In my opinion, philosophical ideas and political theory are forever constrained by the prevailing technologies and scientific knowledge of the age.
Darwin’s theory of evolution lent a deterministic evolutionary underpinning to Marxism embodied in the model of the material dialectic, whilst Nazism went even further and also took its framework into the realm of reproduction, race and hierarchy influenced by the natural world. (1)
Neo-Conservatism as far as I am concerned is nothing more then the harnessing of the same deterministic premise in the cause of claimed conservative goals, but it in reality represents a poor, pale imitation of Nazism, Fascism and Marxism, with a transparentattempt to skip back to Platonic and Hegelian philosophical routes to plagiarise the teleological undercurrents.
Prior to the influence of Darwin, the systems of governance – be they monarchical, Classical Liberal or despotic were continuously based on religious principal of the divine right of the monarch, the right of man (which in itself is equally as religiously based), or naked force.
With the advent of neo-reactionaries, what we are seeing is the rise of the influence of modern technology (and to a lesser degree- capitalistic organisations) in the form of computing software architecture and technological forms of anarchic connection and communication under the despotism of programs with no democratic oversight or “collective“ control – there is only one internet and we don’t vote on how it is run, same with regard to social networking sites (but we can decide to not use them). These technologies inform the developing sociopolitical theoretic models either subconsciously or consciously, and will continue to do so.
This awakening of the possibilities of formulating sociopolitical systems in models based on the elegance of computing systems in a hyper utilitarianism based on extreme competency and excellence of outcomes (this last point a potentially decadent infusion of consumerism?) has dovetailed with the elite’s refutation of democracy in the sudden acceleration of trans-national “extra” democratic organisations practicing “shared sovereignty” and all other pathetic marketing terms for sclerotic crypto-Marxist forms of social manipulation of crowd psychology as a means to manufacture consent to create newrealities through the medium of message amplification (2), media-source symbiosis (3) and continual on message morality tales (4).
Could it be argued that a techno-industrial class (5) is emerging in the same manner as the Askenazim emerged as a lending class within feudalism and monarchies, and the middle class who emerged with the stirrings of capitalism? And is neoreactionaryism the first expression of this class of technologically literate, geographically disparate, multi-national (but not internationalist) class?
Are we witnessing the first palpable social power grouping created by the internet and hyper connectivity?
I believe so.
(1) I refuse to treat Nazism and the works of Hitler as being beyond discussion, and I refuse to add any addendum to the effect of “whilst I don’t advocate Hitler etc” as to do so is akin slipping on a dog collar and kissing the ring of Liberal Progressivism and it’s conservative variants.
(2) I define “message amplification” as being the mechanism of making high profile examples of individuals or groups as a means to alter the norms of the public, as practiced by the current system coined “the cathedral”. Examples include the repeated highlighting and public punishment of people termed racist, as well as people now deemed sexist orhomophobic. This process is very much enacted in line with specific powerrequirements and is very much a conscious action.
(3) I define “media-source symbiosis” as the mechanism by which journalist and government officials become symbiotically dependent by means of the privileged position the media enjoys as a result of access to inside sources. This is highlighted by Moldbug in a number of posts. A practical example is cited in this article.
(4) The consistent propaganda issued via television shows, film and written media is all pervasive. I take the reader to be a neoreactionary, so this will not need explaining.
(5) I have coined this “techno-industrial class” as I have been unable to locate a similar term for this clear grouping, which I believe has proven to be a result of the current technology. I am currently unaware if a similar observation has been made by other people.