Fine. Then perhaps a traditional journal article is more your liking: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0263276421999439 https://journals.sagepub.co

Fine. Then perhaps a traditional journal article is more your liking: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0263276421999439 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/02632764219994... "It is difficult to know how best to approach this material analytically. As Gilroy (2019: 3) suggests, when discussing fascist ideas ‘there is always a danger that critics end up taking them more seriously than their adherents do’. It is also the case that much of the material with which we need to engage is located online and often in a form outwith the usual protocols and stylistics of the academy. The NRx political project is essentially ‘anti-egalitarian’, ‘anti-progressive’, and argues that ‘democracy is bust; rule by the people doesn’t work, and doesn’t lead to good governance’ (Gray, 2017)." I'm also looking at Francis Tseng, lead independent researcher of the Jain family Institute http://distributedweb.care/posts/who-owns-the-stars/ http://distributedweb.care/posts/who-owns-the-stars/ "However, given that Yarvin basically laid out the general design for Urbit independently, as he worked on it alone for 11 years and in parallel with his political writings, and that Urbit, as a P2P project, is a fundamentally social and thus incorporates ideas about how people should be organized, Yarvin’s politics should be considered as something that influences his design decisions and his long-term vision for the project. Dog-whistles have been identified in some of his writing about Urbit and its design, including his leaning on Nazi philosopher Carl Schmitt for questions around Urbit’s governance." Again, I'd argue that you're attacking a "decorum" argument, and not the actual content at hand.