[anon_adderlan]

> To be fair, neoreactionaries are mostly notable for their startling lack of real-world achievements.

That's not fair at all. You make a value judgment by referring to (but not defining) 'real-world achievements' and follow it up with an ad hominem, instead of deconstructing the actual ideas involved.

It also makes perfect sense that following any political view radically different from the mainstream will lead to less 'real-world' success, as not only does compromising your politics for success potentially alienate you from your allies, but mainstream society will be actively and deliberately trying to prevent you from achieving that success (and apparently speaking at technical conferences).

For example, I would not have been successful in the Roman Empire, Communist Russia, or Nazi Germany unless I was willing to compromise my politics. I'm not exactly successful now because my politics don't precisely line up with the 'mainstream'. But that still says nothing about how ethical or tenable my political stance is.