I’ve been reading Neoreaction a Basilisk and, through the books criticisms, getting more acquainted with the current theories right wing “intellectuals” are propagating. That’s led me to consider reading through at least some of Nick Land’s work, maybe to better grasp what theory Silicon Valley elites are huffing at the moment.
I’ve done this once; before I ever became more ideologically aware, I read through Atlas Shrugged not knowing what it was and after finishing, even then, walked away pissed off I spent any time on it. However, it was useful for catching right wing references and understanding the basis for libertarianism later. It’s also been interesting, though not quite useful, to trace how right wing thought has evolved and what the resulting “praxis” has looked like; the Koch brothers using the tea party as an entryist/infiltration strategy for promoting libertarianism in government, the resulting frustration of those efforts leading to Steve Banon and the promotion of Trump and the beginnings of more “authoritarian” or dictatorial strategies, and now to Moldbug and Land promoting straight up accelerationism and fascism amongst the ascendant tech CEOs after they all abandoned their former siding with liberals.
But is it useful to know any of that? I feel like all that’s happening as I come to understand how they think and how they implement their vision for the world, the more I understand how fucked we are (let’s assume we’re fucked, right?).
As I said in my previous comment to someone else, reading any old slop will get you nowhere. But there is still a basis upon which the thinking generally arises, and that can be analyzed. Carl Schmitt, piece of absolute shit, was a very good philosopher (derogatory). And understanding him is vital, imo, to getting fascism. And Nietzsche too. I think Losurdo describes Nietzsche well enough that reading him directly might be unnecessary, but seeing how aesthetics lies at the bottom of his justification right next to goodness is really something that you only get from reading Good and Evil.
obligatory mention of https://redsails.org/really-existing-fascism/ which has some good stuff on Nietzsche
of course! Though this is mostly an extension of Losurdo (good thing), so I like the source a slight bit better myself :). But Redsails is amazing, yes, and I’ve linked this exact essay all over the internet and among friends/comrades
I second skipping Nietzsche and just reading Losurdo’s Nietzsche, the Aristocratic Rebel: Intellectual Biography and Critical Balance Sheet. I made the mistake of reading a lot of Nietzsche at a formative stage of my life and the poison still lingers in me to this day. I haven’t finished Losurdo’s book yet (it’s long af and I keep losing discipline for a few weeksiat a time before diving in for a few more weeks), but he does a good job of explaining Nietzsche’s ideas and their relevance.
There’s a lot about Nietzsche that trying to connect everything with someone unfamiliar with Losurdo’s explanation feels like being a conspiracy nut with red string and a corkboard, but, in a nutshell, his view is that keeping most people in a society enslaved is essential for it to have culture, and that the European ruling classes should abandon any attempts to better the lives of the masses. They should also abandon any views that lead to them treating people as fundamentally equal, especially Christianity (which, to him, is literally the same as post Babylonian Exile Judaism).