Nothing wrong with his thoughts on de Jouvenel, I think our main disagreement here actually may be over how much de Jouvenel's theories of centralization and power maximization affect or do not affect the media/intellectual class.
-
-
Replying to @bespokecommie @WindReign and
Because I like to think that I agree with his general theory of how absolutism eventually lead to liberalism, rise of bureaucracy against the aristocracy, high-low-middle conflict etc.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @bespokecommie @WindReign and
I view journalists as downstream from the policy creation process, their role is to manufacture consent for a strategic direction the policy creation establishment already wants to go. Academia is rewarded/punished for serving/undermining the process.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @joeldavisx @bespokecommie and
The key is who has the power to decide upon a direction and issue the rewards/punishments necessary to effect shifts in the policy creation process. My analysis is based in the observation that only oligarchs or NatSec executives pay enough people to pull such a thing off.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @joeldavisx @bespokecommie and
The role of journalists/academia isnt to sure up the structural power of journalists/academia, but the command structure of the State (natsec) and dominant investors in the economy (oligarchy). Geopolitical and Financial domination, the two central processes at play here.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @joeldavisx @bespokecommie and
You dont need to invent some pseud-BS Moldbug style about the mimetic mind virus "religion" of the "cathedral" to explain this. Cold hard rationality reveals the incentive chain.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @joeldavisx @WindReign and
You kind of do though, its frankly insane to posit that people are embracing sodomy, dog moms, and child sacrifice only due to it favoring centralization and power maximization. Pray tell, why wasn't the emperor of Ming China attended to by trans women of color then?
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @bespokecommie @WindReign and
Feminism, Abortion and LGBT "normalization" were all policy agendas promoted by the Oligarchy's foundations, they weren't "spontaneous" developments. All three things serve structural goals, they create more dependent demographics that become clients of the bureaucracy.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @joeldavisx @WindReign and
Now you're just bullshitting: 1. I never said they were spontaneous, just that mere power maximization isn't enough to justify them.2. All of these things except maybe LGBT (which is debatable because it got medically classified in like 1850) far predate any globalist oligarchy.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @bespokecommie @WindReign and
Power maximization is more than enough motive for the elite donor class, yes. Do you think they are sincere libtards? If the powerful felt it would benefit them more to retvrn to traditional values, they could easily fund a political movement into existence to achieve that.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
>Do you think they are sincere libtards? YES THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE For fuck's sake they have cost themselves trillions in lost wealth in real estate values alone due to being sincere about being "progressive" about crime. Any day now OCP is going to cash in on Detroit real estate
-
-
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @joeldavisx and
This whole discussion is do we have a clerical oligarchy (expert rule, through legitimacy and credentials, harvard, nyt etc) vs do we have a mercantile oligarchy (oil barons smoking cigars jn dimly lit rooms, who want to maximize profits). Its obvious to anybody its the former.
0 replies 0 retweets 4 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.