Being conflicted over internationalism taking an L in Afghanistan, as @KingofShirgar pointed out, and being conflicted over the win of having Yarvin on Tucker's show, is why the right always loses. No win is pure enough to be accepted.https://twitter.com/CosinChristian/status/1435780558559219712 …
-
-
Replying to @CharlesMayne2
The interview should not happen. When something becomes more mainstream it loses value, and becomes more demotic
4 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @NRx_Fur @CharlesMayne2
The way Yavin's ideas are 'evolving' this isn't any longer seen as a problem. He likes democracy now, understood not as a regime, but as a transition catalyst from oligarchy to monarchy.
4 replies 1 retweet 37 likes -
I've lost track of this stuff, is that a good thing or a bad thing?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Liking democracy is bad.
1 reply 0 retweets 14 likes -
But as a way to go from Oligarchy to Monarchy?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I think it is less a question of liking things and more a question of possibility-space. Yarvin wants to elect a monarch because he believes that the capacity for popular sovereignty to do this will disappear soon, and this leads to the nasty world of being a third-world country
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likes -
It’s a means, primarily
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
From what I gathered I thought we were talking about means. Wait, does Yarvin see Democracy as a Means to an end or does he actually Like Democracy now?
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
The former. Oligarchy is designed to defend against monarchy and camouflages itself as democracy. Actual democracy can defeat oligarchy as a one time act - this is far from saying that it's possible or desirable to create a democratic state (it's neither).
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.