3 ms·

yarvin has been saying this since like 2012? it's just his thing you can ignore him. richard hanania has more of an impact, if you want to worry.

cyanydeez 2y ago
little difference: Republicans are now in charge of all branchs of democracy.
- verisimi 2y ago
  People voted the Republicans in right? Perhaps them winning the vote indicates that the Democrats were not doing things right, in most people's opinion?
  - atq2119 2y ago
    If that is indeed the case, then it was not a vote for what Republicans are doing now. It still points to a systemic problem: the system gave certain individuals the power to do things that they don't actually have a mandate for. I'd say one of the major problems is that the voting system is built to de facto ensure a two-party system because it's a system in which individuals are voted for, with each race being a winner-takes-all for a single individual; as opposed to a system of representative voting. And a two-party system simply isn't able to represent the complexities of the world. (This is of course in addition to other problems of the system which are also real.)
    - verisimi 2y ago
      But one's vote is never for whatever the vote winning party actually does. Eg one might like one party's position on the environment, but disagree with regards to their military position - it is not possible to find a party that represents how one feels on a multitude of issues. And even if you did agree with all a party's positions, parties change their positions - saying one thing and doing another. And it has always been thus. One votes for a representative, who then votes on the specifics.
      - atq2119 2y ago
        While there's some truth to that, it makes a huge difference whether you have the choice between two (realistic) options or five. > And it has always been thus. One votes for a representative In the US, yes. In many (most?) other countries, many votes are for parties instead. This allows for better representation.
  - AnimalMuppet 2y ago
    Trump won, not just because of his policy program, but also because he wasn't Biden. But then, Biden won because he wasn't Trump. If you think about that, if that's the best our democracy can do, then it sounds like evidence for Yarvin's position... until you think about it. Then you wonder, what happens if the non-democratic ruler was Biden or Trump or equivalent, and you can't get rid of them? What we actually need is to fix the primary process.
zfg 2y ago
Except J.D. Vance is an adherent of Yarvin's ideas and Vance is in the government: https://newrepublic.com/article/183971/jd-vance-weird-terrifying-techno-authoritarian-ideas https://newrepublic.com/article/183971/jd-vance-weird-terrif... https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right-where-peter-thiel-is-placing-his-biggest-bets https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right... https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/18/jd-vance-world-view-sources-00168984 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/18/jd-vance-w... They've been talking about ignoring court rulings for years. Now they're in a position to actually do that. It may well happen soon that they ignore a Supreme Court ruling. It depends how far they think they can push it.
- defrost 2y ago
  Years before he was the Republican vice presidential nominee, however, Vance openly touted that influence. “So there’s this guy Curtis Yarvin who has written about these things,” Vance said on a right-wing podcast in 2021. Vance didn’t stop at a simple name-drop. He went on to explain how former President Donald Trump should remake the federal bureaucracy if reelected. “I think what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, and replace them with our people. And when the courts stop you, stand before the country and say, ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.’” This “piece of advice” is more or less identical to a proposal Yarvin floated around 2012: “Retire All Government Employees,” or RAGE. JD Vance thinks monarchists have some good ideas (Oct, 2025) ~ https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/16/24266512/jd-vance-curtis-yarvin-influence-rage-project-2025 https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/16/24266512/jd-vance-curtis... (drawn from the Vanity Fair 2022 piece)

cyanydeez 2y ago

little difference: Republicans are now in charge of all branchs of democracy.

verisimi 2y ago
People voted the Republicans in right? Perhaps them winning the vote indicates that the Democrats were not doing things right, in most people's opinion?
- atq2119 2y ago
  If that is indeed the case, then it was not a vote for what Republicans are doing now. It still points to a systemic problem: the system gave certain individuals the power to do things that they don't actually have a mandate for. I'd say one of the major problems is that the voting system is built to de facto ensure a two-party system because it's a system in which individuals are voted for, with each race being a winner-takes-all for a single individual; as opposed to a system of representative voting. And a two-party system simply isn't able to represent the complexities of the world. (This is of course in addition to other problems of the system which are also real.)
  - verisimi 2y ago
    But one's vote is never for whatever the vote winning party actually does. Eg one might like one party's position on the environment, but disagree with regards to their military position - it is not possible to find a party that represents how one feels on a multitude of issues. And even if you did agree with all a party's positions, parties change their positions - saying one thing and doing another. And it has always been thus. One votes for a representative, who then votes on the specifics.
    - atq2119 2y ago
      While there's some truth to that, it makes a huge difference whether you have the choice between two (realistic) options or five. > And it has always been thus. One votes for a representative In the US, yes. In many (most?) other countries, many votes are for parties instead. This allows for better representation.
- AnimalMuppet 2y ago
  Trump won, not just because of his policy program, but also because he wasn't Biden. But then, Biden won because he wasn't Trump. If you think about that, if that's the best our democracy can do, then it sounds like evidence for Yarvin's position... until you think about it. Then you wonder, what happens if the non-democratic ruler was Biden or Trump or equivalent, and you can't get rid of them? What we actually need is to fix the primary process.

zfg 2y ago

Except J.D. Vance is an adherent of Yarvin's ideas and Vance is in the government: https://newrepublic.com/article/183971/jd-vance-weird-terrifying-techno-authoritarian-ideas https://newrepublic.com/article/183971/jd-vance-weird-terrif... https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right-where-peter-thiel-is-placing-his-biggest-bets https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/04/inside-the-new-right... https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/18/jd-vance-world-view-sources-00168984 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/18/jd-vance-w... They've been talking about ignoring court rulings for years. Now they're in a position to actually do that. It may well happen soon that they ignore a Supreme Court ruling. It depends how far they think they can push it.

defrost 2y ago
Years before he was the Republican vice presidential nominee, however, Vance openly touted that influence. “So there’s this guy Curtis Yarvin who has written about these things,” Vance said on a right-wing podcast in 2021. Vance didn’t stop at a simple name-drop. He went on to explain how former President Donald Trump should remake the federal bureaucracy if reelected. “I think what Trump should do, if I was giving him one piece of advice: Fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, and replace them with our people. And when the courts stop you, stand before the country and say, ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.’” This “piece of advice” is more or less identical to a proposal Yarvin floated around 2012: “Retire All Government Employees,” or RAGE. JD Vance thinks monarchists have some good ideas (Oct, 2025) ~ https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/16/24266512/jd-vance-curtis-yarvin-influence-rage-project-2025 https://www.theverge.com/2024/10/16/24266512/jd-vance-curtis... (drawn from the Vanity Fair 2022 piece)