotional sense. My lifetime experience is that Americans just plain don't think about Canada much, and it wouldn't make much sense as a target for "a war to fuel the nationalist fire." Mexico makes far more sense in that regard. Canada (or at least parts of it) would probably be most useful as place for political enemies to be forced into exile. I'm under the vague impression that Ukraine has a much more important place in the Russian psyche than Canada is in the US one. There are always important differences in the details with stuff like this, so it's not very enlightening to do a mad libs style substitution
- pavlov 5y ago
  Russians didn’t think about Ukraine either twenty years ago. The ancient Slav connection mythology is manufactured by the Putinist project. When a place is a void in the public’s mind, that’s the ideal target to fill it with nationalist fury. The people of Belgrade didn’t think very often about Bosnia in 1980; thirteen years later their leaders were running a genocide to cleanse Bosnia of the elements that supposedly threatened Serbian unity.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    Even so, I think Mexico would be a far more logical first target in that scenario than Canada, especially if the Canadians took pains not to annoy the new leaders.
    - pavlov 5y ago
      Climate change makes Canada much more useful than Mexico. The United States has enough arid desert already.
FooBarBizBazz 5y ago
> It’s worth noting that the same arguments would apply to Canada. If the Thiel-funded right succeeds, they’ll eventually need a war to fuel the nationalist fire. Why not a reunification of the North American colonies? Canada is obviously controlled by decadent forces that need to be purged That's silly. Canada is the loyalist colony. They are still part of the Commonwealth. If Theil is a monarchist, then surely Canada is more the good guy to him! And we should question how "anti-Progressive" monarchism actually is. Given that the American Revolution was driven in large part by a desire to expand beyond the Appalachians (which King George III had banned with the Proclamation of 1763), and that the Empire banned slavery outright in 1833, a full 30 years before Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, I think we can say that First Nations and enslaved peoples -- focus of core Progressive causes -- would have both been better off as subjects of the Crown, in a Loyalist America. So maybe monarchism is good?
- donkeybeer 5y ago
  There are no real de facto monarchies left, perhaps other than the saudis. Canada and UK are monarchies on paper only, the real power is wielded by the democratic system. I am sure the Queen has some powers available to herself, but if she actually try to wield them it would be highly unpopular.

by pavlov 5y ago

zozbot234 5y ago

It's interesting because present-day Russia easily combines every disadvantage of the neo-Reactionary dream state, and none of its advantages. Vladimir Putin still has to fight for his legitimacy (in a way that plausibly distorts his policy choices) because he has not leveraged his mass public support by proclaiming himself an actual Tsar. (Of course he could also settle for a far more conventional role as legitimate President of a democratic nation state, but many observers would argue that he seems to be aiming at something different. Which is why this is a sensible question to begin with.)

pavlov 5y ago
> “present-day Russia easily combines every disadvantage of the neo-Reactionary dream state, and none of its advantages” It’s because the advantages are either theoretical and illusionary, or only enjoyable by an extremely narrow oligarchy. It’s like asking why North Korea seems to have all the disadvantages of Stalinism but none of the advantages.

mike4ty4 5y ago

An important question that needs asking is what happens if we run into a situation where that "slowness" of democracy gets more people killed and only a well-paced solution with some cadence to it could do the job (not "super fast", but like say a major change with a 1 year debate period and 10 year implementation period sustained steady progress)? Not arguing for a dictatorship, but out-of-the-box innovative thinking to invent a much more novel/radical political system.

Angostura 5y ago
I think we saw the answer to that in February/March 2021. Apart from the USA where the situation was politicised by a rather special president, most advanced democracies moved remarkably quickly to institute unprecedented emergency measures in theface of the pandemic. Democratic processes were temporarily simplified with the executive taking more power for a short time.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

tablespoon 5y ago

> Putinists love to make the claim that Ukraine isn’t a real nation (and Steve Bannon went on record to agree). It’s worth noting that the same arguments would apply to Canada. If the Thiel-funded right succeeds, they’ll eventually need a war to fuel the nationalist fire. Why not a reunification of the North American colonies? Canada is obviously controlled by decadent forces that need to be purged, just like Ukraine… As an American, that just makes no emotional sense. My lifetime experience is that Americans just plain don't think about Canada much, and it wouldn't make much sense as a target for "a war to fuel the nationalist fire." Mexico makes far more sense in that regard. Canada (or at least parts of it) would probably be most useful as place for political enemies to be forced into exile. I'm under the vague impression that Ukraine has a much more important place in the Russian psyche than Canada is in the US one. There are always important differences in the details with stuff like this, so it's not very enlightening to do a mad libs style substitution

pavlov 5y ago
Russians didn’t think about Ukraine either twenty years ago. The ancient Slav connection mythology is manufactured by the Putinist project. When a place is a void in the public’s mind, that’s the ideal target to fill it with nationalist fury. The people of Belgrade didn’t think very often about Bosnia in 1980; thirteen years later their leaders were running a genocide to cleanse Bosnia of the elements that supposedly threatened Serbian unity.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  Even so, I think Mexico would be a far more logical first target in that scenario than Canada, especially if the Canadians took pains not to annoy the new leaders.
  - pavlov 5y ago
    Climate change makes Canada much more useful than Mexico. The United States has enough arid desert already.

FooBarBizBazz 5y ago

> It’s worth noting that the same arguments would apply to Canada. If the Thiel-funded right succeeds, they’ll eventually need a war to fuel the nationalist fire. Why not a reunification of the North American colonies? Canada is obviously controlled by decadent forces that need to be purged That's silly. Canada is the loyalist colony. They are still part of the Commonwealth. If Theil is a monarchist, then surely Canada is more the good guy to him! And we should question how "anti-Progressive" monarchism actually is. Given that the American Revolution was driven in large part by a desire to expand beyond the Appalachians (which King George III had banned with the Proclamation of 1763), and that the Empire banned slavery outright in 1833, a full 30 years before Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, I think we can say that First Nations and enslaved peoples -- focus of core Progressive causes -- would have both been better off as subjects of the Crown, in a Loyalist America. So maybe monarchism is good?

donkeybeer 5y ago
There are no real de facto monarchies left, perhaps other than the saudis. Canada and UK are monarchies on paper only, the real power is wielded by the democratic system. I am sure the Queen has some powers available to herself, but if she actually try to wield them it would be highly unpopular.