[hga]

Hmmm, I wasn't thinking of sdfghjkl34567 and company as cowards, but now that you mention the possibility, maybe it isn't a coincidence that the calm events (not protests and marches) they brought baseball bats (and hammers) to in the US, at least per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Racist_Action#History were in states where their targets couldn't legally carry guns. It would be interesting to check with Google to see if their targets meet elsewhere relatively unmolested.

[sdfghjkl34567]

The wikipedia history for ARA itself is a pretty reductive list of actions compared to all ARA-aligned actions. Again, I mentioned ARA because they popularized the tactic of shutting down meetings by pressuring hotels (which is not to say they invented secondary target activism), not because it was the only group doing so or for any other specific reason.

Anti-racist and anti-fascist organizing happens under the mantle of a thousand different groups all over the world. There are antifa in Russia that have it much harder than antifa in France or the UK or the US.

[amcastillo]

> Anti-racist and anti-fascist organizing happens under the mantle of a thousand different groups all over the world.

And yet we are asked to believe that an obscure blogger flirting with monarchist political thought would introduce a dangerous authoritarian element if allowed to present on a technical topic. Thanks for putting this into context.

[sdfghjkl34567]

I would not call Moldbug obscure; neo-reactionaryism is growing especially in tech circles and legitimizing its source is a dangerous act, not because he will seize power given the platform, but because it communicates a lack of concern with the threat "neo-reactionaryism" or fascism represents.

[anon_adderlan]

> and legitimizing its source is a dangerous act

This thinking, right here, is a problem.

Discussing an individual's technical contributions does not legitimize their political views, let alone their technical ones.

And the big threat today is not neo-reactionaryism, but zealotry in all its forms. Radicals from any group are more dangerous than moderates from a single distasteful group, and they all use exactly the same tactics to win. And if we're going to win by burying bad ideas through threats and intimidation instead of openly dismantling them through rational and ethical thought, then I'm not sure the battle is even worth winning.

[amcastillo]

> neo-reactionaryism is growing especially in tech circles

This will be great news to the neoreactionaries. How do you figure?

> because it communicates a lack of concern with the threat "neo-reactionaryism" or fascism represents.

And what is the threat, if not that they will seize power?

[eli_gottlieb]

Certainly neoreaction is a cancer, but the best cure for these cancers is sunlight.